Legal Question in Real Estate Law in Nevada

Your question is a bit confusing, but if you mean that the buyer made an offer, the seller accepted, but then the seller tried to amend the deal by countering to the buyer with a proposed price change . . . that MAY BE improper. When the first offer was accepted by the seller, there was what attorneys call a "meeting of the minds" and the terms of the transaction were decided. If something changed that was outside the control of the parties to the contract (for example, the bank refused to accept a short-sale price offered) the parties needed to come together again to JOINTLY amend the contract by mutual consent and signatures.

Many real estate contracts are now being written to allow for an amendment in circumstances like this, and the original Offer and Acceptance (O&A) must be reviewed to see if the price was conditioned upon acceptance by the lender who currently holds the debt on the house. Signatures are always required on real estate contracts in Nevada ("Statute of Frauds"), so if this took place without: 1. a meeting of the minds; 2. a pre-arranged and agreed conditional price; and 3: a signature from the party to be charged (e.g., the seller), there may be some difficulties in this transaction.

Are you the seller or buyer? Are you looking to cancel your purchase or escape the sale of the property? Perhaps you want to enforce the original purchase agreement without a subsequent price amendment that the seller proposed? It all comes down to "the four corners of the document" in analyzing whether something inappropriate was done.

We can help you discover if there was something wrong here, but you should turn first to your Realtor to advise you (that is, if the agent you have been working with is actually representing YOU and not the other party) on the direction to go here. I wish you well.