Smithtown → Huntington Station · Simultaneous Sell-and-Buy Case Study

The Sale Worked. The Purchase Became the Hard Part.

25 Pine Acre Drive in Smithtown sold for $560,000.

Joanne and Mike had outgrown their 1,028-square-foot Smithtown home after the birth of their second child. The challenge was to secure a dependable buyer for Pine Acre, purchase a larger home in Huntington Station and coordinate the two closings.

The clients’ first names have been changed for privacy.

This case study describes one completed transaction. I led the real-estate strategy, offer negotiations, communication and coordination between the two transactions. Joanne and Mike made the final decisions, and the attorneys handled the contract terms, escrow agreement and legal work.

Exterior of 25 Pine Acre Drive in Smithtown

25 Pine Acre Drive

Smithtown

The home being sold

Exterior of 38 Leonard Street in Huntington Station

38 Leonard Street

Huntington Station

The home being purchased

01Pine Acre sale
$549,999 → $560,000

Asking price to final sale price

02Leonard purchase
$649,000 → $700,000

Asking price to final purchase price

03Closing coordination
2 days

Between the two closings

04The sale
Fourth buyer

Three previously accepted buyers withdrew

The Starting Position

They came back when the first house no longer fit.

I first represented these clients in 2019 when they purchased 25 Pine Acre Drive as first-time home buyers. They bought the house for $435,000.

Pine Acre was a fully renovated three-bedroom, two-bath ranch, but it was only approximately 1,028 square feet. They had already started to outgrow it after their first baby. When their second baby arrived, the space became too tight and they knew they had to move.

They called me back to represent them as first-time sellers and help them purchase the next house.

The sale and the next purchase had to be planned as one connected move.

The equity created the opportunity to move.

They originally purchased Pine Acre for $435,000 in 2019 and sold it for $560,000 in 2025. That $125,000 difference is not the same as profit: it does not account for the mortgage balance, closing costs or other expenses. But the appreciation increased the equity available for the next purchase and gave them financial options they did not have as first-time buyers.

The first number we needed was not the asking price.

Joanne and Mike needed the proceeds from Pine Acre for the next purchase, so buying first did not make sense for their financial situation. Before they committed to another property, we needed to secure a buyer and establish a dependable sale number.

Read the guide to selling and buying a home at the same time →

The house
1,028 sq. ft.

The Smithtown home they had outgrown

The financing change
10% → 20%

Approximate down payment from their first purchase to this purchase

Initial search range
Approximately $750,000
Selling Pine Acre

The house did not need renovation. It needed a manageable showing plan.

Pine Acre had been fully renovated when Joanne and Mike purchased it, and it did not need another renovation before they sold it. The challenge was keeping the small house ready for buyers while they were working and caring for a baby.

The baby was home with the grandmother during the day, and toys naturally ended up throughout the house. Joanne would come home from work knowing that another appointment might mean cleaning everything again and leaving the property. That became stressful very quickly.

See how I concentrate early showing activity in the Seller Playbook →

Buyers lined up in the rain.

Pine Acre entered the market on September 5, 2024, with an asking price of $549,999.

Saturday’s open house took place in the rain. The small house could not accommodate everyone inside at the same time. Buyers stood outside waiting for an opportunity to enter. Sunday’s weather was better, and the open house remained busy, although it was not as intense as Saturday.

We received approximately ten complete offers supported by pre-approval letters or other required documentation. Some were substantially below asking, including offers around $500,000 and $525,000.

Smithtown’s location, the renovated condition and the relatively low entry price attracted buyers who wanted an opportunity to move into the area. At the same time, the house’s limited size would eventually cause several aggressive buyers to reconsider.

Saturday
Buyers lined up in the rain
Offer response
Approximately 10 complete offers
The setback
Three accepted buyers withdrew
The result
The fourth buyer closed

Three accepted buyers withdrew. The fourth closed.

The strong open-house turnout produced several aggressive offers, but receiving an aggressive offer and completing a sale are not the same thing.

One documented offer began at $565,000 as an all-cash offer. It included an escalation clause increasing the offer in $5,000 increments above the highest verified written offer, up to $590,000. The buyer also proposed continuing as high as $665,000 with mortgage financing for any amount above $590,000.

That buyer ultimately withdrew.

The problem was the size of the house. Once some buyers realized how much they might have to pay to win Pine Acre, they began comparing it with other Smithtown houses available in the $600,000 to $650,000 range. Some of those homes were older and needed more work, but they offered substantially more living space than the small house.

Three buyers whose offers had been accepted withdrew before a contract was completed. Joanne began to panic. After seeing three prospective buyers change their minds, she became worried that nobody was going to purchase the house.

The buyers had already seen the demand for themselves.

The ultimate buyer attended both weekend open houses. On Saturday, he stood outside in the rain with the other buyers waiting to enter. He returned on Sunday and again saw people coming through the house.

That became important after the earlier buyers withdrew. The fourth buyer did not know the confidential details of the seller’s previous negotiations, and I was not going to disclose private information that could weaken my client’s position. What he did know was what he had personally witnessed: a genuine crowd of buyers competing for the opportunity to purchase the property.

Concentrating the appointments into the open-house windows made the real demand visible. Buyers could see how many people were interested in the house and understand the level of competition for themselves. This puts the seller in the strongest possible position.

Want to see how I strategize to get your home sold? Read the Seller Playbook →

Supporting record

A documented escalation offer

One written offer began at $565,000 and included $5,000 escalation increments. The buyer later withdrew, reinforcing that an aggressive offer was not the same thing as a completed sale.
The Buyer Who Closed

The fourth buyer agreed to something I had never seen before: Joanne and Mike could cancel if they could not complete the next purchase.

Joanne and Mike ultimately accepted the highest remaining offer, which produced a $560,000 contract price. The buyer did not have another property to sell and said that he could remain in his existing living arrangement while Joanne and Mike searched for their next home.

That flexibility gave them relief. They did not have to select the first available house simply because their buyer was pressuring them to close immediately.

The attorneys then documented an unusually protective agreement for the Pine Acre sellers. The sale was contingent on Joanne and Mike successfully purchasing another home. They could extend the anticipated closing date by as much as 45 days, and the agreement gave them an option to cancel if they could not find and close on the next property within the permitted period.

If they exercised that option, the buyer’s deposit would be returned and the sellers would reimburse certain specified and reasonable transaction expenses, including applicable attorney, title, inspection, survey and appraisal costs.

This was an exceptional agreement. It is the only transaction I have handled where a seller received this specific level of protection while the buyer continued spending money and completing the mortgage and title process.

Once Joanne and Mike secured the next house, the Pine Acre buyer moved forward with the mortgage, title search and the remaining transaction expenses. By that point, the buyer was invested in the purchase and wanted to close. I did not need to persuade him to remain in the transaction.

Up to 45 additional days
Time to locate and close on another home
Seller’s purchase contingency
The Pine Acre sale depended on the sellers successfully purchasing another home
Cancellation protection
The sellers had an option to cancel if they could not complete the replacement purchase within the agreed period
Supporting record

The provision that created time to buy

The fully executed Pine Acre addendum allowed up to 45 additional days and made the sale contingent on the sellers successfully purchasing another home.

This was an exceptional negotiated agreement—not a standard protection that every seller should expect to receive.

The Purchase Search

Once the Pine Acre sale was moving forward, Joanne moved quickly.

The Pine Acre buyer had agreed to give Joanne and Mike time, but Joanne still wanted the certainty of knowing where her family was going. Once the sale was moving forward, she searched the available listings aggressively and we began looking at potential homes.

They made offers on several properties. One of those offers was accepted at 64 Harrison Drive in East Northport.

The House They Walked Away From

64 Harrison Drive

$705,000 offer

Winning the Harrison offer did not make it the right purchase.

Harrison entered the market at $689,000. On September 23, 2024, Joanne and Mike offered $705,000. The offer was accepted, but the parties never completed a binding contract of sale.

The nonbinding offer memorandum identified the purchase as contingent on the sale of Pine Acre. It was submitted four days before the September 27 contract date reported in Pine Acre’s MLS history, which means their search had reached the offer stage while the sale was still moving through its own contract process.

Joanne and Mike completed a home inspection at Harrison. The house had deferred maintenance and required more work than they were comfortable accepting at that price. It also did not give them enough additional space to justify the repair burden.

They decided to withdraw and continue looking.

Supporting record

Click either page to view the full-size redacted offer memorandum.

The Harrison offer documented that the purchase depended on the sale of Pine Acre. After the home inspection, Joanne and Mike decided the repair burden was not justified by the additional space and chose not to proceed.

See how I help buyers decide when to walk away →

The House They Chose

38 Leonard Street

$700,000 purchase

Exterior of 38 Leonard Street in Huntington Station

Leonard offered the space and location they were trying to find.

38 Leonard Street entered the market on October 15, 2024, with an asking price of $649,000. It was a five-bedroom, two-bathroom expanded ranch in Huntington Station.

The house was close to Joanne’s job and next to a park the family liked. More importantly, it gave them substantially more room than Pine Acre or Harrison.

Leonard also had extensive deferred maintenance. Joanne and Mike understood that they were not purchasing a move-in-ready house. They decided that the size and location made the work acceptable.

We visited Leonard twice through private appointments. There was no crowded open house showing us how many other buyers might be interested, and the listing side did not provide me with verified information about competing offers.

Joanne and Mike decided to offer $700,000. They arrived at that number themselves.

I could help them assess whether $700,000 made sense for Leonard based on the comparable sales, the condition of the house and what the family needed from the next home. What I could not do was predict whether that number would win, because I did not have verified information about competing offers. Joanne and Mike used that information, along with what they had just experienced as sellers, to choose their own number.

What happened to Harrison afterward

After Joanne and Mike withdrew, Harrison returned to the market. The asking price was later reduced to $679,000, and the property ultimately sold to another buyer for $672,500 on January 8, 2025.

The later sale price does not establish the cost of the repairs or prove what the house was worth to Joanne and Mike. It provides public context for the decision they made before contract.

64 Harrison Drive

Location
East Northport
Original asking price
$689,000
Accepted offer
$705,000
Property
Three bedrooms · Two bathrooms
Condition
Deferred maintenance and substantial repair concerns
Decision
Withdraw after the inspection

38 Leonard Street

Location
Huntington Station
Original asking price
$649,000
Purchase price
$700,000
Property
Five bedrooms · Two bathrooms
Condition
Extensive deferred maintenance
Decision
Proceed because the size and location justified the work

Both properties needed work. The decision was not simply about finding the cheaper house. Joanne and Mike considered the purchase price, repair burden, usable space, location and whether the property could work for their family over time.

Inspection Findings and Contract Protections

The inspector could only evaluate what was accessible.

Leonard contained a tremendous number of belongings when the home inspection took place. Furniture and personal property covered or blocked portions of the house, and the seller did not want to move everything around during the inspection.

That limited what the inspector could see. A home inspector can evaluate visible and accessible areas, operate accessible systems and identify signs that may require further investigation. An inspector cannot see through belongings, walls, underground pipes or the ground itself.

I do not believe the seller was intentionally trying to hide defects. Based on the way he later reacted to the problems discovered at the final walkthrough and closing, I believe he had lived with many of these conditions for so long that he considered them normal.

The inspection still identified significant concerns. Joanne and Mike knew the property had extensive deferred maintenance and decided to continue because the house’s size and location remained valuable to their family.

The belongings did not make the inspection meaningless. They made its limitations more important.

Read what a home inspection can—and cannot—tell a buyer →

What Was Put in Writing

Repairs were agreed upon.

Six separate repair obligations were written into the purchaser’s rider.

The rider required the seller to address the work at the seller’s expense, use appropriately qualified contractors, provide applicable written certifications and photographs, and allow reasonable follow-up access before closing.

  1. 01

    Electrical service entrance

    Correct the non-continuous electrical service-entrance conduit and the related moisture concern.

  2. 02

    Basement moisture

    Address the identified moisture intrusion and visible efflorescence in the basement.

  3. 03

    Electrical panel

    Address the corrosion and moisture identified at the electrical service-panel cabinet.

  4. 04

    Water-supply pipes

    Address the corroded water-supply pipes and evidence of previous leakage.

  5. 05

    Waste line and clean-out

    Replace the sewer ejector-pump waste pipe and provide the proper main clean-out described in the rider.

  6. 06

    Corroded fittings

    Address the identified corroded pipe fittings.

Supporting record

The repairs addressed in the contract rider

The signed purchaser rider identified six repair and remediation items before closing. The final walkthrough later showed that several had not been addressed.

The contract also required the plumbing, heating, electrical systems and included appliances to be in working condition at closing. The purchaser’s rider required the property to be vacant and broom-clean, with the seller’s belongings removed. It also required the wastewater system to be in working condition.

These were not casual promises made during a showing. They were written contractual requirements prepared and documented by the attorneys.

How the Two Contracts Connected

The transactions were financially connected, but Leonard was not legally contingent on Pine Acre.

By the time Joanne and Mike entered the Leonard contract, Pine Acre was already under contract.

The Leonard seller’s rider expressly stated that the purchase was not contingent on the sale of Pine Acre or any other real property owned by Joanne and Mike.

That distinction matters. In practical terms, the two transactions remained financially connected. Contractually, the Leonard seller had not agreed to make the purchase dependent on Pine Acre successfully closing.

That made the strength and flexibility of the Pine Acre buyer especially important. It also meant Joanne and Mike needed to understand the risk they were accepting before signing the Leonard contract.

The attorneys were responsible for explaining the legal effect of the contingency language and advising their respective clients. This case study describes how the transactions were structured; it does not provide legal advice.

  1. 01

    Pine Acre under contract

  2. 02

    Replacement home found

  3. 03

    Leonard under contract

  4. 04

    Pine Acre closed — January 22

  5. 05

    Leonard closed — January 24

September 27, 2024

Pine Acre’s reported MLS contract date

November 1, 2024

Leonard’s reported MLS contract date

The reported contract dates were 35 days apart. The search moved quickly, but the period between the Leonard contract and closing would take much longer.

Contract to Closing

From seller delays to the final walkthrough.

The Leonard seller repeatedly needed more time to move.

The Leonard contract was reported on November 1, 2024, but the seller had accumulated many belongings during his years in the house and repeatedly needed additional time to move everything out.

There were no mortgage, appraisal, title, certificate-of-occupancy or permit problems delaying either transaction. The primary delay came from the Leonard seller needing more time.

Meanwhile, the Pine Acre buyer continued completing the mortgage and title process. Once Joanne and Mike had secured Leonard, their buyer had already invested time and money in purchasing Pine Acre and wanted to close. I did not have to persuade the buyer to remain in the transaction.

Leonard ultimately closed on January 24, 2025—84 days after its reported November 1 contract date.

Removing the belongings revealed problems that had not been visible before.

By the final walkthrough, the seller’s belongings had been removed and Joanne and Mike could see areas that had been blocked during the inspection.

Many of the six repairs written into the purchaser’s rider had not been completed. Additional leaks were visible, and the boiler was not functioning properly. These were especially important because the contract required the plumbing and heating systems to be in working condition at closing.

The final walkthrough was not a ceremonial last visit. It was the buyers’ opportunity to compare the empty property with the condition and repair obligations written into the contract.

The final walkthrough was where the condition of the empty house finally became visible.

The strongest practical leverage existed before the buyers agreed to close.

The unresolved problems led to a major disagreement between the buyer and seller at the closing table.

During the closing discussion, the seller explained that toilet paper could not be used in one of the toilets and that a bidet attachment had been installed instead. He appeared to believe that this was a normal way of using that bathroom rather than evidence of a larger problem.

I do not believe that statement was an admission that the seller had intentionally concealed a failed cesspool. To me, it demonstrated how differently two homeowners can view the same living condition. What the seller had accepted as normal immediately concerned the buyers.

The parties ultimately agreed that the boiler would be serviced and that a plumbing professional would snake the affected pipes. The attorneys arranged for $5,000 of the seller’s money to be held in escrow while that work was addressed.

This was an escrow holdback—not an immediate $5,000 credit to the buyers.

$5,000 held in attorney escrow

  1. Seller delays

    The Leonard seller repeatedly needed additional time to move

  2. Belongings removed

    Previously inaccessible areas became visible

  3. Final walkthrough

    Leaks, plumbing problems and a boiler problem were discovered

  4. Closing-table agreement

    $5,000 was held in attorney escrow

  5. Plumbing service

    The service call indicated a larger problem

  6. Cesspool discovery

    A scope revealed the collapsed cesspool system

At the inspection

The house contained substantial furniture, belongings and personal property that limited visibility.

In the contract

Six repairs and working plumbing, heating and wastewater systems were required in writing.

At the final walkthrough

Many repairs remained incomplete, leaks were visible and the boiler was not functioning properly.

The plumbing service led to a much larger discovery.

When the plumbing professional came to snake the affected bathroom line, he told Joanne and Mike that something was not right. That prompted them to arrange a camera inspection of the waste line.

The additional inspection found that the cesspool system or the piping leading into it had collapsed. One toilet would not flush properly, and the other bathroom also experienced problems that were not apparent during the original home inspection.

The $5,000 escrow was not enough to cover the complete replacement. After approximately one week of disagreement over the escrow, Joanne and Mike received the full $5,000, but they still faced the cost and disruption of installing a new cesspool system.

Joanne and Mike never told me the final replacement cost.

  1. 01

    Final-walkthrough problems documented

  2. 02

    $5,000 placed in attorney escrow

  3. 03

    Plumbing professional identified a larger concern

  4. 04

    Camera inspection found a collapsed wastewater system or line

  5. 05

    The cesspool system was replaced

Who handled what

Andrew — Real-estate strategy and coordination
I helped Joanne and Mike understand the practical problems, communicated with the parties and supported them while they made their decisions.
The attorneys — Legal work and escrow
The attorneys advised their clients about the contract and documented the $5,000 escrow arrangement.
Service professionals — Repairs and technical work
The applicable boiler, plumbing and wastewater conditions were evaluated and addressed by the appropriate service professionals.
Post-Closing Resolution and Final Results

Mike Found the New York State Septic System Replacement Program

Joanne had recently given birth and was recovering while the family was moving into a house with a major wastewater problem. Between the new baby, the move, the repair expense and the disagreement over the escrow, the situation became overwhelming.

Mike found the New York State Septic System Replacement Program and told me they qualified for approximately $25,000. It gave them a practical way to address the failed cesspool after an already expensive move.

I remained available after closing. I spoke with Joanne and Mike as they worked through the cesspool problem and contacted contractors to help them obtain pricing. I continued supporting them through the repair and the escrow disagreement.

Review current Suffolk County wastewater-grant information →

Read how final-walkthrough problems and repair escrows are addressed in the Buyer Playbook →

The two transactions closed two days apart.

Joanne and Mike used approximately three days of post-closing possession while they completed the Leonard purchase and moved their belongings.

The family completed the move into a substantially larger five-bedroom home near Joanne’s job and the park they wanted. They also had to deal with the unexpected cesspool replacement immediately after closing.

The outcome was successful, but it was not smooth. The family reached the next house without moving into temporary housing, but the purchase created stress and an expense nobody had expected.

Pine Acre sold
$560,000
Leonard purchased
$700,000
Between closings
2 days
Wastewater assistance
Approximately $25,000

Program found by Mike

Additional transaction results
Pine Acre purchase in 2019
$435,000
Pine Acre sale in 2025
$560,000
Difference before expenses and mortgage payoff
$125,000
Leonard purchase
$700,000
Time between the two closings
Two days
Post-closing possession
Used for approximately three days
Repair escrow
$5,000
Public wastewater assistance
Approximately $25,000 reported by the clients
The Complete Timeline

  1. June 10, 2019

    Joanne and Mike purchased Pine Acre for $435,000 as first-time home buyers.

  2. September 5, 2024

    Pine Acre entered the market at $549,999.

  3. September 23, 2024

    They offered $705,000 for Harrison.

  4. After the Harrison inspection

    They withdrew before contract and continued searching.

  5. September 27, 2024

    Pine Acre’s reported MLS contract date.

  6. October 15, 2024

    Leonard entered the market at $649,000.

  7. November 1, 2024

    Leonard’s reported MLS contract date.

  8. January 22, 2025

    Pine Acre closed for $560,000.

  9. January 24, 2025

    Leonard closed for $700,000.

  10. After closing

    A camera inspection identified the collapsed wastewater system or line, and the cesspool was replaced.

Final Lesson

My job was to give them the information. The decisions were theirs.

My approach is to give clients the information they need to make a confident decision. I explain what we know, what we do not know, the available options and the tradeoffs. Then the client decides.

That is how I worked with Joanne and Mike from the first consultation through closing. I did not make their decisions for them. I built the plan, made recommendations, answered their questions and stayed involved when the transaction became difficult.

I could not lean on a major brokerage brand. I had to become the sharpest tool in the shed.
Planned the move
Estimated the selling costs, likely net proceeds, purchase costs and working search range.
Designed the sale strategy
Recommended concentrated showing windows and helped negotiate the time needed to purchase the next home.
Explained the tradeoffs
Clarified what was known, what could not be verified and where the practical risks existed.
Stayed involved
Supported the clients through buyer withdrawals, the final walkthrough, closing and the post-closing cesspool problem.
What This Case Shows

Planning created options. It did not create guarantees.

Planning did not prevent every problem. It gave Joanne and Mike options when the transaction changed.

What my plan helped control

  • The order of the sale and purchase
  • The estimated financial picture
  • The number of showing interruptions
  • The visibility of genuine buyer demand
  • The timing flexibility received from the Pine Acre buyer
  • The inspection repairs placed in writing
  • The short period needed to complete the move

What my plan could not eliminate

  • Buyers reconsidering Pine Acre’s size
  • Unverified competition for Leonard
  • The Leonard seller’s moving delays
  • Conditions blocked by belongings
  • Incomplete repairs at the final walkthrough
  • A major wastewater failure discovered after closing
Planning Your Own Move

Do you need to sell one house to purchase the next?

If the money for your next home is tied up in the property you already own, the first step is not simply putting the house on the market and hoping the dates work.

We need to understand what your current property may sell for, what the sale is likely to cost, how much money should remain, when you can begin making serious offers and what terms you may need from both sides.

Tell me what you own, where you are trying to go and whether you need the sale proceeds to complete the purchase. We can work backward from the move before either transaction begins.

Talk Through Your MoveRead the Complete Sell-and-Buy Guide
Contact

Let’s just talk first.

No obligation and no pressure. Tell me a little about your situation and I’ll get back to you myself.

Andrew Ragusa

Licensed Real Estate Broker

Phone

516-858-9434

Email

Andrew@AndrewRagusa.com

Provide either an email address or phone number so the form can be submitted.

Please select the option that best describes where you first heard about me.