![]() |
![]() |
|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Webcams | Blogs | YouTube Channel | Classifieds | Register | FAQ | Donate | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,442
Thanks: 756
Thanked 792 Times in 415 Posts
|
![]()
Understood. I will try to MMOB. Hopefully, this will all be resolved amicably,
but that might be a stretch. Many of the wonderful camps have disappeared over the years, which is very sad. Last edited by Sue Doe-Nym; 09-07-2019 at 06:58 PM. Reason: misspelling |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: the left coast (Portland)and West Alton
Posts: 1,415
Thanks: 65
Thanked 260 Times in 178 Posts
|
![]()
Assuming that RO is the buyer who has a binding purchase and sale agreement, the Winchesters do not have the legal right to back out, without being in breach of contract.
Given the flavor of his comments I suspect RO is attempting to sway public opinion to his side viz. the pending hearings. Hello, backfire.
__________________
basking in the benign indifference of the universe |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Merrimack and Welch Island
Posts: 4,417
Thanks: 1,366
Thanked 1,638 Times in 1,070 Posts
|
![]()
I would expect the Owen P & S to be contingent on subdivision approval, so, "partially binding?" If there were no contingencies, the closing would have occurred ages back. The planning board cannot deny based on public sentiment. They just confirm that all the laws and ordinances are met. If they deny whimsically based on public sentiment, they will likely lose an appeal.
|
![]() |
![]() |
The Following User Says Thank You to Descant For This Useful Post: | ||
WinnisquamZ (09-07-2019) |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|