May 15th, 2017 at 9:50 am
The California Secretary of State (SOS) recently added 10 million records to its Business Search tool, available free-of-charge at Business Search. The SOS is a governmental agency that keeps tracks of companies doing business in California, including corporations, limited liability companies (LLCs), and partnerships (but not fictitious business names). In the past, the SOS Business Search tool provided very limited information about a company, such as company type, status, address, date of registration, and agent for service for receiving court documents. Now the Business Search tool also provides access to Statements of Information, Articles of Incorporation, Registration, and other records. These records provide, among other things, the names of the officers and directors in charge of a company.
In our day-to-day practice, we often encounter corporations and LLCs as sellers, buyers, landlords, brokers, business managers, investors, mortgage brokers, vendors, and so on. We cannot tell by looking at the name of a company whether it’s legitimate or whether the people who say they can act or sign on behalf of the company are in fact the authorized representatives. The newly updated SOS Business Search tool will greatly enhance the transparency of the companies with whom we may be considering doing business.
Copyright© 2017 Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices California Properties (BHHSCP). All rights reserved. Any unauthorized reproduction or use of this material is strictly prohibited. This information is believed to be accurate as of May 15, 2017. It is not intended as a substitute for legal advice in individual situations, and is not intended to nor does it create a standard of care for real estate professionals.
0d80b5
May 8th, 2017 at 9:47 am
Question: I am the listing agent in a transaction. The buyer refuses to sign the disclosures. Should we just document the file to show that the disclosures have been given to the buyer and that we’ve asked for the buyer’s signature, or can we force the buyer to sign?
Answer: It depends on which disclosures have not been signed. The RPA does require the buyer to sign the TDS, NHD, lead-based paint, and certain other “Statutory Disclosures” (see paragraphs 10A(1) and 10A(5)). If the buyer fails to sign the Statutory Disclosures during the buyer’s inspection contingency period, the seller (more…)
May 1st, 2017 at 9:42 am
Fact Pattern: A buyer has a pending sales transaction using the C.A.R. Residential Purchase Agreement (RPA). The buyer has been served with a Notice to Buyer to Perform (NBP) to remove all contingencies. All contingency timeframes have expired, except that the buyer has not yet received the Seller Property Questionnaire (SPQ) which the seller had agreed to provide.
Question: What should the buyer do to prevent the seller from cancelling? Select the best answer:
A. Remove all contingencies.
B. Remove all contingencies, except the SPQ.
C. Remove all contingencies, except the reports/disclosures contingency.
D. Advise the seller that the NBP is defective.
E. Both C and D.
Answer: The best answer is E. As background, the RPA does not specifically address this situation where a seller serves a NBP to remove all contingencies, even though not all disclosures have been given to the buyer. According to the RPA, a seller must provide all reports and disclosures within 7 days after acceptance (see paragraph 14A). If, however, the seller is late, the buyer has 5 days after receipt of an item to review it and remove the “applicable contingency” (paragraph 14B(3)). Moreover, the seller cannot serve a NBP until 2 days before the expiration of the applicable timeframe “to remove a contingency” (paragraph 14E).
(more…)
April 24th, 2017 at 5:25 pm
Question: My client and I were previewing a condominium for lease. My client saw a notice posted in the parking garage stating that the building complex contains chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, and other reproductive harm. Neither the listing agent nor landlord were aware of the sign or the carcinogens. Was this sign posted because of an actual danger or is it just a preemptive warning?
Answer: We don’t know. You’ve succinctly laid out a major problem with Proposition 65. In 1986, California voters approved the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, more commonly known as “Prop 65.” The law aimed to protect people by, among other things, requiring businesses with 10 or more employees to provide a warning about a significant exposure to certain chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.
(more…)
April 17th, 2017 at 5:23 pm
Question: A buyer submits an offer for a single-family home that includes an attached C.A.R. Contingency Removal (or CR) form removing all contingencies. The seller accepts the offer. The seller, however, has not yet delivered to the buyer the Transfer Disclosure Statement (TDS), Seller Property Questionnaire (SPQ), and other disclosures. After the buyer receives these disclosures, can the buyer cancel the agreement and retain the deposit?
Answer: Yes, most likely. Some agents think that the answer is “no” because both the CR and paragraph 14F of the RPA state that, unless otherwise specified in writing, a buyer who removes contingencies shall be deemed to have reviewed the disclosures. However, an exception as “otherwise specified in writing” is found in paragraph 10A(3) of the RPA, which states (more…)
