2000-02-23 Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

February 18, 2000 Page 2 On page 5, we can eliminate the subparagraph (9) at the top of the page entitled "Certificate(s) of Occupancy" On page 7, Mr. Hubers attorney indicates that they do not want to do an additional survey, but rather use the one that was done within the last five years. I am not particularly opposed to that situation, however, we should review the last survey from Mr. Hubers and then make a determination on whether we will accept that or require a new one. Also on page 7, subparagraph (b), Mr, Hubers' attorney makes a comment in the margin regarding amount of money to be withheld. The type of objection this paragraph is anticipating is one in the form of an unpaid judgment or similar obligation. Accordingly, the title company - would typically require an escrow of 125% of the principal balance of the outstanding obligation. Of course, this assumes that we run into such an objection. I do not anticipate having such a problem, but that is how it would be dealt with. On page 8, subparagraph (2) at the top of the page, Mr. Hubers' attorney also has the same comment about the dollar amount to be withheld. This paragraph anticipates an objection that is not necessarily referenced in the dollar amount, but rather is some type of cloud on the title. Accordingly, the title insurance company would make determination on how much it would cost in attorneys fees to remedy the objection. Once that determination is made, that amount will be withheld assuming no strenuous objections from either the buyer or sell. Also on page 8, subparagraph 8(a) can be removed as the seller is not a corporation. On page 9, subparagraphs (d). (e) and (g) can be removed. On page 10, subparagraph (p) entitled `Condition ", we should be entitled to the representations in this paragraph as we are paying full market value for the property. If the seller wants us to purchase the property without any representation from the condition of the property, then we should at a minimum have the ability to have the building and property thoroughly inspected at seller's cost. Additionally, if the seller wants to shift the risk of the condition of the property to the City, then that shift in risk should be in conjunction with a reduction in the purchase price. Also on page 10, subparagraph (q) it is my understanding from our last conversation and discussion with the Council that the City will undertake the expense to cap the well located underneath the building. On page 11, in the top paragraph on that page carried over front page 10, M. Hubers' attorney wants the term "willful" inserted prior to "breach". I do not have a particular problem with inserting that designation. Also on page 11, paragraph 12 entitled "Broker's Commission" can be removed.