Thank you. I have, in fact talked to a lawyer regarding this issue. His position was to go ahead and sue. However, I've since done some research on contract law and read the contract (which the lawyer read also) and since he didn't outline what law would be applicable to overturn a contract with explicit terms, I couldn't understand what a lawsuit would do exactly except enrich his bank account - regardless of the my outcome.
That is why I posted on this site to see if there is anyone that can comment on the likelihood of getting deposit monies back in this situation. The "mortgage contingency clause" only allows time to get "pre-approval" but does not comment on what happens if financing is not obtained. The contract is clear in it's terms, however it does not seem fair. This is not an argument of law, however. l
Does anyone know of any pertinent case law or contemporary judgments in this area. I'm sure there is a lot of litigation lately with the real estate market adjusting downward and people walking away from their purchases. The atmosphere is ripe for it, but I'd like to know which way the courts are leaning.
|