Issue with Earnest Money

[Sa1man]

Jurisdiction

Illinois

Hello everyone,

I recently encountered a problem while purchasing a property, and I'm hoping to get some advice on how to proceed.

We found a house with solar panels and were informed by the seller's agent that if we didn't like them, they could be removed. We proceeded with an offer, which was accepted by the seller, and our earnest money check was cashed by the seller's agent.

During the attorney review period, we learned that the solar panels were leased, meaning we would have to take over the lease as part of the purchase agreement. Additionally, the house's roof was nearly 20 years old, although the solar panels were only installed 2 years ago. We discovered that the removal and reinstallation of the solar panels would cost approximately $7,500 if the roof needed replacement.

We asked the seller for two things:

1. A $5,000 rebate at closing to help offset the $7,500 cost of potential future roof work.
2. Information regarding the output of the solar panels.

The seller countered with a $3,500 rebate but provided no information about the solar panel output. Given the confusion around the solar panels and their profitability, we decided to cancel the deal.

The seller's realtor has since stopped responding despite multiple requests by my realtor agent as well as my attorney (who represented me during the contract review) and has not returned our earnest money. The house has now been sold to someone else, but we are yet to receive our earnest money back.

What steps should we take to recover our earnest money and address this situation? Any advice or similar experiences would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

 

[Zigner]

Why do you believe you are entitled to your earnest money? From the way you presented the story, you asked about the panels and were told that you could remove them if you desired. What was incorrect?

 

[adjusterjack]

you could remove them i

Not that simple. I have come across solar panel leases. Removing the panels could be quite costly.

I agree that the OP may lose his earnest money if he did not properly conduct due diligence but he should be having his lawyer review the purchase contract and the solar lease before giving up.

 

[Zigner]

Not that simple. I have come across solar panel leases. Removing the panels could be quite costly.

Agreed - but that really wasn't what the OP asked about. Had the OP been concerned with the cost of removing the panels, he should have inquired further.

I agree that the OP may lose his earnest money if he did not properly conduct due diligence but he should be having his lawyer review the purchase contract and the solar lease before giving up.

Let's bottom-line it here. The OP is bickering over $1,500. (He asked for a $5k concession and was offered $3.5k.)

 

[adjusterjack]

Let's bottom-line it here. The OP is bickering over $1,500. (He asked for a $5k concession and was offered $3.5k.)

$1,500 is a lot of money to some people. Maybe not you, Ziggy, but I don't scoff at it.

Besides, OP revealed down the streat that his earnest money is $4000 and his lawyer wants $7500 as a retainer.

 

[adjusterjack]

What steps should we take to recover our earnest money and address this situation

As suggested on the other site, small claims court is your answer. Sue the seller for $4000, You won't need a lawyer.

 

[Zigner]

$1,500 is a lot of money to some people. Maybe not you, Ziggy, but I don't scoff at it.

I'm not scoffing at it, just pointing it out. In fact, whether or not the OP considers it "a lot of money" is irrelevant, as it clearly is the line that the OP drew in the sand. As you pointed out, the OP is free to pursue the return of the earnest money in court, if that's the route s/he chooses.


Just as a note, I understand that the connotation of the word "bickering" probably caused your reply, and that's understandable. Perhaps a better word would have been "arguing."

 

[adjusterjack]

I understand that the connotation of the word "bickering" probably caused your reply,

It didn't.

 

[army judge]

Now I get it.

I'm reminded of one of my mother's favorite radio comedy shows, The Bickersons.

The Bickersons was a series of radio and television comedy sketches which began in 1946 on NBC radio. The show's married protagonists, portrayed by Don Ameche and Frances Langford, spent nearly all their time together in relentless verbal war.