Intercontinental Properties, Broker

05/20/2016

I encourage you to visit the link below and take an action. I received this message from my attorney who helped me win a case against my insurance. I filed a claim for my roof damage due to a hail storm back in 2013 but my insurance sent me an estimate of repair for just $4K. Luckily my neighbor had a similar insurance and she recommended me to use an attorney. Guess what, my insurance finally had to agree for an estimated repair of $18K!

DON’T MESS WITH TEXANS: TELL THE INSURANCE COMPANIES THAT YOUR RIGHTS CAN’T BE BOUGHT

If you are receiving this email it’s because we consider you a friend, and someone that wants to make sure insurance companies don't do more to hurt Texas homeowners and business owners.

Right now, insurance companies are quietly trying to take away your rights to sue them in court. Instead of facing a jury to answer for their bad conduct, they want to send you to arbitration, where it’s less likely that they will be punished when they mistreat you. Moreover, arbitration typically requires that YOU pay the arbitrator’s fees, which typically run $300-$500/hour.

Binding arbitration provisions, buried in the fine print of a lengthy new policy submitted to the Texas Department of Insurance, would allow insurance companies to buy your rights in exchange for a few extra dollars a month. Why do insurers want to do this? To avoid being sued by people like you when they break their promise to provide you the coverage you pay for, or commit other wrongs.

Tell the Texas Department of Insurance that your rights are not for sale!

How? Easy. Click on this link created by Texas Watch, a consumer watch dog group – fill in a few blanks, and a letter will be automatically generated to David Mattax, the Commissioner of Insurance of the Texas Department of Insurance.

http://www.texaswatch.org/ngpform/dont-mess-texas-policyholders

Texans and their rights are not to be messed with, and definitely not for sale.

For years, the Texas Department of Insurance has rightfully stood by Texas consumers by rejecting policies with dangerous binding arbitration clauses. But, a policy recently submitted to TDI would strip unaware consumers of their constitutional rights in exchange for a small discount.

04/22/2016

Useful information from Pearl Insurance E&O Risk Management. Learn from real-life example so that we don't put ourselves in the same situation which may cost us a lot of money.

Situation:
A real estate agent listed a residential apartment in a midrise
brick building in a large city. The seller of the unit served on the
Condominium Association Board of Directors for many years. When completing the seller’s property condition disclosure statement, he answered “no” to questions relating to knowledge of any defective physical conditions, and proposed increases to fees, dues, assessments, or bonds. Shortly thereafter, the property was sold in a dual agent transaction to a young couple and proceeded to close as scheduled.

Problem:
The exterior walls of the building were failing as a result of water intrusion, freezing, and expansion.

Mistake:
It was widely known among the residents that there were significant problems with the walls, as the board of directors held
numerous meetings to discuss financial arrangements to hire a structural engineer and contractor. The agent, a non-occupied
owner of one of the units, never attended these sessions, but was on the distribution these sessions, but was on the distribution
list for the meeting minutes.

Result:
Several months after the property closed, the buyers received a “Notice of Special Emergency Assessment” from the board of directors in the amount of $64,000, to be paid over a three-year
period. They immediately filed a lawsuit against the seller and the agent, alleging that they intentionally and negligently misrepresented the condition of the property and fraudulently induced them into the purchase. During the discovery phase of the litigation, copies of all meeting minutes and distribution lists
were produced. In her defense, the agent claimed that she never read the minutes and would have made further inquiries if she knew about the failing walls. However, it was clear that this argument would not be enough to successfully defend the lawsuit. The claim was resolved, with the seller contributing a
majority of the settlement.

Prevention:
Providing the seller’s property condition disclosure statements and Condominium Association documents to buyers are
important steps to take in the disclosure process. These steps alone, however, may not properly satisfy all legal requirements. Having notice of material defects, latent or otherwise, could find
that the agent was knowingly silent and failed to take action to protect her clients, thus committing fraud. Ignoring readily available information about the property in this transaction was a costly error on the part of the agent.

04/15/2016

Today one of my agents asked me how to report an eviction of the tenant to the credit bureau after getting the judgement from the court. I did some research and found this useful link which I like to share with those who are leasing their properties or plan to do some investment in a near future. If you need help with property management, don't hesitate to contact us.
http://homeguides.sfgate.com/fast-eviction-show-up-tenant-screening-report-8048.html

Tenant screening services exist to filter out troubled applicants. Once evicted, the judgment comes up on tenant records quickly and also affects your credit rating. If your next landlord finds an ...

01/29/2016

When you are selling your residential property and the One to Four Family Residential Contract (Resale) is checked with box 6C(1), it is important to provide a copy of both the survey and form T-47 to the buyer within the number of days specified in this paragraph even if the box "Buyer's expense" is selected. Refer to the bold statement in this paragraph for self-explanation. Failure to provide one of the two document may cost you, the seller, $350 or more for a new survey in the event that the existing survey is not accepted by the lender or title company. In the past, when I represented the buyer, the listing agent wanted my client to pay for a new survey when the existing one was not accepted by lender because the box "Buyer's expense" was selected. I referred to this bold statement and reminded him that he failed to provide a copy of the T-47 form. Therefore, the seller had to pay for a new survey in this situation. Understand the contract terms thoroughly has saved my client the cost of a new survey because of the listing agent's mistake. This mistake is very common for many listing agents, even the one with 10+ year experience forgot about it.