Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GraceZ who wrote (86895)	8/24/2007 11:28:51 AM
From: Gary Burton	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Grace-you folks are obviously up on this more than I am since I live in Canada--but--If you obtain a 60 day pre-approval letter from your bank and then rush out and sign an irrevocable contract to buy--would your lender not still be 'required' to go through with the deal becuase buyer in good faith had depended on the letter that bank WOULD advance the funds on closing? (not talking rates here) OR- does the Letter's fine print language enable your bank to unilaterly back out because they could simply say 'sorry we changed our lending practices after the fact and we decided to make it retroactive? My sense is that many banks would likely still honour the spirit of the Letter since buyer in good faith was enticed by it to go and contract with a builder? ins some ways this is sorta similar to the wisconsin couple who won court relief that said theor bank had not adequately spelled out the teaser reset language (truth in lending regulations)---If I THINK in good faith that I am ok and therefore contract might not my bank still be on the hook?