The quality assurance role of seller financing: evidence from second mortgages

Quality problems that are known to the seller of a product, but will become known to the buyer only after the purchase have the potential to frustrate voluntary exchanges. Where the determination of quality after the sale is cut-and-dried, brand names and unconditional guarantees will bond contract performance. When the problem is more subtle or confounded by the extent of consumer inputs, requiring risk-sharing by the contracting parties, these bonding devices typically are not sufficient. Under the circumstances, seller financing may be an efficient contracting solution for bonding the quality dimension of the contract. This form of financing makes both the buyer and the seller share the risk that the product may not suit the buyer’s needs in the way promised by the seller. This paper provides further empirical evidence on the quality assurance role of seller financing. We consider seller-financed second mortgages in the National Association of Realtors database. Seller financing in second mortgages may be a supplement to first mortgages supplied by conventional lenders. The role of seller financing as a quality assurance mechanism in second mortgages is more complex than its role in first mortgages, but is also less subject to an alternative interpretation of credit rationing than is its role in seller-financed first mortgages. To avoid further complexities, we do not consider second seller financing transactions that supplement first assumption mortgage transactions.