Miami Real Estate





Achieving multiple professional certifications and surpassing customer expectations has propelled Keyes Company Sunset Office Vice President Carlos Garcia to become Dade County's top producing real estate leader within The Keyes organization. Garcia's cumulative sales volume is more than $575 Million since he launched his Real Estate career in 1995. In recognition of his exceptional success, Garcia was appointed to The Keyes Company's prestigious President's Council. Garcia is a Certified Residential Specialist (CRS), a graduate of the Realtor Institute (GRI), a Certified Relocation Specialist and Luxury Homes Member. In 2010, Carlos Garcia was named Vice-Chairman and Communication Chair for the Master Brokers Forum (MBF) representing the top 250 agents in Miami-Dade County. To better serve his customers with Short Sales and Foreclosure guidance, Garcia obtained his Certified Distressed Property Expert (CDPE) designation. Prior to launching his career in Real Estate, Garcia served as Vice President of Operations for a major electrical Company in Miami. Carlos has achieved the Number ONE position again in Sales for Miami-Dade County and was awarded the President's Council Award in January 2014 for the 15th consecutive year at the Keyes Annual Awards and has always been ranked amongst the top FIVE sales associates in The Keyes Company which employs over 2,500 sales associates.(press release 2014)

The information on this web site has been obtained from the public record or the property owner and has not been verified. The information, documents and related graphics, may include inaccuracies or typographical errors and should be independently verified. The Keyes Company and/or Carlos Garcia (Associate) is not responsible or liable for the inaccuracy of the information.

Copyright ® 2007 Carlos Garcia, LLC.

Map SearchClick here for a free Market AnalysisBuyers: Search here for your Dream HomeSubscribe! Sign up to recieve our Newsletter!Real Estate Outlook
Updated: Wednesday, August 27, 2014

Buyers Right To Know Of Competition?

Does a buyer have a right to know if some other buyer is competing against him for the same property? Shouldnt buyers be given all >

The Woodsons had become interested in a property represented by Melia Faile of the Allen Tate Co. The Woodsons had an agent representing them as buyers, but, because their agent was absent at times during the negotiations, they frequently communicated directly with the listing agent.

On a Tuesday the listing agent provided the Woodsons with a draft purchase offer form. They made several changes, which they initialed, and returned the signed form on Thursday. The sellers DLI Properties then made some more changes and returned it for acceptance.

Things went back and forth, including a Friday call, from the buyer to the listing agent, saying that he had neglected to include a contingency placing a 4,300 limit on the cost to him of tying into the existing water and sewer systems.

After discussing the matter with the sellers, the listing agent left a Friday afternoon phone message for the buyers. According to the court record, she told them to "notate the change, initial it, and deliver the offer to her with a check for the 1,000 earnest money deposit." They did that and delivered the offer, with the check, to the listing office on Saturday. Because some of the sellers were out of town, they the sellers planned to meet on Monday to sign the final version.

On Sunday, another buyer, through his agent, contacted the listing agent about making an offer on the same property. The listing agent informed them of the situation with the first buyers offer. The second buyer said that he would make a cash offer with an earlier closing date if he could first obtain a satisfactory septic inspection.

On Monday, the listing agent informed the sellers of the second buyer. She asked them if they wanted her to inform the first buyers. They decided not to after she told them "she was afraid that, if she informed the [first buyers] about the other offer, DLI could lose both offers."

On Tuesday, the inspection was conducted with satisfactory results. The second buyer made a formal offer which the sellers accepted.

Naturally, the first buyers sued. Among other things, they claimed that the listing agent "had a duty of care to communicate truthful information to [the first buyer], and breached that duty by failing to disclose the [second] offer and the fact that DLI had not signed [the first buyers] offer." Moreover, they argued that the listing agent had this duty because they had "the right to expressly repose trust and confidence" in her with regard to their offer.

The trial court upheld the defendants motion for summary judgment -- essentially, a motion to dismiss -- determining that the facts, which were uncontested, did not support a claim that the law had been violated. The trial courts order was then upheld by an appellate court and, ultimately, the State Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court noted that the first buyers were not clients of the listing agent; rather they had employed another agent to represent them, "and the circumstances of their dealings with [the listing agent] did not imply a trust and confidence between the parties giving rise to a duty to disclose another offer." Moreover, the court observed, "Nondisclosure becomes fraudulent only when it is the duty of the party having knowledge of the facts to uncover them to the other." [my emphasis]

Situations like this can sometimes be confusing to REALTORS, because the Realtor Code of Ethics makes it clear that, in the absence of a confidentiality agreement, or some particular state law, the terms of an offer are not considered confidential. Indeed, under Article I, Standard of Practice 1-13, buyer agents have a duty to advise their clients of this.

But just because something is not confidential doesnt mean it has to be shared. The existence and terms of an offer may with the sellers permission be disclosed to another buyer; but neither seller nor agent have a duty to do this.

Bob Hunt is a director of the California Association of Realtors. He is the author of Real Estate the Ethical Way.

> Full Story

Ask the HOA Expert: Must All Owners Share The Cost?

Question: I live in a condominium with three buildings and the one I live in has an elevator that needs substantial repairs. The Home Owners Association Board plans to assess all repair costs to our building. Can the board charge only our building or must all owners share the cost?

Answer: Unless the governing documents specifically allocate elevator expenses and repairs to certain units, the costs are spread among all unit owners and that cant be changed unless 100 of all owners agree to it.

Question: Our board has allowed unit owners to enclose patios, replace concrete sidewalks with pavers, add bay windows, greenhouse rooms, skylights and roofs to cover new rooms. The rationale was that such improvements increase the value of all units.

Answer: What you describe constitutes expansion into or modification of the common area. The board has no authority to expand owner use of common area. Any redefinition or reconfiguration of common area must be approved by an appropriate majority of owners which may be 100. However, what is done is done. The board should deny further such encroachments into common area.

Whenever the board grants a legal modification, like carpeting an existing patio, the approval should be done in writing and include the condition that all maintenance and repairs are the owners responsibility as well as any damage caused to common area resulting from those modifications.

Question: We have a homeowner who is having cable TV installed but the cable company wont do the installation without the HOAs approval due to the concern of running a visible cable under the eves of the roof. Should we have the owner sign a waiver accepting responsibility for damages resulting from the installation?

Answer: Generally, the board should have a written policy restricting or prohibiting cable, phone and dish installations that are attached to the buildings for the very reasons you point out. At the very least, these installations should be out of view. Cable TV wiring can usually be run in crawlspaces or attics to minimize exterior cable. It is more labor intensive but the end result is the building exterior looks cleaner and with fewer holes in the siding that could leak water. Satellite dishes should not be attached to the siding or roof unless these are the only locations where good signal is achievable. Erecting various out of sight 15-20 pole locations on the property allows the service providers places to hang their equipment without resorting to building installations.

For more innovative homeowner association management strategies, subscribe to

> Full Story

Always Obtain A Property Survey

Question : We are refinancing and our lender is requiring a survey. We paid for one five years ago when we bought our house, so we dont understand this requirement? Is it necessary?

Answer : Yes and no. The lender needs a survey, but if you have not made any changes to the outside of your property, your lender should be willing to take a sworn affidavit from you indicating no changes and no improvements since the first survey. The original survey should be attached to that document.

What is a survey? It is important to distinguish between a survey and an appraisal -- both of which are generally charged to the buyer. An appraisal assists the mortgage lender in assessing the value of the house so as to determine whether a mortgage should be made and in what amount. Generally, the appraisal will analyze the condition of the house, its location, structural soundness and comparable sales in the area.

A survey, on the other hand, goes to the question of marketability. The surveyor determines whether the house is within the property borders, whether there are any encroachments on the property by neighbors and the extent to which any easements on the property may affect legal title.

Up until the mid 1980s, mortgage lenders did not require a survey. But this has changed. Title companies, when issuing a title insurance policy, will issue an exception to title unless a survey has been obtained. Since Lenders insist on obtaining a clear "lenders" title insurance policy covering the face value of the mortgage, it becomes necessary to obtain a survey to satisfy the lenders requirements.

Every buyer should obtain a survey, even if you are paying all cash. You need to know where your property lines are, and whether there are any building restrictions affecting your right to add a porch or a fence. You want to make sure that your fence does not encroach on the next door neighbor or vice versa.

Here are some suggestions involving the survey process.

First, survey prices vary considerably. Ive seen them as low as 200 and as high as 300, for the same single-family house. Ask your settlement attorney for an estimate. If it seems too high, arrange for your own survey and make sure a copy of the survey gets to your lender well in advance of settlement. It must be done by a qualified surveyor, licensed in the state where your property is located. And your lender must approve the surveyor in advance.

Next, ask your sellers who did their survey. Most lenders will not honor a survey if it is more than six months old, but you should ask the prior surveyor whether the old survey can be updated and whether this will save you some money. Some of the more reputable surveyors are happy to get your business and will give you a break in the price.

You should also go to the government surveyor in the land records office where your property is located. They are quite helpful and may be able to assist you with boundary questions, easement issues and such. They will not, however, provide you legal advice.

If you are buying a condominium unit, you will not have to obtain -- or pay for -- a separate survey of your unit. That survey has already been done as part of the plats and plans which were recorded with the condominium documents. You should, of course, carefully review all of the condominium documents before you decide to go forward with the transaction.

It should be noted that the typical survey which most purchasers obtain when they go to closing is called a "house location" survey. Title insurance generally will exclude from coverage "encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes and any other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of the premises."

The title insurance industry takes the position that a "house location" survey is not such an "accurate survey", and thus will reject many claims regarding boundary disputes.

To obtain full title insurance coverage, the purchaser should obtain what is known as an "ALTA American Land Title Association Survey". This is a very detailed, comprehensive survey, which will cost considerably more than the house location survey.

To be absolutely sure of what property you are purchasing, you might want to consider obtaining this ALTA Survey. However, most residential purchasers would rather not spend that additional money, and will take a chance that the house location survey will adequately protect them.

Finally, keep in mind that most surveys will not include staking your property corners. If you want stakes posted, it will cost you additional dollars. You should make the necessary arrangements for stakes at the time you or your title attorney -- orders the survey.

When you go to settlement, you should ask the settlement attorney to review the survey with you, and to discuss any potential issues which that survey may raise. Are the fences encroaching on your neighbors property? Is the driveway owned by you or it is a shared driveway? Who owns any trees which are on the property? Once you purchase the property, it may be too late to raise any boundary->

And dont forget to get a copy of the survey from your closing attorney before you leave the settlement table.

> Full Story

Copyright © 2004 Realty Times®. All Rights Reserved