Dear Ask George: I just purchased a property at a Sheriff's Auction in Spokane County, Washington. It was a non-judicial foreclosure. The foreclosure was for approximately $24,000 and I paid $31,000. There are unpaid real estate taxes in the amount of $1650 on the property that were not a part of the foreclosure. When I contacted the Trustee they said, "Surplus proceeds are deposited with the court and not used to automatically pay any outstanding lien." Is it possible to have these taxes paid with that surplus? Additionally, I believe that the property was abandoned pursuant to RCW 61.12.093. I would like to find out if the 20 day waiting period to take possession applies to abandoned property. - Seeking Answers in Spokane

Dear Seeking: Most jurisdictions provide for payment on other liens if there is a surplus. Tax liens are a priority lien, so it is likely that the court will apply any excess funds to retire that lien, rather than let the borrower benefit from the excess. As to the specific statute regarding abandonment, if the redemption period expires, the statute states that the purchaser "shall take title in and to such property free from all redemption rights ... upon confirmation of the sheriff's sale by the court." RCW 6.21.120 says the deed issues immediately after the confirmation of the sale.

Dear Ask George: What are the tax advantages and disadvantages of converting one's primary residence -- with 50K appreciation -- to a rental property? - Tax Question

Dear Tax Question: That is a question only you or your hired tax professional can answer. It requires someone who is familiar with your whole taxable income vs. deductible expenses picture. I can answer, however, that many people decide to convert a primary residence to a rental property as a means to accumulate wealth. In fact, a prudently selected residential property is still the primary means of achieving wealth building in the United States. That only makes sense, however, if you purchase another primary residence and if the rental market for your initial primary residence is such that it returns -- including offsets for long-term maintenance, an adequate income in excess of operating expenses.

Dear Ask George: I live in Florida and would like to purchase two vacant lots in Florida. The first lot is owned by someone who is a resident of Switzerland and the second is owned by a resident of Canada. My question to you is this; am I or the closing agent required by Florida law to withhold tax? - Cautious Buyer

Dear Cautious Buyer: The requirement that a transferee (Buyer or Buyer's Designated Agent) pay a "Withholding Tax" to the IRS is a federal requirement under the Foreign Investment Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA). See a brief summary here . Also, see IRS Publications 515 and 519 .

Naturally, I suggest you hire a Tax Attorney, CPA, or other tax professional to provide specific advice regarding your filing requirements, deadlines, amounts, etc. My experience as a real estate broker is that most title companies and many commercial real estate brokerage firms are familiar with FIRPTA requirements.

Dear Ask George: We have hired a real estate agent from a well-known national Realtor firm to sell our house. In an effort to sell our house more quickly, my husband and I thought we might show our house on our own time. We asked our agent whether she would approve of such an endeavor, but she disagreed indicating it would put us in direct competition with her company. However, we would like to know whether it is legal for us to do so. Of course, we were still willing to pay their fee but perhaps at a 1 percent discounted rate. - Frugal Seller

Dear Frugal Seller: Your agent is correct in that it would violate the terms of your listing agreement, which is in all probability an Exclusive Right To Sell agreement. Showing one's own house is too personal for most people. Even a Realtor's professional liability insurance doesn't cover them for the sale of their own property. I've never met a homeowner who didn't have the best house in the neighborhood.

If you want to compete with your listing firm, you would need to enter into an Exclusive Agency Listing Agreement. However, there are many sound, tried-and-true reasons not to enter into an Exclusive Agency Agreement from a real estate firm's point of view. First, instead of selling a home more quickly in the vast majority of cases it actually creates a major obstacle to overcome -- if it can be overcome, when the owners of the home show the property themselves. It is very much like driving an automobile: A person can be a delightful, mature, reasonable adult during a conversation, but when that person gets behind the wheel, especially in rush hour traffic or some other "stressful" situation, they transform into a greedy monster. The psychology of showing a home is 90 percent listening to the prospective purchaser and 10 percent extolling the numerous features of the subject property. It is one of the most difficult things to teach new real estate agents.

Add to that the numerous forms and/or notices that must be presented to prospective purchasers, questions designed to elicit information without turning off prospective purchasers, agency issues as to who is representing the prospective purchaser's interests, and a myriad of other details, has led me to conclude that an Exclusive Agency Listing Agreement is an open invitation to a lawsuit for the real estate firm and/or an invitation for a court-ordered sale rescission for the owners.

I suggest that you will be much better served by allowing your listing firm to do its job according to the normal and usual terms it is accustomed to operating within your specific market area.