Colorado and attorney needs

[dreamhomeco]

Hi, I'm new to the forum and thought someone here may be able to give me piece of mind and steer me in the right direction. My wife and I are about to bid on a home in Colorado to live in as our primary residence and our agent told us that we have no need for an attorney in Colorado. Is this true? What law or rules in Colorado make it so there is no need for this?
I am feeling extremely uneasy that we are about to spend our life savings and I don't have an attorney to protect me. Any and all insight is appreciated!! Thank you!

[Cedar City Utah Realtor]

Your realtor is correct. Then again for about 150 dollars you could take the contract to your attorney and have that piece of mind.
I am suspecting you are coming from a state that requires attorney review of all real estate contracts. Anyways just have your agent fill out the contract then before you sign it take it over to your attorney have him review it then sign it and return to agent. If the agent doesn't like it fire him and use another one.

[TJ2007]

Well most of the time the/ a title company can handle all your needs and do the closing.

However remember that they and the agent are merely there to see the transaction through and get paid, not always represent your best interest.

If you go with the title company it is normally best to work with one recomended by your mortgage broker if you are getting a mortgage as they usually have a good relationship and will expidite getting things done.

However if you are concerned it is always great to have your attorney at least review your contract. And then just use him if there are any problems during the process.

Many realtors & mortgage brokers will advise against using an attorney due to the extra cost and the way that attorneys always seem to manage to screw up the easiest of deals with their paraniod frame of mind and legal mumbo jumbo. (attorneys often get paid by the hour too, so obviously the more problems they can find or even create = more hours & more $$$)

[JChristin]

I would deem it unethical, bordering on malpractice, if not illegal, to advising a client against seeking legal advice. If anyone connected with my firm were to advise that an attorney wasn't really required, well...as the door was hitting them on the backside on their flying exit...their services would no longer be needed at my firm.

If someone asks if they should seek legal advice, they should be so advised to seek it. As professionals, we should never recoil from welcoming other professionals into the due diligence of a transaction. The clients best interests must always come before any others self interests.

That same attorney may end up saving the back end of the agent/broker who feared the attorney would "screw" the whole deal up in the first place. Used car salepersons should be the only ones who fear an attorney...

[TJ2007]

Hahahahahhaa,

God knows my attorney has saved me a ton of money - however usually only needed when the other side had a greedy attorney that was stirring up uneeded problems.

JChristin: I wonder how many car sales persons are now realtors or mortgage brokers now though!:D - I guess that would explain the fear

[JChristin]

Exactly why I mentioned the "used car salesperson" mentality.

I work with a team of attorneys overseeing the prepartion of "risk assesssment letters," approvals of contract lanuage, option agreements, licenses, easements, environmental reviews, and the like. Their benefits and costs have most likely saved the organizations we represent millions. But for the typcial residential transaction, most likely not needed. Imagine, however, one of those "typcial" tranactions ends up in court, for any reason, and the clients testifies, "My broker advised me that an attorney wasn't needed."

Hence the reason, when a client asks if they should seek legal advice, encouragement is the word for the day. Save a commission, future attorney costs, court costs, and any court awards.