3 ms·

I don't actually like this answer but there's likely some truth to it. I am reminded that when I bought a house in my twenties, at the scheduled closing there

I don't actually like this answer but there's likely some truth to it. I am reminded that when I bought a house in my twenties, at the scheduled closing there was some detail that was incorrect. There was a line in the document where we had to say something like "Yes, x paper is in hand." In reality, I think we were still waiting for it. And when I was like "But this isn't true. Shouldn't we wait until we have this?" the banker said "That's your call." So it was lie about it because the paperwork wasn't going to go through if it said anything other than "Why, yes, we absolutely have that!" or delay closing on the house, which could mean losing it. So I signed. And it never came up again. No one ever called and said "But what about blah?" If you are knowledgeable about the bureaucratic process, you may know which check boxes must be checked off, true or not, to file it and in most cases don't actually matter. If you aren't knowledgeable, you are seriously gambling. So in reality, this kind of thing does go on, like it or not. And if you are too pedantic, you can't get things done. Things will grind to a halt while you dot every I and cross every T.

turquoisevar 3y ago
There’s a difference between you knowingly waiving a requirement that is to your benefit (receiving the necessary disclosure document before closing) to further a goal to your benefit and you making a statement on a form to the detriment of someone else. In your analogy it would be as if the seller ticket the box saying that they’ve disclosed all deficiencies to you despite not having done so, to not jeopardize your willingness to close.
- DoreenMichele 3y ago
  I don't recall what the document was but in real estate, a defect can also negatively impact neighbors or future owners. If the defect was the responsibility of the previous owner and not having the disclosure at the time of the closing means you no longer have legal standing to pursue remedy and you don't get around to fixing it, it may get grandfathered in and now it's potentially a permanent situation. I think TFA is a case where the OP messed up. He shouldn't have lied to appease his boss and it seems he wasn't clear about that at the time. He didn't seem to feel he was lying. He told his boss X then did as he was told. And I think this sort of mental disconnect is common and, among other things, leads to problematic choices for how to relate online. In his mind, while filling out the papers, what he said was part of this larger conversation and his boss knew what he really believed to be true. The problem is that putting it in writing means other people can read it and they aren't part of this larger conversation. I was clear that signing the papers could come back to bite me but based on the banker's remark inferred he wasn't concerned and he felt rescheduling was a bigger problem. Odds are good the item showed up soon after and was added to the file and said the "right" thing, so didn't create problems. I still think what I said elsewhere: OP should probably be planning his exit. But I do also understand why some people have sympathy for his boss and feel like playing devil's advocate here.

turquoisevar 3y ago

There’s a difference between you knowingly waiving a requirement that is to your benefit (receiving the necessary disclosure document before closing) to further a goal to your benefit and you making a statement on a form to the detriment of someone else. In your analogy it would be as if the seller ticket the box saying that they’ve disclosed all deficiencies to you despite not having done so, to not jeopardize your willingness to close.

DoreenMichele 3y ago
I don't recall what the document was but in real estate, a defect can also negatively impact neighbors or future owners. If the defect was the responsibility of the previous owner and not having the disclosure at the time of the closing means you no longer have legal standing to pursue remedy and you don't get around to fixing it, it may get grandfathered in and now it's potentially a permanent situation. I think TFA is a case where the OP messed up. He shouldn't have lied to appease his boss and it seems he wasn't clear about that at the time. He didn't seem to feel he was lying. He told his boss X then did as he was told. And I think this sort of mental disconnect is common and, among other things, leads to problematic choices for how to relate online. In his mind, while filling out the papers, what he said was part of this larger conversation and his boss knew what he really believed to be true. The problem is that putting it in writing means other people can read it and they aren't part of this larger conversation. I was clear that signing the papers could come back to bite me but based on the banker's remark inferred he wasn't concerned and he felt rescheduling was a bigger problem. Odds are good the item showed up soon after and was added to the file and said the "right" thing, so didn't create problems. I still think what I said elsewhere: OP should probably be planning his exit. But I do also understand why some people have sympathy for his boss and feel like playing devil's advocate here.