[Legislativecommittee1] HB1081 and HB1075

Fri Dec 20 16:13:53 PST 2024

You are probably correct about how this came about. It likely is intended to
address a particular constituent's problem (or at least a perceived
problem), but that "need" isn't clear to us with the language in the draft
bill. 

If we knew the problem we might be able to help craft something. But even
then it could be something that Maureen or Robin have posited, where we
might find such a statute would present more problems than it is intended to
solve. 

George

George Peters, WTP

Executive Director

Washington Land Title Association

 <https://washingtonlandtitle.com> https://washingtonlandtitle.com 

Mail: PO Box 328, Lynnwood, WA 98046

Delivery: 6817 208th St SW, #328, Lynnwood, WA 98036

206-437-5869 (Mobile)

206-260-4731 (Fax)

 <mailto:execdirector at wltaonline.org> execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com

This is a confidential communication intended solely for the named
recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy it and call
George Peters at 206-437-5869 immediately. Thank you.

From: Robin Aberasturi <robin.aberasturi at futuratitle.com> 
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2024 3:34 PM
To: 'Maureen Pfaff' <maureen at olypentitle.com>; George
<execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com>;
legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com
Subject: RE: [Legislativecommittee1] HB1081 and HB1075

Maureen, I agree with you 100%!

My very first response to this was how is an individual seller, or even
legit individual buyer (not one of the "cash buy company guys) to know that
this regulation is out there.  When these "buyers" use their own drafted
purchase agreements that have virtually no information, there is no
consistency at all. They already put escrow in the middle because they don't
have representation and we walk a very thin line in guiding FSBO
transactions thru the process as it is. 

I think a standardized PSA to be required to be used on non realtor
transactions would be a better start to include all the appropriate
disclaimers and State requirements.  At that point, at least escrow can say
"this is not the appropriate PSA" and decline to close.  Happy to give them
a link to a State website where they can pull the State required form.

Also agree that escrow does NOT want to be involved in verifying anything
that has to do with legislative requirements on either party.  WE are not
party to the PSA, and should not even get our selves into the middle of its
conditions.  Our escrow instructions even state "all terms and conditions of
the PSA have been met and are accepted by the parties".  What this would
mean for us is that I create a very stout escrow instructions disclaimer,
that in and of itself will likely scare a buyer away, as well as having them
sign off that we advised both parties to contact legal counsel, etc. 

Robin Aberasturi

VP/Corporate Escrow Manager

Futura Title & Escrow, LLC

Phone 208-955-9684 | Cell 208-250-3816

From: Legislativecommittee1
<legislativecommittee1-bounces at washingtonlandtitle.com
<mailto:legislativecommittee1-bounces at washingtonlandtitle.com> > On Behalf
Of Maureen Pfaff
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2024 3:43 PM
To: George <execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com
<mailto:execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com> >;
legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com
<mailto:legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com> 
Subject: Re: [Legislativecommittee1] HB1081 and HB1075

Thank you for jumping in on this, I see those additions now George. I meant
for my earlier email to go out to the entire committee. This bill feels like
a response to a constituent's bad experience selling a house to one of the
outfits that

Thank you for jumping in on this, I see those additions now George.   

I meant for my earlier email to go out to the entire committee.  This bill
feels like a response to a constituent's bad experience selling a house to
one of the outfits that buy properties on a wholesale contract, it looks
good on the surface - who would be against extra protections for
unsophisticated sellers? - but implementing it in any meaningful way seems
unlikely without some way to get the word out to sellers.   I'm still trying
to understand how the people who would fall under this new rule let alone
those who they are trying to protect, will even know it exists. It would
make more sense if the bill was proposing to create a new PSA for solicited
real estate transactions not involving Realtors but, again, how would these
transactions be identified since the people involved are not licensed in any
way so it's not as if they can be notified of the new rule? 

And I agree with JP and Megan's comments from the other day that we should
address the Interpleader rules and try and get some safe harbor language in
the bill as I don't want our LPO's to be put in the position of policing
these contracts and I wouldn't want insurers open to claims if the
transaction went through without these specific items properly addressed in
the PSA because we didn't know it was a "solicited purchase" that fell under
this rule.  Maybe I'm making a big deal out of nothing, but I wanted to ask
the questions that popped into my mind as I reviewed the proposed
legislation.  

 <mailto:legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
@legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com - do any of our attorney
members (or others) have thoughts on this?  I'm not sure what safe harbor
language would be best, definitely not my area of expertise.  I don't think
we would want to include any language requiring us to ask for proof of
compliance, but I also don't think we want legislation on the books that
will leave us open to claims if we close a transaction that fell under these
rules without our knowledge.  Obviously if the buyer is a "We Buy Homes for
Cash LLC" type entity we would be tipped off that those elements might need
to be present, but it still wouldn't be cut and dried because it would only
apply if the property hadn't been actively offered for sale when the offer
was made to the seller.  There are also transactions where a random
individual walks up and knocks on the door of a home and solicits the
homeowner to sell the property and there would be nothing to alert us to
that being the case unless someone in the transaction tells us.  

Maureen

  _____  

From: George < <mailto:execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com>
execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com>
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2024 11:53 AM
To: Maureen Pfaff < <mailto:maureen at olypentitle.com>
maureen at olypentitle.com>
Subject: Re: [Legislativecommittee1] HB1081 and HB1075 

I agree. 

I did add a new section 5 about interpleaders. The first sentence probably
more important than the second. Wasn't sure if the statute should say
anything about LPOs asking for proof of compliance so maybe the second
sentence shouldn't be included.

Do you think the first sentence provides sufficient safe harbor language? I
didn't want to single out LPOs as the only ones to be protected. 

George

Sent from my mobile phone 206-437-5869

  _____  

From: Maureen Pfaff < <mailto:maureen at olypentitle.com>
maureen at olypentitle.com>
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2024 9:33:48 AM
To: George Peters < <mailto:execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com>
execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com>
Subject: Re: [Legislativecommittee1] HB1081 and HB1075

This feels like a response to a constituent's bad experience selling a house
to one of the outfits that buy properties on a wholesale contract, it looks
good on the surface but implementing it in any meaningful way seems unlikely
without some way to get the word out to sellers.   I'm still trying to
understand how the people who would fall under this new rule and those who
they are trying to protect will even know it exists. It would make more
sense if the bill was proposing to create a new PSA for solicited real
estate transactions not involving Realtors but, again, how would these
transactions be identified since the people involved are not licensed in any
way so it's not as if they can be notified of the new rule? 

And I agree with Megan's comments from the other day that we should try and
get some safe harbor language in the bill as I don't want our LPO's to be
put in the position of policing these contracts and I wouldn't want insurers
open to claims if the transaction went through without these specific items
properly addressed in the PSA because we didn't know it was a "solicited
purchase" that fell under this rule.

  _____  

From: Legislativecommittee1 <
<mailto:legislativecommittee1-bounces at washingtonlandtitle.com>
legislativecommittee1-bounces at washingtonlandtitle.com> on behalf of George
Peters < <mailto:execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com>
execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2024 5:54 PM
To: '1 WLTA Legislative Committee' <
<mailto:legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
Subject: Re: [Legislativecommittee1] HB1081 and HB1075 

I took a stab at this. Not sure if everything is needed, but I did think it
was important to clarify that later references to a purchase contract ties
to a specific contract between the buyer and seller. I also think "currently
publicly available" and "the real estate market" are vague terms.. And I
don't know if you can "solicit" property so maybe that phrase can be
changed.

These suggested changes & my comments are in the attached redlined document
and I don't know how they'd be transmitted to whomever we might want to send
them to.

No pride of authorship here.maybe too much to ask for; I'm just throwing it
out for our discussion.

George

George Peters, WTP

Executive Director

Washington Land Title Association

<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/washingtonlandtitle.com__;!!DEULSLR5O6ir
Ng!X5jvaaTcgbtenqwGHqx58rZ6gVLdN9ZR3Z2TO3fSa2fJPMGtLckQzbC_eHN4swD6W-pklc3uV
S742IWSdfQPYlQb_S7_$> https://washingtonlandtitle.com

Mail: PO Box 328, Lynnwood, WA 98046

Delivery: 6817 208th St SW, #328, Lynnwood, WA 98036

206-437-5869 (Mobile)

206-260-4731 (Fax)

 <mailto:execdirector at wltaonline.org> execdirector at washingtonlandtitle.com

This is a confidential communication intended solely for the named
recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy it and call
George Peters at 206-437-5869 immediately. Thank you.

From: Legislativecommittee1 <
<mailto:legislativecommittee1-bounces at washingtonlandtitle.com>
legislativecommittee1-bounces at washingtonlandtitle.com> On Behalf Of Jp
Kissling
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2024 1:37 PM
To: Maureen Pfaff < <mailto:maureen at olypentitle.com>
maureen at olypentitle.com>
Cc: '1 WLTA Legislative Committee' <
<mailto:legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
Subject: Re: [Legislativecommittee1] HB1081 and HB1075

It appears that we are going to be asked for a formal amendment to the bill
is there someone willing to work on that?  I will help where I can. 

From: Maureen Pfaff < <mailto:maureen at olypentitle.com>
maureen at olypentitle.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2024 11:52 AM
To: Jp Kissling < <mailto:jpkissling at fitico.com> jpkissling at fitico.com>
Cc: '1 WLTA Legislative Committee' <
<mailto:legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
Subject: Re: HB1081 and HB1075

>From an escrow standpoint it seems like this bill would put the burden on us
to confirm several things:

1.	Is the transaction the result of a solicited offer that meets the
criteria of the legislation? 
2.	Are the specific items included in the contract in at least 10 pt
font?
3.	 Did the seller affirmatively acknowledge the items?
4.	 Were the timelines for requesting an appraisal or waiving the
appraisal right met?
5.	 Were the timelines for cancellation without penalty or further
obligation met?

Most of these (other than maybe the font size) would be reasonably easy to
confirm, we do this regularly in reading contracts to be sure that
requirements have been met and/or waived.  I think that if the cancellation
notice met the stated requirements in the contract there would be no need to
interplead.  Interpleading would come into play if the contract was
rescinded outside of the stated timeline and then it would be handled as
usual - mutual agreement or we would have to interplead.

What concerns me is that we will have to determine if the sale is the result
of a solicited offer or not in order to even know that these rules apply.
Sometimes it's obvious, but not always and we all know how confusing these
type of nuances can be for the general consumer.  

  _____  

From: Jp Kissling < <mailto:jpkissling at fitico.com> jpkissling at fitico.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2024 11:02 AM
To: Maureen Pfaff < <mailto:maureen at olypentitle.com>
maureen at olypentitle.com>
Cc: '1 WLTA Legislative Committee' <
<mailto:legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
Subject: RE: HB1081 and HB1075

they have the right to cancel the contract within 4 days of receiving the
appraisal without penalty or further obligation.

From: Jp Kissling
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2024 10:01 AM
To: Maureen Pfaff < <mailto:maureen at olypentitle.com>
maureen at olypentitle.com>
Cc: '1 WLTA Legislative Committee' <
<mailto:legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
Subject: RE: HB1081 and HB1075

I feel we also need to have some clarification on the earnest money and how/
if,  it will affect our ability to interplead funds RCW 64.04.220.

From: Legislativecommittee1 <
<mailto:legislativecommittee1-bounces at washingtonlandtitle.com>
legislativecommittee1-bounces at washingtonlandtitle.com> On Behalf Of Maureen
Pfaff
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2024 9:43 AM
To:  <mailto:legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com>
legislativecommittee1 at washingtonlandtitle.com
Subject: [Legislativecommittee1] HB1081 and HB1075

We still need a review of HB 1075 if anyone has a few minutes to take a look
at it.

I reviewed HB 1081 but have a couple of questions for the committee.  This
bill would provide additional protections to the seller in a transaction
where the buyer actively solicited the purchase of a property that is not
currently being offered for sale and where the Seller is not represented by
a licensed Realtor.  It would require that the contract specifically notes
that the seller has a right to have an appraisal done by an appraiser of
their choosing and paid for by the buyer and that they have the right to
cancel the contract within 4 days of receiving the appraisal without penalty
or further obligation. For owners who do not choose to have an appraisal
done they have the right to cancel the contract without penalty or further
obligation within 10 business days after execution. It also adds specific
requirements for how these rights will be shown in the contract and that the
seller must affirmatively acknowledge them.  Would it fall on us to confirm
that the contract in a transaction we close meets these requirements?  If it
doesn't and we close and insure the transaction would we be open to a claim
down the road?

Maureen

Maureen Pfaff, President and CEO

Ph: (360) 457-4451 | Fax: (844) 513-2400

403 S Peabody St, Port Angeles, WA 98362

 <mailto:maureen at olypentitle.com> maureen at olypentitle.com

<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/url.avanan.click/v2/r01/___http:/www.oly
pentitle.com/___.YXAzOmZpZGVsaXR5dGl0bGVjbzphOm86NTY3NzgzZjY2Njc3ZGVlNGYxOTg
yNmMyZmU2YzM3MDU6Nzo5OTA2OmQ3MTg2YzlhYWM1M2MzMWU4MDVhZGRjNTdmNzg5ZWQyN2IzOGM
0Y2I0ZGMxOWRiNmJmYzk0MDMzNzBlNjBhODQ6aDpUOkY__;!!DEULSLR5O6irNg!X5jvaaTcgbte
nqwGHqx58rZ6gVLdN9ZR3Z2TO3fSa2fJPMGtLckQzbC_eHN4swD6W-pklc3uVS742IWSdfQPYmqF
dsnP$> www.olypentitle.com

WARNING - FRAUDULENT FUNDING INSTRUCTIONS

Email hacking and fraud are on the rise to fraudulently misdirect funds.
Please call your escrow officer immediately using contact information found
from an independent source, such as the sales contract or internet, to
verify any funding instructions received. We are not responsible for any
wires sent by you to an incorrect bank account.

ATTENTION LENDERS:  Loan packages, complete with documents and balanced CD,
must be received no later than 2:00 pm PST on the day prior to signing.

<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/url.avanan.click/v2/r01/___https:/www.yo
utube.com/watch?v=ek4TwC9owwY&feature=youtu.be___.YXAzOmZpZGVsaXR5dGl0bGVjbz
phOm86NTY3NzgzZjY2Njc3ZGVlNGYxOTgyNmMyZmU2YzM3MDU6NzplZTM2OjhlYjI3N2QxYTQ0NG
ZiMjJkODYzOGI3NWNmMzRmMjBkOWVjNWVmYTdkZmQ0YWU5NmQzMTc4ZDY3YzVlYjZhMWI6aDpUOk
Y__;!!DEULSLR5O6irNg!X5jvaaTcgbtenqwGHqx58rZ6gVLdN9ZR3Z2TO3fSa2fJPMGtLckQzbC
_eHN4swD6W-pklc3uVS742IWSdfQPYtm5X7Dy$> CLICK HERE TO WATCH VIDEO 

<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/url.avanan.click/v2/r01/___https:/www.yo
utube.com/watch?v=ek4TwC9owwY&feature=youtu.be___.YXAzOmZpZGVsaXR5dGl0bGVjbz
phOm86NTY3NzgzZjY2Njc3ZGVlNGYxOTgyNmMyZmU2YzM3MDU6Nzo2YjIwOmU4ZDljYWYyZTY4OT
Q0NWQxZGY4Njg5ZWI3MmUxOGQwM2M3MTk0YjdmYmExOTUxOGUzOWQ5Y2JjZjBmM2ExOGI6aDpUOk
Y__;!!DEULSLR5O6irNg!X5jvaaTcgbtenqwGHqx58rZ6gVLdN9ZR3Z2TO3fSa2fJPMGtLckQzbC
_eHN4swD6W-pklc3uVS742IWSdfQPYhIBXQIe$> ON WIRE FRAUD PREVENTION

This electronic mail may constitute a client communication that is
privileged at law.  It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by,
any unauthorized persons. 
If you have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please
delete it from your system without copying it, and notify the sender by
reply e-mail, so that our address record can be corrected.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.washingtonlandtitle.com/pipermail/legislativecommittee1/attachments/20241220/b6cfc7da/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6078 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.washingtonlandtitle.com/pipermail/legislativecommittee1/attachments/20241220/b6cfc7da/attachment-0003.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 68742 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.washingtonlandtitle.com/pipermail/legislativecommittee1/attachments/20241220/b6cfc7da/attachment-0004.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 76718 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.washingtonlandtitle.com/pipermail/legislativecommittee1/attachments/20241220/b6cfc7da/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.washingtonlandtitle.com/pipermail/legislativecommittee1/attachments/20241220/b6cfc7da/attachment-0005.jpg>