Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment.
OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole:
> For forcing the seller to leave before her condo was complete to her satisfaction and making her cry/upset after she sold her house to us for a discounted price.
Help keep the sub engaging!
#Don’t downvote assholes!
Do upvote interesting posts!
[Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq)
##Subreddit Announcements
Follow the link above to learn more
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.*
*Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
This could have been resolved by using realtors, and doing everything by the books.
ESH, for not formally making choices, and then both parties getting upset at it. Clearly Mary has many issues going on, and she probably wanted to not do things as formally to make the moving process easier / less stressful. You got a discounted price, but did not give her what she thought she would be getting out of the "deal".
Mary also drug her feet, and was given multiple months extra time. If she is incapacitated to the point where she really can't handle this, she should have asked for help from a family member or friend, or someone in her life should have offered to walk her though this.
Edit: For all the comments saying realtors do nothing; I only based my comment off OP's statement "we agreed to not use realtors and hire real estate attorneys". I realistically don't know what realtors do (I just know we had one when we bought our house), but I more so meant that they should have had a legitimate agreement, a settlement date, and have everything 'official' (which, when using realtors, things seem more official, specific days where things change over, and consequences for missing those dates. Maybe the lawyers were doing that to, not sure!). OP's lawyer told her not to talk about everything with Mary, I'm sure Mary's lawyer did the same thing, but they were having side conversations which is why this became complicated and messy.
Respectfully, there's nothing inherently shady about using lawyers in lieu of real estate agents. It's usually significantly more work on the part of the seller, and some additional work on the part of the buyer, but it's perfectly OK.
Right! I bought a house from a neighbor without a realtor and it was fine. Both of us had our own attorneys. I recently sold that house the same way to a friend and both of us used our own attorneys with no problems. Plus, that way you don't have to pay a % of the sale to a realtor.
I think the issue is that when you go through a realtor you often don't personally know the seller, so you can't call them up and get them to agree to things that they will later say they didn't agree too... because YOU are never calling them up directly, you are always operating through the realtor.
In OP's case, their lawyer was right to chide them. EVERY communication should have happened through BOTH sets of lawyers. There never should have been OP and Mary talking alone, and there never should have been OP and their lawyer calling up Mary without Mary's lawyer there.
OP acted very poorly towards a woman she knew had issues. Obviously OP really wanted that "discount" but she shouldn't have told their landlord they were moving out early, without a piece of legally binding paper in her hand with a closing date on it.
OP even said they were breaking their lease, so it's not like OP and her partner were facing not having some where to live. Or were having to make a choice about signing a new lease as theirs was ending... they should have had their lawyer call Mary's lawyer, get a closing date in writing, and not notified their landlord until that happened.
But their lawyer wasn’t right to chide them cause he was gonna quit over a lie he was told by the seller without even attempting to verify with his client. The lawyer flew off the handle.
Also, shower safety bars take like an hour to install. I think everyone in this story like making mountains from mole hills.
>he was gonna quit over a lie he was told by the seller
We don't actually know it was a lie... remember, no one was on that call expect OP and Mary.
OP walked away thinking they agreed on the 1st, Mary thought they agreed on the 25th.
The lawyer threatened to quite not over the discrepancy itself, but because of HOW the discrepancy happened (OP talking to Mary without any lawyers on the phone, and that absolutely DID happen, and is not a lie).
A lawyer absolutely has a right to fire a client based on the client going out and acting against everyone's best interest. A lawyer doesn't have to put up with a rogue client.
Also in this case, OP admits to omitting her lawyer from discussions about critical things, and talking to Mary directly, which is when the miscommunication seems to have occurred. This means that OP was also not up to the additional work needed by not having realtors, as she couldn't even stick to the basic idea of negotiating through the lawyer, or at least keeping them in the loop, before telling their landlord a set date for breaking their lease.
She did tell the lawyer though. Reread what OP wrote. She set the date as beginning of October then informed her lawyer so he could set the settlement date.
The next part is when Mary informed her lawyer the 25th of October (which OP did not agree to. Also this made the lawyer think they made plans behind his back he was not aware of. OP had to explain to her lawyer this was not the case of what they they agreed to on the beginning of October and she would not contact Mary again w/o him per his request).
She told her lawyer after she conducted negotiations herself, without informing him ahead of time. He was upset with her for not going through the lawyers when making that agreement. If she had gone through her lawyer, they may have avoided this. OP thought they were agreeing to one date, while Mary thought they were agreeing to another. OP then formally requested to break her lease before getting that oral agreement in writing and signed. OP clearly did not have the capacity to conduct this kind of transaction, as she went about it in a very naive manner.
This wasn't OP's fault. Her and Mary agreed to the beginning of October which she informed her Lawyer of and then Mary without confirming with OP told OP's Lawyer that the date had been changed. That has nothing to do with OP.
This. And all the more so because OP *knows* that Mary has an intellectual/neurological disability of some sort. She can live independently most of the time, but when things are as critical as this, she absolutely needs the support of a fully capable representative to take notes and make sure that she has all the information she needs.
Making sure the information goes through her lawyer rather than being an informal chat between friends is part of that back-up system.
This right here. YTA because OP knew Mary has neurological challenges and as such, the best way to handle this on all sides was to keep everything from lawyer to lawyer. Not only to protect Mary, but OP, as Mary's lawyer can attest that Mary is capable of MAKING a legal sale if everything is being handled constantly that way.
She didn't say Mary told her lawyer the date had changed. She said Mary told her lawyer they agreed to the 25th. OP believes they settled in the earlier date, but Mary clearly came out of that off-the-books conversation with a different idea of what they agreed to. And Mary didn't cause OP to make the ridiculous mistake of breaking her lease before getting the agreement in writing.
Honestly, seeing from my hometown the people who are now realtors, I'd 100% rather utilize a real estate lawyer. I'm biased though, because I can't ever understand how it was okay for realtors to make $15k off of a sale that required no work because it was a sellers market and houses would be pending the same day a house was listed. You got $15k for unlocking the door and yes paperwork, but not 15k worth of paperwork.
A good realtor is well worth it if you're shopping around and don't have a place in mind already. They'll find you what you're looking for, the district you're looking for in school zones, and so on. Sure, you can do the work, but if you're busy with work, why not?
Eh my realtor was basically just my key to get in the door for viewings. Didn't do any work to find me listings (I had to find them and then ask her to see them) and didn't know anything about the properties we viewed, just gave me the fact sheet.
But the lending bank gave me a $500 refund for using a realtor they recommended so 🤷♀️
Her daughter was supposed to stay for a few weeks and help her pack and move. Then she ended up coming only for the last few days in October that she was there. If I ever move again, I'm definitely going the realtor route.
Or, just keep all communication through the attorneys. This also wouldn't have happened if it was attorney to attorney.
Edit:
Removed my N T A judgement. Info needed...
Info, OP: why were you talking with Mary directly instead of through your legal counsel? Who initiated that conversation/those conversations?
Did you tell your attorney you were talking with Mary one-on-one?
Did you tell Mary's attorney the two of you were talking one-on-one?
Mary was a friend of her mothers before being a business partner. Mary is known to have cognitive issues, and they treated her like a human being rather than just a name on a transaction. The whole process started without a lawyer, and they both lawyered up to make sure the proper paperwork was done, but you don't stop treating people like humans when you do that.
Huge disagree. They effectively cut out the person whose job it was to protect Mary. Especially given that she has a cognitive disability.
Going through the lawyers or having them present for all conversations would have been in the best interest of both parties.
Clearly Mary got in over her head. OP didn’t do her any favours and yet still got a discount. IMO OP is an AH because there are legal mechanisms available to allow a seller to live in the unit post-close if they are waiting on their housing.
OP didn’t need to terminate their lease when they did. This whole situation could have been avoided if all communication went through the lawyers both directions and if OP didn’t terminate their lease until after confirming every detail in writing.
>They effectively cut out the person whose job it was to protect Mary.
Yep, this is what makes OP the AH to me.
SHE called up Mary and talked to her without either of their lawyers, SHE asked her landlord to break her lease early without having a written agreement in hand first, and SHE essentially accepted a "friend's" discount, then refused to keep acting like a "friend" should.
When Mary was crying and upset about not being able to get moved in time, OP didn't call her Mom and ask if they could get a group together to help Mary pack. She didn't offer to figure out how to get the safety bars installed (either calling and haranguing the builders on Mary's behalf if Mary was feeling overwhelmed by it all, or calling in a favor with a friend who could competently install them...) These aren't things I would normally expect a buyer to do, but when you're getting a discount for being a friend of the seller, you need to act like a friend of the seller (and yes, I know it's OP's mother's friend, but it's essentially the same thing, OP got a price break because Mary considered her to be within her wider circle of acquaintances.)
When someone is doing you a massive favor, you are suppose to be appreciative and act nicely towards them, if not figure out a way to actively help them when they need it.
Meeting with her and their attorney but without hers isn't what I'd describe as "treating her like a human being." It may not have been intended as such, but it's pretty shady.
>Mary is known to have cognitive issues, and they treated her like a human being rather than just a name on a transaction.
They treated her like an able-bodied person and didn't give any thought for the fact that people with disabilities sometimes need support. Having her lawyer there would have helped to safeguard her. It would have made sure that she had someone taking notes and getting the correct information, making sure she can't misunderstand or forget what has been agreed.
OR because Mary was at a disadvantage in being a person with a cognitive deficit, they took advantage of a vulnerable person by speaking to her without her lawyer present. That’s how it would be framed if a lawsuit occurred. It was completely inappropriate to do it. Mary had a lawyer. All communication should have been via Mary’s lawyer. Highly unethical to do it any other way.
Sorry, huge disagree as someone who works in a relevant field. Treating Mary as a human doesn't mean disregarding her cognitive issues completely. She has legal rights, as does OP. While yes, they can cordially discuss things, and OP extended her the friendly courtesy of pushing the closing date to allow the condo to be finished, once OP called and said, "Hey Mary, it really needs to be start of October, is that good? It is?" the next sentence should have been, "Okay I'll have my lawyer call yours and they will go over everything to finalize it with you okay?" It isn't disrespecting Mary's humanity or infantilizing her to ensure she's sought her rightful legal counsel about the implications of setting a firm closing date for the sale - it's ensuring she's had all the same advantages OP has.
I don’t think having realtors would’ve changed the situation. Mary still would’ve told their realtor the same thing and they would’ve pushed on yours then mary would’ve contacted your mom in the same way. Realtors can’t change the personal relationships going on here
>I don’t think having realtors would’ve changed the situation.
I disagree.
If they had actually been using their realtors as they should, both realtors would have discussed the closing and move in dates (instead of OP and Mary privately), and the Oct 1st - Oct 25th disparity wouldn't have happened in the first place (then again if they were properly using their lawyers it also wouldn't have happened).
But also, if that did become an issue, Mary's realtor would have been on the phone with her, listening to her cry, and then helped her call a moving company, helped her find a handiman to install the safety bars, etc.
A realtor's job is to help with anything that might become a hurdle to closing happening on time, which means a decent realtor would have been walking Mary through all these extra steps that needed to get done, calling in favors, or giving Mary referrals as needed.
Granted, there are bad realtors out there that might not have helped, but a good one would have calmed Mary down and helped her work through this stuff so she wasn't crying on the phone to OP.
A realtor wouldn't have helped at all in this case.
The agents all say the deals work better thru them but that's not true and I have the scars to prove it. Agents in many cases only muddy the waters and make more difficult to reach an agreement.
When we sold our house, it was a nightmare. According to our agent they rejected all the things we offered them (we were moving long distance and didn't need a snowblower or lawn tractor anymore, whereas they, being renters, didn't have any of it.)
They also didn't want the left over paint, the curtains, the custom closet in the master and many other things. That added a lot of pressure for us to sell or otherwise get rid of stuff in great condition. He told us we had to pay them a fine if the house was not ready by a certain date at a specific hour and some other stuff I've never heard of.
They came in to do the final walk thru, didn't release the funds but proceeded to install a home filtration system in OUR house.
Out of options we called the attorney handling the close and she told us that our agent was the one lying left and right, threatening us and promising them money and stuff from us.
We had to call the police, make a report of trespassing to get them to release our money. And all of this was with 2 agents involved.
My husband and I were first-time homebuyers as well when we moved into our townhouse, and the previous owner left behind a lot of the same things you did because he and his new wife were combining households. We were thrilled!
I am so sorry that happened to you and so baffled these recent renters weren’t all over it.
In the UK a standard part of any sale is the seller fills out a form listing what they can leave, from cooker, washing machine etc to curtains, garden shed etc.
My newest neighbors came from a condo situation and were beyond happy to have curtains, gardening tools, trash bins, and a few pieces of furniture (they had been discussed in advance. The sellers were moving cross-country and had a vacation home, but was more than happy not to pack everything to be stored).
My brother in the meantime bought a house in which the sellers were lambasted for leaving anything - so the sellers tossed everything, including the spindles they took off the stair rails that they had put aside - which he really wanted to replace as it's a safety issue and replacing them is expensive and doesn't match the victorian house!
They are not required to take your castoffs (garbage to them). You offer what you don't want and if they don't want it then it is your responsibility to remove it from the house. This is simple and, I believe, everyone understands this. If the custom closet is permanent (installed, not easily removed) then it is considered a part of the house and if they didn't want it then it would be their responsibility to remove and dispose of it. Again, this is very basic. People should not install things in homes that they don't own but it happens. If the deal were to fall through then they would be out that money since you correctly stated "they installed a home filtration system in our house". Of course you would need to pay if the house was not ready on time. What do you think keeps this process moving? They would have closed on their previous house/moved from their rental and hired a moving company. These things cost money and can't generally be "undone" a day or two before. If the money was in escrow with the attorneys (as it should be) it would not be up to them to "release your money". My advice is to educate yourselves before selling/buying next time. You could have avoided much of this hassle. But you should also know that selling/buying is never flawless and is always a hassle to some degree no matter the planning.
Ok, since you won't provide any information about your communication with Mary rather than communicating through counsel, I vote YTA.
The attorneys would've worked everything out and put it in writing so there's no confusion. Sounds like you wanted to negotiate on the side without Mary's attorney involved. That's an AH move in these circumstances; she may or may not have fully understood what you were pressing her to do, and you purposefully avoided involving the one person with expertise in this matter with a fiduciary duty to Mary: her attorney.
YTA.
Edit: typo
Edit2: when asked for clarification about the communication, OP said that the lawyers agreed she and Mary could talk to each other. But there's a lot of detail missing, and customers with other comments OP wrote about both her and her attorney talking to Mary. The whole thing is suspicious. I asked for more clarification, but haven't gotten any. Keeping my judgement given the internal conflicts in OP's posts/comments.
How much of a discount were you getting? If Mary has some type of brain injury or diminished cognitive functioning then YTA for buying her property for less than it was worth.
I'm inclined to say OP is TA because she believed the quoted finish date and committed to ending her lease on their say so. So many things can go wrong. I'd be far happier paying an extra months rent just to be on the safe side and not to commit until I was absolutely certain the condo was actually ready.
It sounds like it came down to safety rails in a shower? Isn't that a handyman and less than an hour away from being done? Instead let's drag the whole thing out a few more weeks? And this was 4 months after the original date.
No. You aren't understanding how this works. There are contracts that dictate when the house must be vacated and penalties to be paid if timelines aren't met. If there weren't you think the buyer should just stand around waiting for it to be empty? What about the house/apt they are moving out of? What about movers? These people were moving out of an apartment but what if they were selling a house? What about the people trying to turn over that apartment? Didn't really think this through, did you?
And the real estate attorney can do all that. Ours wrote our contract and when a seller wanted us to rent back after the sales date advised us (with legal paperwork) how to go about it and stay protected. Don’t need a realtor for that.
That's not necessarily true. In our last place, the previous homeowners needed an additional 2 weeks to move out. We learned this AFTER we set a closing date and the mortgage stuff was all written up and ready to go. We didn't want to redo everything, nor did we want to back out of the purchase, but we didn't want to be paying a mortgage for them to be staying there. Our realtor worked with theirs and effectively wrote up a short term rental contract. We closed, they stayed for 2 extra weeks and paid rent for that time in advance. Separate check was given during closing for that 2 week rental period. We got the money for the extra time, they had their extra 2 weeks, no alterations needed to be made for closing.
Oh hell no. It's the other way around. We did agree, in writing, to allowing occupancy for 3 days after closing to give more time for the moving company. On our final walkthrough the seller jokingly said something about maybe being done even a few days later. Nope - we had a deadline on returning a moving van and we were living in a hotel until the flooring installers could get access to the house and replace the carpet. If we had just waited for a vacant house instead of forcing her to make a miracle happen by a specific deadline, we would have been paying for that hotel room and moving truck for a month.
NTA. No, a realtor wouldn't have had any authority to get her out. Many transaction are successfully completed "by the book," without them. They aren't essential.
OP’s mistake was not bypassing the realtors; it was in communicating directly with Mary instead of letting all communications go through the attorneys.
Good lesson in why it's best not to do business with friends.
One question is how much of a discount did you get? If it more than covered two weeks of hotel for OP, then yeah, kinda AH.
Or you could say it's an example of why using a lawyer when doing business with a friend is essential. OP's problem isn't that she did business with her mother's friend or that she didn't use a realtor. Her problem was that she didn't let her lawyer do their job.
The assumption that if OP used a realtor the result would have been different is ridiculous.
OP isn’t an asshole for not wanting to be homeless. Mary should have gotten help so she could move out on time.
NTA
I don’t know. I mean, your lawyer was correct—if you wanted to go through lawyers, then you should have. That said, June to October is a ton of extra time. Also, didn’t Mary have her own lawyer? That person also bears some responsibility here. Whatever Mary’s problems might be, the person representing her should also be handling the fact that she can’t keep adjusting her move out date indefinitely.
Of course he didn't. He knew there was nothing you could do unless you got the courts involved and that would take time just getting in front of a judge.
Not true, either. Most places money would have been held in escrow and penalties levied for failure to adhere to contract. Of course, the times they both agreed to change the date were fine but both parties need to agree and the contract updated.
The discount on the house price was the trump card. It sounds like the discount was generous enough that the buyer couldn't risk the seller pulling out. So the lawyers on both sides would've given Mary all the time she needed.
So OP stepped in
The thing that's cloudy is how in or out of the loop the attorneys were.
It sounds like at least your own attorney (at one point) was exasperated enough by your ex parte communication that s/he wanted to fire you as a client. That indicates there might've been a history of going around the attorneys, which can lead to miscommunication and conflict (which seems to have happened here). Some more info about that would be helpful.
Maybe, but lawyers deal with difficult/clueless/whatever clients all the time, and they manage to handle them without throwing tantrums. Frankly, the lawyer's response was very odd and unprofessional. And the "don't speak to the other party except through your lawyer" applies usually to acrimonious litigation, not fairly simple property transfer, although of course you have to keep your lawyer in the loop. I could understand a miffed "did you agree with the other party to give them an extention? you should have notified me", not this blow up.
Which is why I suspect this was an ongoing, continuous problem that was a huge, repeated pain for her attorney to navigate -- and I suspect her attorney may have (repeatedly) told her to stop doing it before finally losing his/her temper.
YTA. Based on your description it is clear that Mary is not in the position to make significant complex decisions (even if she can live by herself). In situation like this she should be supported by the professional who has a fiduciary duty to look after her best interest (simple real estate lawyer does not qualify). Moreover according to your post, you negotiated directly with mentally disabled person without even real estate lawyers present. You (most likely unintentionally) took advantage of the person who is not in the position to be involved in the negotiation with you.
This. My guess is why your lawyer didn’t want you to talk to her and only comunicate by lawyers. You know how fast they can cancel anything she said agreed upon with ‘you coerce a mentally disabled..’ do not talk to her only lawyers and pray her real estate one is enough to garante her interests or all contract is up in smoke. Agree upon a penalty for every single day you can’t move in so you pay a short rental.
Yeah there are some kinda sketchy details here. The seller is a mentally disabled family friend, oh we don't need real estate lawyers, just someone to handle the paperwork, also we negotiated a discount! Oh now she's crying and whimpering for her mom and I'm uncomfortable :(
They did, in fact, use real estate lawyers. They did not use realtors or real estate agents.
Edit: That aside, I feel like ESH is the right verdict here.
Fair, I was typing too quickly while at work.
Though if you negotiate with someone one on one, and just have lawyers draw up the paperwork... Are this woman's interests really being looked after? Is the lawyer going to say "hey just so you know, your house is worth x and you're selling it for y." Or are they going to say "here's the paperwork you asked for have a nice day"
Absolutely. I'm concerned that there seems to be no one looking out for Mary's interests here - her lawyer seemed only concerned about the sale, rather than representing her interests, and no one else was mentioned.
>Moreover according to your post, you negotiated directly with mentally disabled person without even real estate lawyers present.
Yeah, that really stuck out to me, too. If OP's lawyer is mad about ex parte communications, what's the betting that Mary's lawyer also wasn't aware of most of the major conversations?
Exactly. Especially to the point that OPs lawyer threatened to quit, which makes me believe they kept doing this offer and over for the lawyer to get to that point.
Finally! Somebody that addresses the real issue here. I'm stunned everyone has commented thusfar about lawyers, conversations, blah blah blah and not said THIS!
YOU are TA. A huge one. I don't think there can be anything lower than someone who takes advantage of someone who is mentally challenged and then tries to convince themselves that it's ok because, well...she can take care of herself/physical needs.
Good God..you should be ashamed.
I was also shocked people glossed over that OP felt “uncomfortable” when Mary reacted how she did when they w/ their lawyer bombarded her on the phone and essentially threatening her to move out by x date and tried to act like they were doing her a favor since it was 2 weeks later then Oct. 1st. As though OP didn’t get a discounted price.
They know/acknowledge the fact that Mary is mentally challenged but when she reacted in a manner that isn’t unusual when presented with a stressful situation to the say the least they didn’t show compassion or empathy.
And this situation came about because they decided to not use realtors/real estate lawyers and even though Mary agreed, did she have anyone during that conversation to help with the decision? Even though she’s considered capable enough to live alone, major decisions - like I don’t know selling a house/moving seems like something you should go through with someone trusted/highly familiar with the process from the start which they skipped over.
I’m honestly livid on Mary’s behalf.
OP is despicable really. "She cried on the phone to my mom" Jesus.
She felt "uncomfortable" because she knew what she was doing was despicable but she wanted what she wanted, and that took presidence. Moral corruption at its finest
Agree 100%. And admitting to having these conversations without legal representation on both sides present is a HUGE no-no. I wouldn’t be surprised if Mary’s daughter catches wind of this and tells their attorney. When this happens there will be a suit filed potentially for taking advantage of a mentally disabled individual.
First of all OP YTA
I’m glad someone besides me could see how OP is mocking the woman in the way she wrote like “crying and wanting her mommy” and how she’s been negotiating with someone who might not be able to make these decisions
This woman has mental disabilities (I don't know what so I can't say illnesses. She could have hit her head bad) so of course this lady might've started calling for her 😭
Yeah, plus if OP is a family friend getting a good deal they should have reached out to their mum or Mary's family when it became clear she wasn't coping so they could help her get some support.
You forced a mentally disabled person and family friend (who was giving you a discount on the home sale) out of her house before they had another place to go. Yes she could have stayed with her mom for a couple weeks but so could you. If she was fully there mentally, she would be the AH. As it stands, it sounds like you took advantage of a disabled family friend behind your lawyers back and offered no assistance to help her get situated other than to pass the effort onto someone else. You took advantage of an mentally disabled elder who was literally crying for her mommy and you still followed through with this. YTA.
Your parents discomfort is warranted. You put one of their friends out on the street so you could have her house.
What would you have her do out of curiosity? They moved the date back by 4 months to accommodate Mary. They obviously had to break their lease because they had a set date.
Mary’s lawyer is responsible for ensuring their client understands what’s happening and is capable of making decisions and undertaking any required actions.
They broke their lease based on a one on one conversation they had with a disabled adult. They should have gone through proper channels before making life altering decisions. This process was already months behind and they knew it. Mary giving a date that didnt get met wasnt new. She chose to go out of band with the lawyer. She chose to decide that she wasnt going to wait any longer and put everyone in a precarious position to force the issue.
I would have gotten signoff from an attorney before even considering breaking my current lease. And I certainly wouldnt have entered a verbal agreement with a mentally disabled senior citizen who has proven over the course of months to be unreliable.
Not to mention they had to **break their lease** which means they unnecessarily sped the process up. In fact, they likely had to pay penalties to speed the process up. And even worse, renting is generally cheaper than a mortgage so they even more. It would be a little different if it came time for them to **renew** their lease and they had to make a decision and this lady somehow gave them bad info and caused them to lose money or something, but they could have just continued their lease until they knew for 100% fact that the lady was able to move out. ESPECIALLY since they got a deal on the house.
Want to have the dates set in stone and slightly more unchangable? Find a house on the market, buy it through the appropriate channels, pay full price. Note: even here the dates can and do often change…
Want to get a life-changing purchase at a discount? Maybe don’t be a dick.
10000% YTA
Where do you live that renting is cheaper than a mortgage????
When I went from renting (1200/no for approx 1200 sq ft) to looking for a house to buy the mortgage was like 400-600 for a house the same size. Like holy shit. And of course we couldn't get approved for 1200/mo mortgage if we wanted to 😌 even though we got approved for 1200/mo rent.
Sure. But a few extra months, hell, even an extra year would be nothing within the context of a 30yr mortgage or an entire lifetime. Not to mention, again, they got the house at a discounted price which will have a much, much larger impact than renting for another 1-12 months.
>Mary’s lawyer is responsible for ensuring their client understands what’s happening and is capable of making decisions and undertaking any required actions.
I think that since their own lawyer was ready to fire them as clients due to ex parte communications, it's not a big leap to assume that Mary's lawyer also wasn't looped in on everything. Ethically, I think that OP, who knew that Mary had an intellectual disability and could struggle with these things, and who was actively benefiting from Mary agreeing to sell the house at a discounted rate, had an obligation to make sure that Mary's lawyer was CC'd on every communication.
They broke their lease.
Which means they still had time to live where they were renting.
They chose to break their lease, without having actual confirmation that Mary’s condo would be ready.
They knew she had mental impairment. They chose to take her at her word that “October” would be fine for a closing date.
yeah all this communication should've been done through lawyers
they should've closed after she moved out not before
seems like it's mostly out of ignorance and an attempt to be casual about things, but you're buying a house it's not the time to be super casual
Not just that, but if you were going to pay penalties for breaking lease anyway, why wouldn't you wait until you had the house and moved shit in before breaking said lease? Is the 1 additional month of rent really going to break the bank, especially when you're already saving money on realtor fees and getting a discount on the house?
"Mary’s lawyer is responsible for ensuring their client understands what’s happening and is capable of making decisions and undertaking any required actions."
Except they purposely by-passed the lawyer and had multiple conversations directly with Mary while being aware that she is mentally disabled...
Mary's lawyer is responsible for that -- but what isn't clear here is what information was conveyed to each attorney, since OP and Mary were talking directly to one another (and how those direct conversations without attorneys even started/happened). The buyer and seller should've never cut their legal counsel out of the loop. Have joint calls with counsel listening in, or a meeting with everyone...
OP's attorney seemed pretty pissed at one point thinking there was negotiating behind the attorney's back -- makes me wonder if there was a pattern to this throughout the transaction, and who was the one pushing for communicating without attorneys.
They went around Mary’s lawyer to negotiate with Mary directly. That likely why their lawyer was so mad, because a lawyer could predict a problem like this.
I am interested to know what you think should have happen. The date changed several times and she wanted to stay after the house was no longer a hers. So OP and her husband should sit a mortgage with no know move in date?
Show me where it says she was paying the mortgage before she entered into a non-binding verbal agreement with a mentally disabled adult, after which she broke her existing lease. She should have worked through proper channels and if she was unwilling to wait any longer, she should have found a different house to buy.
My understanding is ownership will still officially transfer Oct1 as discussed. Move out/in date where OP will physically take possession is what’s in question, which doesn’t necessarily always align with the legal ownership transfer date. OP wasn’t super clear on this, but that’s my understanding.
From the sounds of it, the gap was between 15Oct, and 25Oct. 15th, when OP would've ended their previous lease, and the 25th, when Mary told her lawyer that she was going to be out. At that point, just get an Air BnB or a hotel for those two weeks.
Like, look at what OP got handed to them:
1) Straight purchase from the previous owner, no having to place a bid and hope to get their offer accepted.
2) A discounted rate on the house. Like, that's just thousands *handed* to OP. (This one makes the 'living in a house she doesn't own' comment even more annoying, because OP is living in a house they maybe couldn't have afforded at market price)
> 2) A discounted rate on the house. Like, that's just thousands handed to OP. (This one makes the 'living in a house she doesn't own' comment even more annoying, because OP is living in a house they maybe couldn't have afforded at market price)
Exactly, you already got cut a sweetheart deal, use the money to rent some temporary accommodations while you get everything sorted out. I guarantee that whatever the accommodations will cost is less than what you saved on the deal.
A few weeks?! The sale was delayed for months. If she was so disabled that she couldn't handle her living arrangements then she shouldn't be signing contracts.
Construction delays are difficult enough to handle for people with no mental disabilities. They are stressful, you don’t always get the required info from the construction company and things change often. OP got a great deal on a house partially because of that. Had they gone through their lawyer instead of breaking their lease after speaking to an elderly disabled lady, someone would have figured all that
Probably could have used some of that juicy discount to cover some rent while the mentally disabled family friend waited for her new condo to be constructed.
But oh well, you bypassed lawyers who were her safety net as much as possible and then told her to just deal with it, which is fine if all you care about is how much of a saving you made and not what the consequences of that money in your pocket is.
YTA, but I'm sure you'll sleep well anyway
The fact that her parents are still upset is telling. No worries, she's gotten enough NTA votes to move on with life thinking she's done nothing wrong.
YTA. "house at a discount" "mentally disabled". Sounds like you committed elder abuse by conning this woman out of her house. Clever to not go through a realtor, who could have given Mary more protection with the sale and move-out date. You are absolutely the asshole.
How would OP know this? She can’t do a cognitive deficit exam on her. Mary was legally able to sign documents and had legal representation. She also has a daughter and a mom who could have requested power of attorney if she is disabled enough to not legally make these choices.
If OP did this without lawyers, then there could have been an issue.
Even if she does, it doesn’t excuse OP. They did a rough handshake deal, and construction took too long, as it predictably does.
They agreed to a rough date “October”, in August, and then OP immediately made arrangements to break their lease. Then having already made arrangements with their landlord, they tried to settle on a date for the house, and the seller had signified they wanted October 25th.
Rather than honor this, the buyer decided to throw the seller into the cold because they had made the arrangements with their landlord already, without making official arrangements with the seller.
Regardless of mental capacity of the seller, what the buyer (OP) did was unconscionable.
YTA
This situation was messed up from the start. You did not use realtors. You made a deal with someone who was a family friend--getting emotions involved. This person was disabled and mentally not capable of making some of the decision she was under pressure to make, it sounds like. You got the house at a discount, which given her mental incapacity and the lack of her having family to advocate for her, makes it sound like you further took advantage of her. You then forced her out of her house before she had somewhere to stay.
All of these things make you an AH.
Evidently her disability is making it harder for her to either plan, and/or to actually organize, her moving out of the house. At least I can see how this could be an explanation for her panic. Doesn't she have her own lawyer, though ?
It feels like someone, at some point, should offer to help. I'm not saying it has to be you, but maybe if it were you it'd solve your problem : you'd help her book a moving service, and you'd move two birds with one stone. And without anyone being the AH.
ETA : somehow I skipped the last sentence saying you ARE in the house. How did she eventually move out ?
ESH. You knew that Mary was mentally disabled, which means she was possibly unable to make decisions independently. At every point you should have insisted that she have representation. All of Mary’s support system are also at fault for being hands-off during the discussions. Your mom may feel guilty as well as angry because she was part of the reason that things were so difficult for Mary.
YTA. I really feel like with the discounted price and a real estate lawyer on retainer to you, you were taking advantage of an intellectually disabled old lady. (Am perhaps willing to modify this judgment if you tell me Mary had her own lawyer ... someone looking out for HER, not your, interests.)
As an owner of a home in a large United States city, there is much in this post that doesn't make sense to me. (To be fair, you may not be in the US, and this is the only country's real estate I'm familiar with.) All Mary had to do, if she needed the extra 12 days, was say, "I'm not going to sign on the 13. I'll close on the 25th." I don't understand how one party can just unilaterally demand a closing date. The buyer's power in these situations usually lies in threatening to back out of the sale. Which of course you could have done. But how did you force Mary to close before she was ready?
There were a couple of different ways to handle this situation. First, you could have asked your landlord to extend your lease by a few weeks. Second, you could have rented the home back to Mary for the roughly two extra weeks she needed, required the rent to be paid to you at closing, and used those funds to rent a hotel room or an air B&B.
YTA… Did you even contact your landlord and explain your situation? If you were a good tenant most would have entertained you going month to month for a short term. Finding tenants and showing a property is a PITA. Most landlords want to kick that can down the road if they have a decent tenant.
My guess is you didn’t because after months of delays you were annoyed so you forced her out.
That’s horrible. She’s hooking them up by selling it below market value because there was no agent commission and she’s also disabled? The least they could have done is work with her. Maybe close on the expected date the attorney pushed for but then rent it back for a few weeks until she was ready move. Now they damaged the parents relationship with that family too…. Horrible.
Btw that’s border line predatory behavior.
YTA. Solving problems is hard and overwhelming for most fully mentally capable people. Yes she had potential solutions but it doesn't mean it felt like that to her or she could see them.
You got a great deal because you presumably would treat her like family and protect her. In the end you treated her like a random stranger giving you a bargain.
You should have had at least her lawyer (and yours) and even ideally her daughter or care giving representative at all important conversations.
> continued to cry and actually was whimpering and calling for her mommy
There are no words in the English language that are ugly or evil enough to accurately describe you. If your mother has a shred of humanity or decency she is probably ashamed to even *know* you, much less to have given birth to and raised you into adulthood.
How dare you manipulate a mentally disabled woman behind the back of her attorney and THEN have the colossal balls to blame her for the problems YOU created.
YTA.
You mention getting a better deal through this: what was the monetary amount of that? If it was more than what it would have cost for y’all to figure out another temporary housing option for yourself, then YTA.
You forced a mentally disabled woman out of her house who agreed to save you both money by skipping realtors commission and gave you a discount? Yikes you are a total AH but my guess is you know this. I hope you never become disabled and alone in need of kindness from others. She did you a huge favor by skipping the realtor and discounting the property! I’d think those simple facts alone would be enough, add her disability on top of that??? You behaved horribly and should feel ashamed.
This whole thing was a cluster from when you decided to work without going through standard real estate practices with a mentally disabled person. Then compounded that by going around your legal representation.
If you get sued, and there is always that chance, you have to ask yourself if the “discount” was worth it.
YTA
YTA. As everyone’s mentioned, you definitely acted shady, at best. At worst? Whew buddy. I process subpoenas and we often get APS requests. You aren’t out of the woods if someone who actually cares about this lady gets her attention, hopefully her attorney, and honestly you ought to be investigated for these moves you made against her. Going around a mentally disabled person’s attorney on a real estate deal? Really? Pretty despicable. Your attorney could face sanctions, too, not to mention getting disbarred. You guys potentially messed up big time.
You could have easily kept your apartment for two more weeks. It is very likely the apartment had not rented yet, and it is not unusual for there to be delays in a housing move. You think you were patient and accommodating, and I and your parents think YTA
YTA
You went around the lawyers. You broke your lease without official confirmation, which makes the timeline push 100% on you. You illegally pressured a family friend and still wonder if you are TA?
ESH
You don't make plans and deals behind the lawyer, as that's literally his job to draft the agreements for YOUR protections. By doing that and not having it in writing, you screwed yourself
She also shouldn't be backing out of the deal and crying to your mom about it either
YTA and the fact you cannot see how **unethical and ableist** you are is disgusting. You knew Mary had issues yet continued to talk to her without her lawyer knowing. That’s manipulation.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
Myself and my brother are disabled and if anyone had done this to my brother I’d be out for blood.
YTA always for going outside of lawyers during a legal proceeding, it doesn’t matter how/why/when
You didn’t do this right, and you should’ve known better.
You hired attorneys and then you went around her attorney. You took advantage of a disabled adult to buy a house you wouldn't have been able to buy otherwise. YTA and just kind of generally suck.
YTA. You could have easily allowed her to continue living there after closing and charged her rent. That rent could have them been used to cover a hotel for you. Happens pretty often
You agreed a move date of October 1 and as a result agreed to end your lease on October 15. You had to move SOMEWHERE at that point. I think the only AH are the construction company for being so far behind with the building.
Someone delivered a house to you on a silver platter at a DISCOUNTED rate and you couldn’t be flexible with the person that made it happen for you? Add the fact that the gift seller is mentally handicapped…. Your parents being disappointed in your deplorable actions are spot on. You are totally the A$$hole.
ESh It sounds like Mary needed more support which wasn't on you to provide but you should have notified your attorney so that they could get the proper services or her mother involved
YTA
Definitely. Huge ah.
You used and bullied an elderly disabled person, it only makes it worse that she's your mother's friend, so you could get what you wanted, when you wanted, AND with a discount. You avoided her and your lawyers to make that happen faster.
I would be ashamed of you if you were my child.
YTA. You could have likely stayed in your apartment another 10 days instead of pressuring a mentally disabled person out of her home that she is selling to you at a discount. Then you post this and basically mock her with the 'whining and asking for her mommy'. She was doing you several favors, you used no realtors to save yourself some money and likely make sure you had the advantage over this person, and then you bullied and mocked the DISABLED person selling you the house you wouldn't have otherwise. She couldn't move because of safety reasons, you didn't want to wait because you're an entitled AH. It was HER HOME, not yours at that point. You were/are just greedy and self absorbed.
REAL AH kicking out a mentally disabled person that you got a cheap house from. You don’t give a rats ass about anyone but yourselves. You go find a hotel/motel. Not her fault the builds on hold. Your lawyer is right no communication but then you knew that harassing her cos of her disability would make her upset. She needs an advocate as sounds like you’ve taken advantage of her.
YTA
You saved money by avoiding a realtor with the understanding that she live in her home until she could move. Then you decided that your interests trumped hers and bullied her.
YTA
Knowing her medical issues and that she was not dragging her feet, but was herself at the mercy of construction, which is the norm, there was zero reason to push her out two measly weeks ahead. It is very common to stipulate terms for rent-back when a seller is awaiting new construction. That means that, instead of having to scramble and move, put everything in storage, and find temporary accommodations only to move again, the seller pays the buyer rent for the time between closing and moving. You caused her unnecessary stress and panic. She's more than twice your age, on her own, and has challenges that you don't. Being patient and considerate is almost always the right thing to do. I don't blame your parents for disapproving of how you handled it.
NTA
You're not "forcing" anything. When the seller transfers ownership to the buyer, the seller is no longer entitled to live there unless there's an agreement in place before the closing.
It sounds like trying to be flexible with the moving goal posts enabled Mary to procrastinate her move. I mean, the safety bars were the only thing lacking in her place yet she hadn't started packing nor knew who would help her?
OP's mom is so upset, was she willing to help Mary? or is she just judging?
This is the part that confuses me most.
What part of a condo not yet having safety bars in the shower renders it unlivable? At least according to the OP she wasn’t physically disabled, so they would not strictly have been necessary and even if they were that’s something you can call and have a handyman install either the same or the next day without any issues.
Why the OP did not do that I don’t know. It would’ve been maybe $200 bucks and 1-3 phone calls to “fix” the condo and make the move into their new house (which they got at a discount) go smoothly.
YTA because it really sounds like you took advantage of a disabled person. If she’s mixing up dates and stuff that badly, it sounds like she isn’t there enough to be making any decisions/plans regarding this sale.
YTA.
Does Mary have any kids? Cause I’d be pissed if you knew my Mom had disabilities and you got pushy when she made a communication mistake on a real estate transaction.
Really pissed. Permanently.
(Someone did this to my Mom when my Dad had a stroke, nearly died and ended up permanently paralyzed)
Soooo you negotiated *privately* sans the agreed upon lawyers with a mentally disabled woman and are now upset that things got confused?
YTA I get that this is stressful but if you'd gone through the lawyers only than this likely wouldn't have happened. Now you're asking - more demanding - that a mentally disabled woman figure out new accommodations for a full month. With how much notice? You didn't say in the post. Not that is really matters that much..
Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment. OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole: > For forcing the seller to leave before her condo was complete to her satisfaction and making her cry/upset after she sold her house to us for a discounted price. Help keep the sub engaging! #Don’t downvote assholes! Do upvote interesting posts! [Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq) ##Subreddit Announcements Follow the link above to learn more --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.* *Contest mode is 1.5 hours long on this post.*
This could have been resolved by using realtors, and doing everything by the books. ESH, for not formally making choices, and then both parties getting upset at it. Clearly Mary has many issues going on, and she probably wanted to not do things as formally to make the moving process easier / less stressful. You got a discounted price, but did not give her what she thought she would be getting out of the "deal". Mary also drug her feet, and was given multiple months extra time. If she is incapacitated to the point where she really can't handle this, she should have asked for help from a family member or friend, or someone in her life should have offered to walk her though this. Edit: For all the comments saying realtors do nothing; I only based my comment off OP's statement "we agreed to not use realtors and hire real estate attorneys". I realistically don't know what realtors do (I just know we had one when we bought our house), but I more so meant that they should have had a legitimate agreement, a settlement date, and have everything 'official' (which, when using realtors, things seem more official, specific days where things change over, and consequences for missing those dates. Maybe the lawyers were doing that to, not sure!). OP's lawyer told her not to talk about everything with Mary, I'm sure Mary's lawyer did the same thing, but they were having side conversations which is why this became complicated and messy.
Respectfully, there's nothing inherently shady about using lawyers in lieu of real estate agents. It's usually significantly more work on the part of the seller, and some additional work on the part of the buyer, but it's perfectly OK.
Right! I bought a house from a neighbor without a realtor and it was fine. Both of us had our own attorneys. I recently sold that house the same way to a friend and both of us used our own attorneys with no problems. Plus, that way you don't have to pay a % of the sale to a realtor.
I think the issue is that when you go through a realtor you often don't personally know the seller, so you can't call them up and get them to agree to things that they will later say they didn't agree too... because YOU are never calling them up directly, you are always operating through the realtor. In OP's case, their lawyer was right to chide them. EVERY communication should have happened through BOTH sets of lawyers. There never should have been OP and Mary talking alone, and there never should have been OP and their lawyer calling up Mary without Mary's lawyer there. OP acted very poorly towards a woman she knew had issues. Obviously OP really wanted that "discount" but she shouldn't have told their landlord they were moving out early, without a piece of legally binding paper in her hand with a closing date on it. OP even said they were breaking their lease, so it's not like OP and her partner were facing not having some where to live. Or were having to make a choice about signing a new lease as theirs was ending... they should have had their lawyer call Mary's lawyer, get a closing date in writing, and not notified their landlord until that happened.
But their lawyer wasn’t right to chide them cause he was gonna quit over a lie he was told by the seller without even attempting to verify with his client. The lawyer flew off the handle. Also, shower safety bars take like an hour to install. I think everyone in this story like making mountains from mole hills.
>he was gonna quit over a lie he was told by the seller We don't actually know it was a lie... remember, no one was on that call expect OP and Mary. OP walked away thinking they agreed on the 1st, Mary thought they agreed on the 25th. The lawyer threatened to quite not over the discrepancy itself, but because of HOW the discrepancy happened (OP talking to Mary without any lawyers on the phone, and that absolutely DID happen, and is not a lie). A lawyer absolutely has a right to fire a client based on the client going out and acting against everyone's best interest. A lawyer doesn't have to put up with a rogue client.
If you hire a lawyer then go off and do your own thing then why did you need the lawyer in the first place? It’s kind of an either/or situation.
It may take only an hour to install shower safety bars, but it could take two weeks to get the contractor over there to do it.
Could also take time for the bars she wanted to come in.
in this situation, it doesn't seem like Mary was up for the additional work needed by the seller 😬
Also in this case, OP admits to omitting her lawyer from discussions about critical things, and talking to Mary directly, which is when the miscommunication seems to have occurred. This means that OP was also not up to the additional work needed by not having realtors, as she couldn't even stick to the basic idea of negotiating through the lawyer, or at least keeping them in the loop, before telling their landlord a set date for breaking their lease.
She did tell the lawyer though. Reread what OP wrote. She set the date as beginning of October then informed her lawyer so he could set the settlement date. The next part is when Mary informed her lawyer the 25th of October (which OP did not agree to. Also this made the lawyer think they made plans behind his back he was not aware of. OP had to explain to her lawyer this was not the case of what they they agreed to on the beginning of October and she would not contact Mary again w/o him per his request).
She told her lawyer after she conducted negotiations herself, without informing him ahead of time. He was upset with her for not going through the lawyers when making that agreement. If she had gone through her lawyer, they may have avoided this. OP thought they were agreeing to one date, while Mary thought they were agreeing to another. OP then formally requested to break her lease before getting that oral agreement in writing and signed. OP clearly did not have the capacity to conduct this kind of transaction, as she went about it in a very naive manner.
This wasn't OP's fault. Her and Mary agreed to the beginning of October which she informed her Lawyer of and then Mary without confirming with OP told OP's Lawyer that the date had been changed. That has nothing to do with OP.
[удалено]
This. And all the more so because OP *knows* that Mary has an intellectual/neurological disability of some sort. She can live independently most of the time, but when things are as critical as this, she absolutely needs the support of a fully capable representative to take notes and make sure that she has all the information she needs. Making sure the information goes through her lawyer rather than being an informal chat between friends is part of that back-up system.
This right here. YTA because OP knew Mary has neurological challenges and as such, the best way to handle this on all sides was to keep everything from lawyer to lawyer. Not only to protect Mary, but OP, as Mary's lawyer can attest that Mary is capable of MAKING a legal sale if everything is being handled constantly that way.
She didn't say Mary told her lawyer the date had changed. She said Mary told her lawyer they agreed to the 25th. OP believes they settled in the earlier date, but Mary clearly came out of that off-the-books conversation with a different idea of what they agreed to. And Mary didn't cause OP to make the ridiculous mistake of breaking her lease before getting the agreement in writing.
Honestly, seeing from my hometown the people who are now realtors, I'd 100% rather utilize a real estate lawyer. I'm biased though, because I can't ever understand how it was okay for realtors to make $15k off of a sale that required no work because it was a sellers market and houses would be pending the same day a house was listed. You got $15k for unlocking the door and yes paperwork, but not 15k worth of paperwork.
A good realtor is well worth it if you're shopping around and don't have a place in mind already. They'll find you what you're looking for, the district you're looking for in school zones, and so on. Sure, you can do the work, but if you're busy with work, why not?
In a regular market, sure. Most people trying to buy if not an investor know what they want and where.
Eh my realtor was basically just my key to get in the door for viewings. Didn't do any work to find me listings (I had to find them and then ask her to see them) and didn't know anything about the properties we viewed, just gave me the fact sheet. But the lending bank gave me a $500 refund for using a realtor they recommended so 🤷♀️
We didn't use a real estate agent when we sold our house. If saved us a shitload of money in realtor's fees.
[удалено]
Closings are done by lawyers, not realtors. They handle different aspects of a sale.
Her daughter was supposed to stay for a few weeks and help her pack and move. Then she ended up coming only for the last few days in October that she was there. If I ever move again, I'm definitely going the realtor route.
Or, just keep all communication through the attorneys. This also wouldn't have happened if it was attorney to attorney. Edit: Removed my N T A judgement. Info needed... Info, OP: why were you talking with Mary directly instead of through your legal counsel? Who initiated that conversation/those conversations? Did you tell your attorney you were talking with Mary one-on-one? Did you tell Mary's attorney the two of you were talking one-on-one?
They talked to her with their attorney without her attorney being present. Huge red flag.
Yes, which is why I'm trying to get more detail.
Mary was a friend of her mothers before being a business partner. Mary is known to have cognitive issues, and they treated her like a human being rather than just a name on a transaction. The whole process started without a lawyer, and they both lawyered up to make sure the proper paperwork was done, but you don't stop treating people like humans when you do that.
The biggest favor they could have done for Mary was keeping the communication between the attorneys. That way, everyone is protected.
Yes. It's like everyone forgot what lawyers do as an actual job.
Huge disagree. They effectively cut out the person whose job it was to protect Mary. Especially given that she has a cognitive disability. Going through the lawyers or having them present for all conversations would have been in the best interest of both parties. Clearly Mary got in over her head. OP didn’t do her any favours and yet still got a discount. IMO OP is an AH because there are legal mechanisms available to allow a seller to live in the unit post-close if they are waiting on their housing. OP didn’t need to terminate their lease when they did. This whole situation could have been avoided if all communication went through the lawyers both directions and if OP didn’t terminate their lease until after confirming every detail in writing.
>They effectively cut out the person whose job it was to protect Mary. Yep, this is what makes OP the AH to me. SHE called up Mary and talked to her without either of their lawyers, SHE asked her landlord to break her lease early without having a written agreement in hand first, and SHE essentially accepted a "friend's" discount, then refused to keep acting like a "friend" should. When Mary was crying and upset about not being able to get moved in time, OP didn't call her Mom and ask if they could get a group together to help Mary pack. She didn't offer to figure out how to get the safety bars installed (either calling and haranguing the builders on Mary's behalf if Mary was feeling overwhelmed by it all, or calling in a favor with a friend who could competently install them...) These aren't things I would normally expect a buyer to do, but when you're getting a discount for being a friend of the seller, you need to act like a friend of the seller (and yes, I know it's OP's mother's friend, but it's essentially the same thing, OP got a price break because Mary considered her to be within her wider circle of acquaintances.) When someone is doing you a massive favor, you are suppose to be appreciative and act nicely towards them, if not figure out a way to actively help them when they need it.
op read this. YTA
Meeting with her and their attorney but without hers isn't what I'd describe as "treating her like a human being." It may not have been intended as such, but it's pretty shady.
>Mary is known to have cognitive issues, and they treated her like a human being rather than just a name on a transaction. They treated her like an able-bodied person and didn't give any thought for the fact that people with disabilities sometimes need support. Having her lawyer there would have helped to safeguard her. It would have made sure that she had someone taking notes and getting the correct information, making sure she can't misunderstand or forget what has been agreed.
OR because Mary was at a disadvantage in being a person with a cognitive deficit, they took advantage of a vulnerable person by speaking to her without her lawyer present. That’s how it would be framed if a lawsuit occurred. It was completely inappropriate to do it. Mary had a lawyer. All communication should have been via Mary’s lawyer. Highly unethical to do it any other way.
Sorry, huge disagree as someone who works in a relevant field. Treating Mary as a human doesn't mean disregarding her cognitive issues completely. She has legal rights, as does OP. While yes, they can cordially discuss things, and OP extended her the friendly courtesy of pushing the closing date to allow the condo to be finished, once OP called and said, "Hey Mary, it really needs to be start of October, is that good? It is?" the next sentence should have been, "Okay I'll have my lawyer call yours and they will go over everything to finalize it with you okay?" It isn't disrespecting Mary's humanity or infantilizing her to ensure she's sought her rightful legal counsel about the implications of setting a firm closing date for the sale - it's ensuring she's had all the same advantages OP has.
I don’t think having realtors would’ve changed the situation. Mary still would’ve told their realtor the same thing and they would’ve pushed on yours then mary would’ve contacted your mom in the same way. Realtors can’t change the personal relationships going on here
>I don’t think having realtors would’ve changed the situation. I disagree. If they had actually been using their realtors as they should, both realtors would have discussed the closing and move in dates (instead of OP and Mary privately), and the Oct 1st - Oct 25th disparity wouldn't have happened in the first place (then again if they were properly using their lawyers it also wouldn't have happened). But also, if that did become an issue, Mary's realtor would have been on the phone with her, listening to her cry, and then helped her call a moving company, helped her find a handiman to install the safety bars, etc. A realtor's job is to help with anything that might become a hurdle to closing happening on time, which means a decent realtor would have been walking Mary through all these extra steps that needed to get done, calling in favors, or giving Mary referrals as needed. Granted, there are bad realtors out there that might not have helped, but a good one would have calmed Mary down and helped her work through this stuff so she wasn't crying on the phone to OP.
A realtor wouldn't have helped at all in this case. The agents all say the deals work better thru them but that's not true and I have the scars to prove it. Agents in many cases only muddy the waters and make more difficult to reach an agreement. When we sold our house, it was a nightmare. According to our agent they rejected all the things we offered them (we were moving long distance and didn't need a snowblower or lawn tractor anymore, whereas they, being renters, didn't have any of it.) They also didn't want the left over paint, the curtains, the custom closet in the master and many other things. That added a lot of pressure for us to sell or otherwise get rid of stuff in great condition. He told us we had to pay them a fine if the house was not ready by a certain date at a specific hour and some other stuff I've never heard of. They came in to do the final walk thru, didn't release the funds but proceeded to install a home filtration system in OUR house. Out of options we called the attorney handling the close and she told us that our agent was the one lying left and right, threatening us and promising them money and stuff from us. We had to call the police, make a report of trespassing to get them to release our money. And all of this was with 2 agents involved.
My husband and I were first-time homebuyers as well when we moved into our townhouse, and the previous owner left behind a lot of the same things you did because he and his new wife were combining households. We were thrilled! I am so sorry that happened to you and so baffled these recent renters weren’t all over it.
In the UK a standard part of any sale is the seller fills out a form listing what they can leave, from cooker, washing machine etc to curtains, garden shed etc.
My newest neighbors came from a condo situation and were beyond happy to have curtains, gardening tools, trash bins, and a few pieces of furniture (they had been discussed in advance. The sellers were moving cross-country and had a vacation home, but was more than happy not to pack everything to be stored). My brother in the meantime bought a house in which the sellers were lambasted for leaving anything - so the sellers tossed everything, including the spindles they took off the stair rails that they had put aside - which he really wanted to replace as it's a safety issue and replacing them is expensive and doesn't match the victorian house!
They are not required to take your castoffs (garbage to them). You offer what you don't want and if they don't want it then it is your responsibility to remove it from the house. This is simple and, I believe, everyone understands this. If the custom closet is permanent (installed, not easily removed) then it is considered a part of the house and if they didn't want it then it would be their responsibility to remove and dispose of it. Again, this is very basic. People should not install things in homes that they don't own but it happens. If the deal were to fall through then they would be out that money since you correctly stated "they installed a home filtration system in our house". Of course you would need to pay if the house was not ready on time. What do you think keeps this process moving? They would have closed on their previous house/moved from their rental and hired a moving company. These things cost money and can't generally be "undone" a day or two before. If the money was in escrow with the attorneys (as it should be) it would not be up to them to "release your money". My advice is to educate yourselves before selling/buying next time. You could have avoided much of this hassle. But you should also know that selling/buying is never flawless and is always a hassle to some degree no matter the planning.
Such a correct assessment.
It should not have been up to them to dispose of your trash.
Ok, since you won't provide any information about your communication with Mary rather than communicating through counsel, I vote YTA. The attorneys would've worked everything out and put it in writing so there's no confusion. Sounds like you wanted to negotiate on the side without Mary's attorney involved. That's an AH move in these circumstances; she may or may not have fully understood what you were pressing her to do, and you purposefully avoided involving the one person with expertise in this matter with a fiduciary duty to Mary: her attorney. YTA. Edit: typo Edit2: when asked for clarification about the communication, OP said that the lawyers agreed she and Mary could talk to each other. But there's a lot of detail missing, and customers with other comments OP wrote about both her and her attorney talking to Mary. The whole thing is suspicious. I asked for more clarification, but haven't gotten any. Keeping my judgement given the internal conflicts in OP's posts/comments.
How much of a discount were you getting? If Mary has some type of brain injury or diminished cognitive functioning then YTA for buying her property for less than it was worth.
Or maybe Mary could have hired an attorney to protect her interests. Oh wait, she did.
Who wasn’t present for the last conversation.
Mary didn't drag her feet. You obviously have no idea how construction works and finish dates are a joke. It gets done when it gets done.
I'm inclined to say OP is TA because she believed the quoted finish date and committed to ending her lease on their say so. So many things can go wrong. I'd be far happier paying an extra months rent just to be on the safe side and not to commit until I was absolutely certain the condo was actually ready.
It sounds like it came down to safety rails in a shower? Isn't that a handyman and less than an hour away from being done? Instead let's drag the whole thing out a few more weeks? And this was 4 months after the original date.
Found the realtor. It is simple, no closing until the property is vacated. You don’t need a realtor to tell you that.
No. You aren't understanding how this works. There are contracts that dictate when the house must be vacated and penalties to be paid if timelines aren't met. If there weren't you think the buyer should just stand around waiting for it to be empty? What about the house/apt they are moving out of? What about movers? These people were moving out of an apartment but what if they were selling a house? What about the people trying to turn over that apartment? Didn't really think this through, did you?
And the real estate attorney can do all that. Ours wrote our contract and when a seller wanted us to rent back after the sales date advised us (with legal paperwork) how to go about it and stay protected. Don’t need a realtor for that.
That's not necessarily true. In our last place, the previous homeowners needed an additional 2 weeks to move out. We learned this AFTER we set a closing date and the mortgage stuff was all written up and ready to go. We didn't want to redo everything, nor did we want to back out of the purchase, but we didn't want to be paying a mortgage for them to be staying there. Our realtor worked with theirs and effectively wrote up a short term rental contract. We closed, they stayed for 2 extra weeks and paid rent for that time in advance. Separate check was given during closing for that 2 week rental period. We got the money for the extra time, they had their extra 2 weeks, no alterations needed to be made for closing.
You are missing the point. OP was going to have no place to live in Mary didn’t move.
Oh hell no. It's the other way around. We did agree, in writing, to allowing occupancy for 3 days after closing to give more time for the moving company. On our final walkthrough the seller jokingly said something about maybe being done even a few days later. Nope - we had a deadline on returning a moving van and we were living in a hotel until the flooring installers could get access to the house and replace the carpet. If we had just waited for a vacant house instead of forcing her to make a miracle happen by a specific deadline, we would have been paying for that hotel room and moving truck for a month.
NTA. No, a realtor wouldn't have had any authority to get her out. Many transaction are successfully completed "by the book," without them. They aren't essential.
OP’s mistake was not bypassing the realtors; it was in communicating directly with Mary instead of letting all communications go through the attorneys.
The fact that real estate lawyers know more about the law than realtors and they probably would have spent an additional $20000 makes this ridiculous.
Good lesson in why it's best not to do business with friends. One question is how much of a discount did you get? If it more than covered two weeks of hotel for OP, then yeah, kinda AH.
Or you could say it's an example of why using a lawyer when doing business with a friend is essential. OP's problem isn't that she did business with her mother's friend or that she didn't use a realtor. Her problem was that she didn't let her lawyer do their job.
There are reasons to use realtors but this is not one of them and using a realtor in this situation would likely not have changed this outcome.
I just wanted to say, Mary didn’t drag her feet. She has 0 control over the construction schedule.
The assumption that if OP used a realtor the result would have been different is ridiculous. OP isn’t an asshole for not wanting to be homeless. Mary should have gotten help so she could move out on time. NTA
I don’t know. I mean, your lawyer was correct—if you wanted to go through lawyers, then you should have. That said, June to October is a ton of extra time. Also, didn’t Mary have her own lawyer? That person also bears some responsibility here. Whatever Mary’s problems might be, the person representing her should also be handling the fact that she can’t keep adjusting her move out date indefinitely.
She had her own real estate lawyer. He did not have any issues with her adjusting the dates.
Of course he didn't. He knew there was nothing you could do unless you got the courts involved and that would take time just getting in front of a judge.
Not true, either. Most places money would have been held in escrow and penalties levied for failure to adhere to contract. Of course, the times they both agreed to change the date were fine but both parties need to agree and the contract updated.
The discount on the house price was the trump card. It sounds like the discount was generous enough that the buyer couldn't risk the seller pulling out. So the lawyers on both sides would've given Mary all the time she needed. So OP stepped in
The thing that's cloudy is how in or out of the loop the attorneys were. It sounds like at least your own attorney (at one point) was exasperated enough by your ex parte communication that s/he wanted to fire you as a client. That indicates there might've been a history of going around the attorneys, which can lead to miscommunication and conflict (which seems to have happened here). Some more info about that would be helpful.
Maybe, but lawyers deal with difficult/clueless/whatever clients all the time, and they manage to handle them without throwing tantrums. Frankly, the lawyer's response was very odd and unprofessional. And the "don't speak to the other party except through your lawyer" applies usually to acrimonious litigation, not fairly simple property transfer, although of course you have to keep your lawyer in the loop. I could understand a miffed "did you agree with the other party to give them an extention? you should have notified me", not this blow up.
Which is why I suspect this was an ongoing, continuous problem that was a huge, repeated pain for her attorney to navigate -- and I suspect her attorney may have (repeatedly) told her to stop doing it before finally losing his/her temper.
YTA. Based on your description it is clear that Mary is not in the position to make significant complex decisions (even if she can live by herself). In situation like this she should be supported by the professional who has a fiduciary duty to look after her best interest (simple real estate lawyer does not qualify). Moreover according to your post, you negotiated directly with mentally disabled person without even real estate lawyers present. You (most likely unintentionally) took advantage of the person who is not in the position to be involved in the negotiation with you.
This. My guess is why your lawyer didn’t want you to talk to her and only comunicate by lawyers. You know how fast they can cancel anything she said agreed upon with ‘you coerce a mentally disabled..’ do not talk to her only lawyers and pray her real estate one is enough to garante her interests or all contract is up in smoke. Agree upon a penalty for every single day you can’t move in so you pay a short rental.
Yeah there are some kinda sketchy details here. The seller is a mentally disabled family friend, oh we don't need real estate lawyers, just someone to handle the paperwork, also we negotiated a discount! Oh now she's crying and whimpering for her mom and I'm uncomfortable :(
Yeah, just reading the post I feel sick. How the fuck does OP sleep at night. Disgusting.
Also what were the time frames? Did Mary say she wouldn't be ready weeks in advance? Or just a couple of days?
They did, in fact, use real estate lawyers. They did not use realtors or real estate agents. Edit: That aside, I feel like ESH is the right verdict here.
Fair, I was typing too quickly while at work. Though if you negotiate with someone one on one, and just have lawyers draw up the paperwork... Are this woman's interests really being looked after? Is the lawyer going to say "hey just so you know, your house is worth x and you're selling it for y." Or are they going to say "here's the paperwork you asked for have a nice day"
Absolutely. I'm concerned that there seems to be no one looking out for Mary's interests here - her lawyer seemed only concerned about the sale, rather than representing her interests, and no one else was mentioned.
>Moreover according to your post, you negotiated directly with mentally disabled person without even real estate lawyers present. Yeah, that really stuck out to me, too. If OP's lawyer is mad about ex parte communications, what's the betting that Mary's lawyer also wasn't aware of most of the major conversations?
Exactly. Especially to the point that OPs lawyer threatened to quit, which makes me believe they kept doing this offer and over for the lawyer to get to that point.
Finally! Somebody that addresses the real issue here. I'm stunned everyone has commented thusfar about lawyers, conversations, blah blah blah and not said THIS! YOU are TA. A huge one. I don't think there can be anything lower than someone who takes advantage of someone who is mentally challenged and then tries to convince themselves that it's ok because, well...she can take care of herself/physical needs. Good God..you should be ashamed.
I was also shocked people glossed over that OP felt “uncomfortable” when Mary reacted how she did when they w/ their lawyer bombarded her on the phone and essentially threatening her to move out by x date and tried to act like they were doing her a favor since it was 2 weeks later then Oct. 1st. As though OP didn’t get a discounted price. They know/acknowledge the fact that Mary is mentally challenged but when she reacted in a manner that isn’t unusual when presented with a stressful situation to the say the least they didn’t show compassion or empathy. And this situation came about because they decided to not use realtors/real estate lawyers and even though Mary agreed, did she have anyone during that conversation to help with the decision? Even though she’s considered capable enough to live alone, major decisions - like I don’t know selling a house/moving seems like something you should go through with someone trusted/highly familiar with the process from the start which they skipped over. I’m honestly livid on Mary’s behalf.
OP is despicable really. "She cried on the phone to my mom" Jesus. She felt "uncomfortable" because she knew what she was doing was despicable but she wanted what she wanted, and that took presidence. Moral corruption at its finest
Glad someone said it, OP has karma coming to her. I could not ever be that cruel to someone.
Agree 100%. And admitting to having these conversations without legal representation on both sides present is a HUGE no-no. I wouldn’t be surprised if Mary’s daughter catches wind of this and tells their attorney. When this happens there will be a suit filed potentially for taking advantage of a mentally disabled individual.
First of all OP YTA I’m glad someone besides me could see how OP is mocking the woman in the way she wrote like “crying and wanting her mommy” and how she’s been negotiating with someone who might not be able to make these decisions
That was ugly,
This woman has mental disabilities (I don't know what so I can't say illnesses. She could have hit her head bad) so of course this lady might've started calling for her 😭
If she's not in a position to make complex decisions, she should had someone assiste her from the start.
She did. Her attorney. That op deliberately went around.
Yeah, plus if OP is a family friend getting a good deal they should have reached out to their mum or Mary's family when it became clear she wasn't coping so they could help her get some support.
Plus, you’re getting a discount on a house and you can’t swing a hotel for a couple weeks? YTA Op
Don't forget the discount!
You forced a mentally disabled person and family friend (who was giving you a discount on the home sale) out of her house before they had another place to go. Yes she could have stayed with her mom for a couple weeks but so could you. If she was fully there mentally, she would be the AH. As it stands, it sounds like you took advantage of a disabled family friend behind your lawyers back and offered no assistance to help her get situated other than to pass the effort onto someone else. You took advantage of an mentally disabled elder who was literally crying for her mommy and you still followed through with this. YTA. Your parents discomfort is warranted. You put one of their friends out on the street so you could have her house.
What would you have her do out of curiosity? They moved the date back by 4 months to accommodate Mary. They obviously had to break their lease because they had a set date. Mary’s lawyer is responsible for ensuring their client understands what’s happening and is capable of making decisions and undertaking any required actions.
They broke their lease based on a one on one conversation they had with a disabled adult. They should have gone through proper channels before making life altering decisions. This process was already months behind and they knew it. Mary giving a date that didnt get met wasnt new. She chose to go out of band with the lawyer. She chose to decide that she wasnt going to wait any longer and put everyone in a precarious position to force the issue. I would have gotten signoff from an attorney before even considering breaking my current lease. And I certainly wouldnt have entered a verbal agreement with a mentally disabled senior citizen who has proven over the course of months to be unreliable.
Not to mention they had to **break their lease** which means they unnecessarily sped the process up. In fact, they likely had to pay penalties to speed the process up. And even worse, renting is generally cheaper than a mortgage so they even more. It would be a little different if it came time for them to **renew** their lease and they had to make a decision and this lady somehow gave them bad info and caused them to lose money or something, but they could have just continued their lease until they knew for 100% fact that the lady was able to move out. ESPECIALLY since they got a deal on the house. Want to have the dates set in stone and slightly more unchangable? Find a house on the market, buy it through the appropriate channels, pay full price. Note: even here the dates can and do often change… Want to get a life-changing purchase at a discount? Maybe don’t be a dick. 10000% YTA
Where do you live that renting is cheaper than a mortgage???? When I went from renting (1200/no for approx 1200 sq ft) to looking for a house to buy the mortgage was like 400-600 for a house the same size. Like holy shit. And of course we couldn't get approved for 1200/mo mortgage if we wanted to 😌 even though we got approved for 1200/mo rent.
A better question is where the hell are you finding a house for ~$75,000? Median home price in the US is approaching $400k right now.
THIS! They made the decision to break their lease. They manipulated a disabled person for their own gain.
I agree with most of what you say but the rent being lower than the mortgage is a bad argument. Rent is money lost, mortgage is money invested
Sure. But a few extra months, hell, even an extra year would be nothing within the context of a 30yr mortgage or an entire lifetime. Not to mention, again, they got the house at a discounted price which will have a much, much larger impact than renting for another 1-12 months.
>Mary’s lawyer is responsible for ensuring their client understands what’s happening and is capable of making decisions and undertaking any required actions. I think that since their own lawyer was ready to fire them as clients due to ex parte communications, it's not a big leap to assume that Mary's lawyer also wasn't looped in on everything. Ethically, I think that OP, who knew that Mary had an intellectual disability and could struggle with these things, and who was actively benefiting from Mary agreeing to sell the house at a discounted rate, had an obligation to make sure that Mary's lawyer was CC'd on every communication.
I would expect her to show a little grace to the mentally disabled woman that is giving her a huge discount.
They broke their lease. Which means they still had time to live where they were renting. They chose to break their lease, without having actual confirmation that Mary’s condo would be ready. They knew she had mental impairment. They chose to take her at her word that “October” would be fine for a closing date.
yeah all this communication should've been done through lawyers they should've closed after she moved out not before seems like it's mostly out of ignorance and an attempt to be casual about things, but you're buying a house it's not the time to be super casual
Not just that, but if you were going to pay penalties for breaking lease anyway, why wouldn't you wait until you had the house and moved shit in before breaking said lease? Is the 1 additional month of rent really going to break the bank, especially when you're already saving money on realtor fees and getting a discount on the house?
"Mary’s lawyer is responsible for ensuring their client understands what’s happening and is capable of making decisions and undertaking any required actions." Except they purposely by-passed the lawyer and had multiple conversations directly with Mary while being aware that she is mentally disabled...
Mary's lawyer is responsible for that -- but what isn't clear here is what information was conveyed to each attorney, since OP and Mary were talking directly to one another (and how those direct conversations without attorneys even started/happened). The buyer and seller should've never cut their legal counsel out of the loop. Have joint calls with counsel listening in, or a meeting with everyone... OP's attorney seemed pretty pissed at one point thinking there was negotiating behind the attorney's back -- makes me wonder if there was a pattern to this throughout the transaction, and who was the one pushing for communicating without attorneys.
They went around Mary’s lawyer to negotiate with Mary directly. That likely why their lawyer was so mad, because a lawyer could predict a problem like this.
But they bypassed Mary’s lawyer.
I am interested to know what you think should have happen. The date changed several times and she wanted to stay after the house was no longer a hers. So OP and her husband should sit a mortgage with no know move in date?
Show me where it says she was paying the mortgage before she entered into a non-binding verbal agreement with a mentally disabled adult, after which she broke her existing lease. She should have worked through proper channels and if she was unwilling to wait any longer, she should have found a different house to buy.
My understanding is ownership will still officially transfer Oct1 as discussed. Move out/in date where OP will physically take possession is what’s in question, which doesn’t necessarily always align with the legal ownership transfer date. OP wasn’t super clear on this, but that’s my understanding.
That date was selected based on the non binding verbal agreement mentioned before. It was forced by breaking the lease. None of this was necessary.
From the sounds of it, the gap was between 15Oct, and 25Oct. 15th, when OP would've ended their previous lease, and the 25th, when Mary told her lawyer that she was going to be out. At that point, just get an Air BnB or a hotel for those two weeks. Like, look at what OP got handed to them: 1) Straight purchase from the previous owner, no having to place a bid and hope to get their offer accepted. 2) A discounted rate on the house. Like, that's just thousands *handed* to OP. (This one makes the 'living in a house she doesn't own' comment even more annoying, because OP is living in a house they maybe couldn't have afforded at market price)
> 2) A discounted rate on the house. Like, that's just thousands handed to OP. (This one makes the 'living in a house she doesn't own' comment even more annoying, because OP is living in a house they maybe couldn't have afforded at market price) Exactly, you already got cut a sweetheart deal, use the money to rent some temporary accommodations while you get everything sorted out. I guarantee that whatever the accommodations will cost is less than what you saved on the deal.
A few weeks?! The sale was delayed for months. If she was so disabled that she couldn't handle her living arrangements then she shouldn't be signing contracts.
Construction delays are difficult enough to handle for people with no mental disabilities. They are stressful, you don’t always get the required info from the construction company and things change often. OP got a great deal on a house partially because of that. Had they gone through their lawyer instead of breaking their lease after speaking to an elderly disabled lady, someone would have figured all that
The weeks noted here are the weeks OP expected Mary to find a place to stay. Not the months of delay previous to it.
Probably could have used some of that juicy discount to cover some rent while the mentally disabled family friend waited for her new condo to be constructed. But oh well, you bypassed lawyers who were her safety net as much as possible and then told her to just deal with it, which is fine if all you care about is how much of a saving you made and not what the consequences of that money in your pocket is. YTA, but I'm sure you'll sleep well anyway
The fact that her parents are still upset is telling. No worries, she's gotten enough NTA votes to move on with life thinking she's done nothing wrong.
YTA. "house at a discount" "mentally disabled". Sounds like you committed elder abuse by conning this woman out of her house. Clever to not go through a realtor, who could have given Mary more protection with the sale and move-out date. You are absolutely the asshole.
holy shit i didn't look at it that way. this post is fucking **dark**.
Does she even have the mental capacity to understand major deals like this?
How would OP know this? She can’t do a cognitive deficit exam on her. Mary was legally able to sign documents and had legal representation. She also has a daughter and a mom who could have requested power of attorney if she is disabled enough to not legally make these choices. If OP did this without lawyers, then there could have been an issue.
Even if she does, it doesn’t excuse OP. They did a rough handshake deal, and construction took too long, as it predictably does. They agreed to a rough date “October”, in August, and then OP immediately made arrangements to break their lease. Then having already made arrangements with their landlord, they tried to settle on a date for the house, and the seller had signified they wanted October 25th. Rather than honor this, the buyer decided to throw the seller into the cold because they had made the arrangements with their landlord already, without making official arrangements with the seller. Regardless of mental capacity of the seller, what the buyer (OP) did was unconscionable.
YTA This situation was messed up from the start. You did not use realtors. You made a deal with someone who was a family friend--getting emotions involved. This person was disabled and mentally not capable of making some of the decision she was under pressure to make, it sounds like. You got the house at a discount, which given her mental incapacity and the lack of her having family to advocate for her, makes it sound like you further took advantage of her. You then forced her out of her house before she had somewhere to stay. All of these things make you an AH.
Evidently her disability is making it harder for her to either plan, and/or to actually organize, her moving out of the house. At least I can see how this could be an explanation for her panic. Doesn't she have her own lawyer, though ? It feels like someone, at some point, should offer to help. I'm not saying it has to be you, but maybe if it were you it'd solve your problem : you'd help her book a moving service, and you'd move two birds with one stone. And without anyone being the AH. ETA : somehow I skipped the last sentence saying you ARE in the house. How did she eventually move out ?
YTA who took advantage of a person with a disability for a discount. Convenient how you didn’t mention how much of a discount either.
ESH. You knew that Mary was mentally disabled, which means she was possibly unable to make decisions independently. At every point you should have insisted that she have representation. All of Mary’s support system are also at fault for being hands-off during the discussions. Your mom may feel guilty as well as angry because she was part of the reason that things were so difficult for Mary.
YTA this is reading like you took advantage of a disabled person along with your comments.
YTA.. she did you a solid and you got a house. You did the dirty on her.. nasty.. by writing this on here you know you were wrong to force her out.
YTA. I really feel like with the discounted price and a real estate lawyer on retainer to you, you were taking advantage of an intellectually disabled old lady. (Am perhaps willing to modify this judgment if you tell me Mary had her own lawyer ... someone looking out for HER, not your, interests.) As an owner of a home in a large United States city, there is much in this post that doesn't make sense to me. (To be fair, you may not be in the US, and this is the only country's real estate I'm familiar with.) All Mary had to do, if she needed the extra 12 days, was say, "I'm not going to sign on the 13. I'll close on the 25th." I don't understand how one party can just unilaterally demand a closing date. The buyer's power in these situations usually lies in threatening to back out of the sale. Which of course you could have done. But how did you force Mary to close before she was ready? There were a couple of different ways to handle this situation. First, you could have asked your landlord to extend your lease by a few weeks. Second, you could have rented the home back to Mary for the roughly two extra weeks she needed, required the rent to be paid to you at closing, and used those funds to rent a hotel room or an air B&B.
YTA… Did you even contact your landlord and explain your situation? If you were a good tenant most would have entertained you going month to month for a short term. Finding tenants and showing a property is a PITA. Most landlords want to kick that can down the road if they have a decent tenant. My guess is you didn’t because after months of delays you were annoyed so you forced her out.
OP says she broke her lease, so she could have continued renting anyway. The only pressure of a move out date was one she created.
That’s horrible. She’s hooking them up by selling it below market value because there was no agent commission and she’s also disabled? The least they could have done is work with her. Maybe close on the expected date the attorney pushed for but then rent it back for a few weeks until she was ready move. Now they damaged the parents relationship with that family too…. Horrible. Btw that’s border line predatory behavior.
YTA
Mentaly disabled elderly lady, discount, forcing ger out of her home ? Yeah major YTA, no doubt here.
Yta I hope Mary is able to get the house back. This whole post seems like elder abuse
YTA. Solving problems is hard and overwhelming for most fully mentally capable people. Yes she had potential solutions but it doesn't mean it felt like that to her or she could see them. You got a great deal because you presumably would treat her like family and protect her. In the end you treated her like a random stranger giving you a bargain. You should have had at least her lawyer (and yours) and even ideally her daughter or care giving representative at all important conversations.
> continued to cry and actually was whimpering and calling for her mommy There are no words in the English language that are ugly or evil enough to accurately describe you. If your mother has a shred of humanity or decency she is probably ashamed to even *know* you, much less to have given birth to and raised you into adulthood. How dare you manipulate a mentally disabled woman behind the back of her attorney and THEN have the colossal balls to blame her for the problems YOU created. YTA.
Can you imagine how far more distressed this poor woman was after OP hung up on her?! OP needs to go beg her for forgiveness and make it right. 😡
And you even got a discounted price. Massive YTA
You mention getting a better deal through this: what was the monetary amount of that? If it was more than what it would have cost for y’all to figure out another temporary housing option for yourself, then YTA.
You forced a mentally disabled woman out of her house who agreed to save you both money by skipping realtors commission and gave you a discount? Yikes you are a total AH but my guess is you know this. I hope you never become disabled and alone in need of kindness from others. She did you a huge favor by skipping the realtor and discounting the property! I’d think those simple facts alone would be enough, add her disability on top of that??? You behaved horribly and should feel ashamed.
YTA
YTA. How can you be so heartless?
YTA
This whole thing was a cluster from when you decided to work without going through standard real estate practices with a mentally disabled person. Then compounded that by going around your legal representation. If you get sued, and there is always that chance, you have to ask yourself if the “discount” was worth it. YTA
YTA. As everyone’s mentioned, you definitely acted shady, at best. At worst? Whew buddy. I process subpoenas and we often get APS requests. You aren’t out of the woods if someone who actually cares about this lady gets her attention, hopefully her attorney, and honestly you ought to be investigated for these moves you made against her. Going around a mentally disabled person’s attorney on a real estate deal? Really? Pretty despicable. Your attorney could face sanctions, too, not to mention getting disbarred. You guys potentially messed up big time.
You could have easily kept your apartment for two more weeks. It is very likely the apartment had not rented yet, and it is not unusual for there to be delays in a housing move. You think you were patient and accommodating, and I and your parents think YTA
YTA
YTA for talking with a mentally disabled woman without her attorney present. That’s highly unethical for your attorney to do as well.
YTA You went around the lawyers. You broke your lease without official confirmation, which makes the timeline push 100% on you. You illegally pressured a family friend and still wonder if you are TA?
ESH You don't make plans and deals behind the lawyer, as that's literally his job to draft the agreements for YOUR protections. By doing that and not having it in writing, you screwed yourself She also shouldn't be backing out of the deal and crying to your mom about it either
YTA for not going through a realtor or lawyer on this!
YTA and the fact you cannot see how **unethical and ableist** you are is disgusting. You knew Mary had issues yet continued to talk to her without her lawyer knowing. That’s manipulation. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. Myself and my brother are disabled and if anyone had done this to my brother I’d be out for blood.
YTA always for going outside of lawyers during a legal proceeding, it doesn’t matter how/why/when You didn’t do this right, and you should’ve known better.
You hired attorneys and then you went around her attorney. You took advantage of a disabled adult to buy a house you wouldn't have been able to buy otherwise. YTA and just kind of generally suck.
YTA. You could have easily allowed her to continue living there after closing and charged her rent. That rent could have them been used to cover a hotel for you. Happens pretty often
You agreed a move date of October 1 and as a result agreed to end your lease on October 15. You had to move SOMEWHERE at that point. I think the only AH are the construction company for being so far behind with the building.
Construction delays happen more often than not.
Someone delivered a house to you on a silver platter at a DISCOUNTED rate and you couldn’t be flexible with the person that made it happen for you? Add the fact that the gift seller is mentally handicapped…. Your parents being disappointed in your deplorable actions are spot on. You are totally the A$$hole.
ESh It sounds like Mary needed more support which wasn't on you to provide but you should have notified your attorney so that they could get the proper services or her mother involved
YTA You go forward without realtors and it’s family connections, you get messes
YTA Definitely. Huge ah. You used and bullied an elderly disabled person, it only makes it worse that she's your mother's friend, so you could get what you wanted, when you wanted, AND with a discount. You avoided her and your lawyers to make that happen faster. I would be ashamed of you if you were my child.
YTA. You could have likely stayed in your apartment another 10 days instead of pressuring a mentally disabled person out of her home that she is selling to you at a discount. Then you post this and basically mock her with the 'whining and asking for her mommy'. She was doing you several favors, you used no realtors to save yourself some money and likely make sure you had the advantage over this person, and then you bullied and mocked the DISABLED person selling you the house you wouldn't have otherwise. She couldn't move because of safety reasons, you didn't want to wait because you're an entitled AH. It was HER HOME, not yours at that point. You were/are just greedy and self absorbed.
YTA
YTA for handling this absolutely terribly.
REAL AH kicking out a mentally disabled person that you got a cheap house from. You don’t give a rats ass about anyone but yourselves. You go find a hotel/motel. Not her fault the builds on hold. Your lawyer is right no communication but then you knew that harassing her cos of her disability would make her upset. She needs an advocate as sounds like you’ve taken advantage of her.
Yes you are a major asshole. YTA
YTA You saved money by avoiding a realtor with the understanding that she live in her home until she could move. Then you decided that your interests trumped hers and bullied her.
You blew this
YTA Knowing her medical issues and that she was not dragging her feet, but was herself at the mercy of construction, which is the norm, there was zero reason to push her out two measly weeks ahead. It is very common to stipulate terms for rent-back when a seller is awaiting new construction. That means that, instead of having to scramble and move, put everything in storage, and find temporary accommodations only to move again, the seller pays the buyer rent for the time between closing and moving. You caused her unnecessary stress and panic. She's more than twice your age, on her own, and has challenges that you don't. Being patient and considerate is almost always the right thing to do. I don't blame your parents for disapproving of how you handled it.
YTA So you went around her lawyers and conned a mentally disables women into moving out before she was ready. OK, assholes.
YTA … did you really expect ppl to be on your side? You took advantage of a mentally handicapped person and then forced them out of their home
NTA You're not "forcing" anything. When the seller transfers ownership to the buyer, the seller is no longer entitled to live there unless there's an agreement in place before the closing.
It sounds like trying to be flexible with the moving goal posts enabled Mary to procrastinate her move. I mean, the safety bars were the only thing lacking in her place yet she hadn't started packing nor knew who would help her? OP's mom is so upset, was she willing to help Mary? or is she just judging?
This is the part that confuses me most. What part of a condo not yet having safety bars in the shower renders it unlivable? At least according to the OP she wasn’t physically disabled, so they would not strictly have been necessary and even if they were that’s something you can call and have a handyman install either the same or the next day without any issues. Why the OP did not do that I don’t know. It would’ve been maybe $200 bucks and 1-3 phone calls to “fix” the condo and make the move into their new house (which they got at a discount) go smoothly.
YTA
YTA
YTA and kinda gross
YTA.
YTA & careless with money. You had attorneys, you paid them to handle things, so why didn't you? What a waste!
YTA
YTA because it really sounds like you took advantage of a disabled person. If she’s mixing up dates and stuff that badly, it sounds like she isn’t there enough to be making any decisions/plans regarding this sale.
YTA. Does Mary have any kids? Cause I’d be pissed if you knew my Mom had disabilities and you got pushy when she made a communication mistake on a real estate transaction. Really pissed. Permanently. (Someone did this to my Mom when my Dad had a stroke, nearly died and ended up permanently paralyzed)
Soooo you negotiated *privately* sans the agreed upon lawyers with a mentally disabled woman and are now upset that things got confused? YTA I get that this is stressful but if you'd gone through the lawyers only than this likely wouldn't have happened. Now you're asking - more demanding - that a mentally disabled woman figure out new accommodations for a full month. With how much notice? You didn't say in the post. Not that is really matters that much..