Chris Guldi
07-03-2003, 07:51 PM
Just my opinion...
I would never put a clients SSN in an offer with the problems with identity
theft. I do however require a buyer to show me proof they have the cash to
purchase BEFORE showing them any houses, just as I require a purchaser
taking a mortgage to get mortgage approval before showing them any houses.
In the rare instances where I have had cash purchasers, I have black out
account numbers on bank/stock statements, and any other information that
could be used to hurt my client.
<jack@jack.and.jill.nospam> wrote in message
news:3EFBADA3.8C168C1C@jack.and.jill.nospam... x-no-archive: yes John Cowart wrote: Our agent can fulfill her "duties" with or without SSNs. Probably not in an economical manner. ... She needs to run a criminal background check on you to see if you are a known drug dealer or money launderer. While it is possible to run a check based on just a person's name, it is more expensive than doing it based on the person's SSN. There is also a greater chance of getting a false positive, such as when there is a known criminal who happens to have the same name or alias as yourself, which could jinx the sale. She probably just doesn't want to spend the extra money. I've never heard of real estate agents being required to run background checks on their clients. Not even banks, I believe, are required to do something like that. I think they are only required to *report* suspicious transactions. I don't think they are required to *investigate*. I diagree with your suggestion that real estate purchases without a mortgage are on the face of it suspicious. There're many reasons why people may not want to get a mortgage. Maybe they're only looking to buy something cheap and they don't absolutely need a mortgage. Maybe they're considered bad credit risks and no commercial lenders would lend them money on favorable terms. Maybe they're afraid of becoming victims of predatory lenders. The fact is, not having a mortgage is not the same as paying for a purchase with a bag full of paper money. Everything still has a paper trail and is fully auditable. If you still think that the "duty" of a real estate agent extends beyond reporting suspicious transactions, could you provide references to the relevant statutes and regulations? Jack
I would never put a clients SSN in an offer with the problems with identity
theft. I do however require a buyer to show me proof they have the cash to
purchase BEFORE showing them any houses, just as I require a purchaser
taking a mortgage to get mortgage approval before showing them any houses.
In the rare instances where I have had cash purchasers, I have black out
account numbers on bank/stock statements, and any other information that
could be used to hurt my client.
<jack@jack.and.jill.nospam> wrote in message
news:3EFBADA3.8C168C1C@jack.and.jill.nospam... x-no-archive: yes John Cowart wrote: Our agent can fulfill her "duties" with or without SSNs. Probably not in an economical manner. ... She needs to run a criminal background check on you to see if you are a known drug dealer or money launderer. While it is possible to run a check based on just a person's name, it is more expensive than doing it based on the person's SSN. There is also a greater chance of getting a false positive, such as when there is a known criminal who happens to have the same name or alias as yourself, which could jinx the sale. She probably just doesn't want to spend the extra money. I've never heard of real estate agents being required to run background checks on their clients. Not even banks, I believe, are required to do something like that. I think they are only required to *report* suspicious transactions. I don't think they are required to *investigate*. I diagree with your suggestion that real estate purchases without a mortgage are on the face of it suspicious. There're many reasons why people may not want to get a mortgage. Maybe they're only looking to buy something cheap and they don't absolutely need a mortgage. Maybe they're considered bad credit risks and no commercial lenders would lend them money on favorable terms. Maybe they're afraid of becoming victims of predatory lenders. The fact is, not having a mortgage is not the same as paying for a purchase with a bag full of paper money. Everything still has a paper trail and is fully auditable. If you still think that the "duty" of a real estate agent extends beyond reporting suspicious transactions, could you provide references to the relevant statutes and regulations? Jack
