What's the norm in your area? Ask your realtor.

She can't think of any other way. I just thought I would throw it out here.

Through your realtor, just ask them to reimburse you for any out of pocket expenses, since they canceled the contract. If they refuse, then see what options you have.

You could take them to small claims court. If you win, put a lien on property or file a lis pendens on it.

I'd nicely ask for reimbursement since they are the ones that defaulted on contract. If they refuse, I'd have any atty send them a letter stating that you intend to do one of the above, which will tie up their home.

I agree!

I would nicely tell the seller that you'll sign the paperwork once your $600 is returned. If they refuse, then let them know you're going to small claims (hopefully it doesn't get to that point) and DO NOT sign anything.

If you are willing to accept the property in its offered condition, they may not have the right to cancel at all. While I am not familiar with the real estate contracts in your area, they are a legally binding agreement and spell out who has the right to cancel and when. In general, there are fewer cancellation options for sellers than buyers. Buyers are wading into the unknown and real estate laws and contracts generally exist to ensure that the property purchased is substantially what the buyer thought they were purchasing (really it is time to ensure that there is a meeting of the minds). Sellers don't get that same protection, they should already know what they are selling. If this is the case for your contract you can demand reimbursement or even profit for cancelling the contract.

However, if they are refusing to repair items that you want repaired then they are not really cancelling the contract and you probably have no right to the return of your expenses. So the question is are they taking it off the market in response to your repair demand or did they change their mind?

Sorry about the confusion. I think I see where I left out some info.

Yes, we made an offer on the house, it was accepted and a contract was signed by all parties. We had the inspections done and based on the inspections (and the Oak Wilt situation), we wanted to reduce the price of the house because we didn't want them making any of the repairs, especially since they are so extensive. Our agent said it's easier to just ask for closing costs paid for by the seller instead of reducing the sell price. So that's what we did and then the tantrum about taking the house off the market and asking us to cancel the contract. We decided that we want the house anyway, so we will not terminate the contract and leave it exactly as signed by all parties. The $600 in inspection fees that we wanted reimbursed came into play because if we cancelled the contract because they refuse to sell it to us - we would be out of the money because we signed a contract in good faith.

You had a contract, then you proposed changes to the contract, and the seller refuses the changes, and wants to cancel the whole thing. Is that right?

I can ask they can refuse. I'm negotiating a contract.

Based on new info, no you would not have been entitled to inspection money reimbursement.

Sellers refusing to make repairs/pay additional money or discount house means you can terminate, and normally get earnest money back. But you wouldn't get your inspection money reimbursed, even if sellers took house off mkt.

Is there a "specific performance" clause in your contract?

http://oureverydaylife.com/real-estate-contract-specific-performance-7406.html

Although a specific performance clause makes your life easier, in reality it probably isn't necessary. For most home sellers specific performance is really the only option.

Now to be honest, the courts are sometimes reluctant to make someone move out of their house and reward monetary damages instead. So from a legal perspective there is a good chance you are going to get money instead of the house. However, that money is usually significant enough that the seller has no real practical choice. Someone balking at closing costs is probably not even going to fight you.

Don;t forget your attorney fees.

I think I was a bit unclear earlier, I meant that this probably wouldn't get to court. Once your attorney sends them a letter notifying them of the breach, their attorney wil most likely advise them not to litigate because of the expense and because with this tyoe of breach there is a significant chance of damages plus attorney fees or damages significantly greater than attorney fees.

The real question isn't about winning and losing, or right and wrong, it is would you really want to buy a house from someone you forced out.

Asking for repairs after a signed contract is renegotiating as well.

It would seem the sellers are perfectly happy to sell their house now that there are no addendums. Based on the latest info I have received, I believe much of this could have been prevented with better communication from the realtors. This situation is crazy convoluted and after we've closed I'll be more comfortable coming back and giving the nitty-gritty details.

Good idea Salti. Deleted.