The odd title above is a phrase one of my real estate law professors used constantly. It means, as you have probably already realized, that you don't have an enforceable part of a contract unless it's actually in writing.

Here's a good case in point. Some condominium developers have begun to insert a "right to repurchase" clause in their sale contracts. Buyers who decide to rent or sell their condominium before having lived in it for a year must, if they agree to this clause, give the builder the first right to repurchase the unit at its original price. (That last item is a bit of a stinger, no?)

Now, given the fact that most lenders impose restrictions on the loans they make available to buyers in a condo development occupied by an unusually high percentage of renters, this clause makes some sense−as regards renting. But it doesn't make much sense, though it is perfectly legal, as regards selling. Buyers who object to the clause may occasionally be told, "Don't worry, we won't actually exercise this clause." But if the buyers don't have that in writing, they have nothing but a restrictive−and enforceable−repurchase clause.

Real estate attorney and columnist Benny Kass suggests that the following wording be added to the repurchase clause: "Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, should the Purchaser have an emergency -- such as a health problem -- which requires the relocation of the purchaser, or should the Purchaser be obligated to move to another location as a result of employment conditions or hardship, this repurchase agreement shall be null and void." And he insists: Make sure it's in writing! For Real Estate help call Beth at (425) 450-5208 and visit her website at www.bethbillington.com.

Beth Billington is a Realtor® with Coldwell Banker Bain in Bellevue, WA.