Many of you know that I have written often of the perils of dual agency. Case in point: I received a phone call today from a woman whose sister is working with an agent to purchase property. The agent also represents the seller.
Apparently the buyer and seller executed a contract. The seller, four days later, realized a mistake was made and they should have asked for a higher price. The agent let the buyer know that they were to sign an addendum for the higher price. The buyer did not agree and was fearful that the seller could cancel the contract. Her initial deposit money is already in escrow and escrow is open.
I do not represent this person and have not seen the contract. I did not provide legal advice but rather told the caller what right a buyer has under basic contract law – unless of course there is a clause in the contract giving a party more rights or altering the general rules.
Here is the bottom line: as a buyer in a real estate transaction, where there is a fully executed contract and no party has breached, and where there have been no alterations of contractual obligations pertaining to rights to cancel or amend, as long as a buyer performs his or her duties under the contract on time the seller does not have a right to cancel the contract. Parties of course CAN mutually agree IN WRITING and signed by all, to alter material terms, but if a buyer does not agree to do so it does not generally give the seller the right to cancel if the buyer is not in breach of contract.
Once again this problem is a result of dual agency- how can an agent who has a fiduciary duty to the seller (who wants to change a material term), also fulfill a fiduciary duty to the buyer (who does not agree)? This is a big pitfall of dual agency and a big reason for real estate lawsuits. I advised the caller to contact the agent, contact escrow, and if necessary contact an attorney.