I found Douglas Weitzman on Avvo related to my real estate dispute. Weeks after signing the P&S the buyers attempted to cancel the contract using the ‘inspection contingency’ as their stated basis—and wanted to back out—but I thought ‘changing their minds’ was not a valid reason to cancel the contract since I provided the buyers with a full disclosure—which described in detail all the current conditions of the property. The buyers commissioned their own inspection report—and the conditions identified in the buyers’ inspection report were the same conditions identified in my disclosure—revealing nothing new—as there were no repairs needed. Despite this—the buyers exercised their 'inspection contingency' within the 10-day inspection period, during which time the buyer is allowed to have the property inspected to reveal any potential issues that could 'void' the contract. Despite the fact that there 'weren't any' new unsatisfactory conditions on the property—the 'inspection contingency' is obviously a scapegoat that buyers can use to back out of a deal. Weitzman asked me if I issued a 'notice to perform'—a real estate tool designed to make buyers stick to agreed-upon deadlines that are defined in the real estate purchase agreement—issuing a notice typically gives the buyer 48 hours to remedy the situation at hand—if the buyer has still failed to comply with the agreed-upon action, ​the seller can keep the earnest money deposit in some cases. Thus, we learn that the buyers have 'no obligation' to buy until they notify sellers that all contingencies are satisfied. Weitzman gave me a free consultation and in turn helped me define the 'notice to perform' and how to use it—which can be advantageous to both buyers and sellers in the California residential purchase agreement. In this case, I am not at the 'distinct advantage' of issuing the Notice to Perform. Cody Leeder blog.cruvoir.com

Doug kindly answered a question I had. He took the time and answered my question as well as giving me great advice. Thanks Doug.

Douglas responded quickly, and gave me the help I requested.

Mr. Weitzman was kind enough to answer a question I had. I'm grateful he took the time and answered my question as well as giving me sound advice. I would recommend him to anyone requiring his services.

Mr. Weitzman was very generous with his time when I called his office to speak with him. Mr. Weitzman answered all my questions in detail. He took the time to educate me about my legal rights. Based on my research,I feel confident that a high caliber attorney like Douglas Weitzman is the ONE I can trust with my case. Contact Attorney Weitzman before you hire anyone to handle your case.

I found Douglas Weitzman on Avvo related to my real estate dispute. Weeks after signing the P&S the buyers attempted to cancel the contract using the ‘inspection contingency’ as their stated basis—and wanted to back out—but I thought ‘changing their minds’ was not a valid reason to cancel the contract since I provided the buyers with a full disclosure—which described in detail all the current conditions of the property. The buyers commissioned their own inspection report—and the conditions identified in the buyers’ inspection report were the same conditions identified in my disclosure—revealing nothing new—as there were no repairs needed. Despite this—the buyers exercised their 'inspection contingency' within the 10-day inspection period, during which time the buyer is allowed to have the property inspected to reveal any potential issues that could 'void' the contract. Despite the fact that there 'weren't any' new unsatisfactory conditions on the property—the 'inspection contingency' is obviously a scapegoat that buyers can use to back out of a deal. Weitzman asked me if I issued a 'notice to perform'—a real estate tool designed to make buyers stick to agreed-upon deadlines that are defined in the real estate purchase agreement—issuing a notice typically gives the buyer 48 hours to remedy the situation at hand—if the buyer has still failed to comply with the agreed-upon action, ​the seller can keep the earnest money deposit in some cases. Thus, we learn that the buyers have 'no obligation' to buy until they notify sellers that all contingencies are satisfied. Weitzman gave me a free consultation and in turn helped me define the 'notice to perform' and how to use it—which can be advantageous to both buyers and sellers in the California residential purchase agreement. In this case, I am not at the 'distinct advantage' of issuing the Notice to Perform. Cody Leeder blog.cruvoir.com

Doug kindly answered a question I had. He took the time and answered my question as well as giving me great advice. Thanks Doug.

Douglas responded quickly, and gave me the help I requested.

Mr. Weitzman was kind enough to answer a question I had. I'm grateful he took the time and answered my question as well as giving me sound advice. I would recommend him to anyone requiring his services.

Mr. Weitzman was very generous with his time when I called his office to speak with him. Mr. Weitzman answered all my questions in detail. He took the time to educate me about my legal rights. Based on my research,I feel confident that a high caliber attorney like Douglas Weitzman is the ONE I can trust with my case. Contact Attorney Weitzman before you hire anyone to handle your case.