banner
article2photo
byline
in this issue
article1
article2
article3

 
Kelly Kretchmer, with Fidelity National Title in Redding, California, dealt with a situation that quickly spiraled out of control. An elderly mother was selling her property for $150,000. The closing proceeded as normal until the seller came to the office to sign. She brought her son, who was not a party to the transaction.

When Kelly asked the mother questions, the son jumped in and answered all questions on behalf of his mother. At first, he did not come across as overbearing and seemed like he was lending a hand to his elderly mother, but he did not let the mother speak.

Kelly felt this was unusual, but insisted she talk with the mother directly without any third–party influence. When she asked the son to leave the room, he immediately became irate. The son insisted on staying. Fearing the mother was being taken advantage of, Kelly asked both to leave the office.

Kelly received numerous phone calls from the purchaser of the property, who was adamant they complete the transaction. She even received a phone call from the mother, asking if she could come back in to sign.

The mother was evasive when Kelly asked questions about whether she was being forced to sell her home and Kelly could hear the son screaming in the background. Kelly's next avenue was to call the buyer's lender to explain the situation. The lender was sympathetic but offered little to no information, since they only represented the buyer.

After more research, Kelly found the property value was likely twice the $150,000 sales price. The buyer was a neighbor who lived with his mother and worked in local law enforcement. The buyer was also an acquaintance of the son.

After feeling the pressure from all the principals, Kelly agreed to have the mother come back and sign as long as the son allowed her to sign alone. Reluctantly the son agreed, yet the son once again attended the signing.

In the lobby, the son became overbearing; he was angry and insisted his mother would not answer any questions without him, even after Kelly refused to proceed with him in attendance. Finally, the son relented and agreed to wait outside while the mother signed.

Once alone, Kelly asked the mother some basic questions. Her answers indicated she was competent and she was fully aware of the sale of her property. However, when asked, "Why are you selling?" her answer was heartbreaking. She felt it was the only way she could get away from her abusive son.

Hearing this, Kelly made the correct call to resign and not proceed with the closing. Kelly's only fear was the son would just take the transaction elsewhere. Kelly asked the mother if she had any other family or friends to help her. Unfortunately, her son was her only family.

Ultimately, Kelly has been awarded $1,500 for making the brave and correct call to go against all the principals in this transaction and resign.

 

 
 

MORAL OF THE STORY

While a positive story for the Company in not assisting an abusive family member, the tragedy is whether the mother will get out of the situation. Kelly noticed the red flags at the signing with the overbearing third party. She wisely asked difficult questions and refused to proceed even when being pressured by both the buyer and seller.

 
 

Article provided by contributing author:
Scott Cummins, Advisory Director
Fidelity National Title Group
National Escrow Administration

 

 
  SHARE    
 
 
 
footer_line
 
stop fraud! share
 
footer_line
 
 
FNF Home