OK need some expert advise

[Anonymous]

Hello all.....We have made an offer on a bank owned house that is fairly new (1999) but was a foreclosure and is missing a few light fixtures, a dishwasher and faucets.  My lender called me yesterday and said my loan came back from the underwriters and I am approved for the loan but was told yesterday that because the home is missing faucets and a couple light fixtures, the bank will not put a mortgage on the home unless it is "habitable" nor will the bank put any money into the home.  My options were to pass on this one or lower the price and have a licenced contractor install the fixtures before closing.  We also ammended the original terms knocking off another $5,000 from the already low price, but here is my question:

My wife and I are concerned about the possible risk involved with putting money into a home we don't own yet and wonder what could go wrong this far into the process where we could potentially lose the money we put in for these fixtures.  Our offer was submitted yesterday and it sounds like it probably will be accepted upon these contingencies. Assuming there isn't anything major found in the inspection report, what potential pitfalls are their to installing cheap fixtures for now until the home is ours?  Anyone have any experience with this? 

[ShanetheMortgageMan]

Well the risk you take is not being able to close on the home and then anything that you put into the home ($, work, time, fixtures) would be lost.  What you should find out before putting one penny or second of work into the place, is find out if that is the only thing that is preventing you from closing on this home or not.  You would find that out by asking your loan officer.  Get a list of items from the underwriter (called a condition list) that they will need taken care of before your docs can be drawn/loan funded.  It will be broken down into items that need to be satisfied prior to your docs being drawn (called "prior to doc" conditions, which usually consist of income & asset verification, preliminary title report review, appraisal review, and then anything specific to your situation - like deferred student loan letters, a gift letter for your down payment, or whatever), and then there will be a list of items that need to be satisfied prior to your loan being funded (called "prior to fund" conditions, such as Final HUD-1 needs to be signed, no more than $X,XXX can be brought in at closing and still be able to qualify, copy of certified funds check/wire, etc.).  This way you will know exactly what is left to "knock out" and will be assured that you are putting money into a home that otherwise you will have no problem qualifying for.

[Anonymous]

We were completely approved on a house and had all the "prior to doc" conditions fulfilled.  We went to closing with certified funds in hand and didn't close because the seller was a relo company and hadn't recorded their deed.  They disagreed with the lender on who the "seller" was in the box on the HUD-1 form and as a result we lost the contract.  They just relisted the house yesterday and I still don't think that they have their paperwork completed.  So when they say "it isn't final until the ink is dry" they mean it.  The worst part for us is that we did everything right and then they refused to extend the contract while we found another lender when it was they who didn't have their ducks in a row.  Anyway...  before I'd put money into a place I'd ask about title and any possible title issues that may arise.

[ShanetheMortgageMan]

Funny because this exact situation happened last April.  However it was addressed way ahead of time because when we had all parties sign the Amendatory Clause/RE Certification disclosure form the RELO company signed it, the underwriter asked why is a RELO company signing it and not the seller/title owner itself, we produced RELO paperwork showing a paper trail of the transaction (nevermind the purchase contract that had "Relocation Company" written all over it), but was not an issue after all documents the underwriter wanted were presented to them.  The biggest issue that the underwriter was having was the 90 day seasoning requirement that FHA has, however the 90 day seasoning requirement is exempt on sales of properties purchased by employers or relocation agencies in connection with relocations of employees, and that was what all the paperwork was for.  It sounds like it was actually your lender/underwriter who was at fault there, and a loan officer who wasn't familiar with the HUD handbook.  Sorry to hear about the mess up.

---

@Anonymous wrote:
We were completely approved on a house and had all the "prior to doc" conditions fulfilled.  We went to closing with certified funds in hand and didn't close because the seller was a relo company and hadn't recorded their deed.  They disagreed with the lender on who the "seller" was in the box on the HUD-1 form and as a result we lost the contract.  They just relisted the house yesterday and I still don't think that they have their paperwork completed.  So when they say "it isn't final until the ink is dry" they mean it.  The worst part for us is that we did everything right and then they refused to extend the contract while we found another lender when it was they who didn't have their ducks in a row.  Anyway...  before I'd put money into a place I'd ask about title and any possible title issues that may arise.

---