Forms Updates

01/16/2026

Summer 2026 Forms Updates

Action

As part of our commitment to offering real estate forms that are clear, user-friendly, legally sound, and responsive to industry needs, Oregon REALTORS^® has released library version 2026-1. All of the updated forms are available for preview and for use on platforms.

Form 1.1, 1.1A, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5 Sale Agreements

Extra space provided in several blanks on the Financial Terms section, where appropriate
FinCEN language modified to reflect the fluid nature of the FinCEN real estate report rule after recent lawsuits. New language states, for all intents and purposes, “if this is subject to FinCEN, then this provision applies,” to ensure the form is able to adapt if an injunction reinstitutes the real estate reporting rule in the future.

Form 1.3 Manufactured and Floating Home Sale Agreement

Added “Association” checkbox for parties to note if the property is subject to a manufactured home park or marina park association.

Form 1.9 Invitation to Escalate

Clarified that “net purchase price” includes seller payments of Buyer brokerage fees [e.g. if an offer’s Purchase Price was $100, Buyer offered to pay for the $2 well tests, and buyer agent was being paid $10 by Seller, the “net purchase price” of the offer is $108, representing $100 -$2 for well tests that Seller otherwise would have had to pay, and +$10 for buyer agent compensation that Seller is not normally expected to pay].

Form 2.1 Counteroffer & Form 2.1A Counteroffer onto Oregon REALTORS® Forms

Added ability for Buyer to specify that they are countering a seller offer.

Form 2.5 Repair Addendum

Added additional blank line space for parties to specify the repairs.

Form 2.6 Lead Hazard Addendum

Clarified that the seller’s signature on the form counts as confirmation that the Buyer Agent informed seller of seller’s obligations [as the form informs the seller of the seller’s obligations and is, on a literal level, a document provided by the Buyer Agent to the Seller as a part of the mutual acceptance process]

Form 2.8 Well Addendum & Form 2.9 On site Sewage Addendum

Flexibility added to provisions that require delivery or ordering of tests. Where it previously was always 2 Business Days, it is now an option for 2 days or ___ days.

Form 2.12 Seller’s Obligation to Sell

Included checkbox option requiring seller to explain whether they are seeking replacement property while represented or while unrepresented as that information may change the likelihood of seller success in finding replacement property.
Seller must now notify Buyer when the contingent obligation is met before the deadline [e.g. offer accepted to purchase replacement property]. Until that notice is provided, Buyer now has a right of termination [similar to a contingent right to purchase].

Form 2.15 Release of Contingencies

Added substantial space for “other contingencies” release section and broadened use of “other contingencies” to apply to non-contingency provisions that a buyer wishes to release.

Form 2.24 Insurance Contingency Addendum

New form, creates a contingency for a Buyer that allows the Buyer to back out of the contract before a specified deadline if they have not been able to obtain a certain type and amount of insurance or additional coverages at specific premiums and deductibles.

Form 4.4 Association Addendum

Added quarterly option for how often payment is required for dues, and payments for parking/storage/slip/park spaces

Form 4.4A Delivery and Receipt of Association Documents

All spaces for client initials and reference to client initials next to received documents removed as it was seen as duplicative. Buyer signature on the document carries functionally the same impact as initials next to everything received.

Form 5.3 Notice of Termination

Added options for Contingent Obligation to Sell and Insurance contingency Addendum reflecting 2026-2 changes.

Form 6.1 Commercial Assignment of Lease

Added ability to specify tenant rental payment amount and what day of the month a monthly payment would be due.

Form 9.3 Listing Agreement

Added requirement that Seller must provide a list of “all persons agent placed in contact with Seller” within a 5 day window after expiration or termination in order for agent to invoke the entitlement to compensation after expiration/termination.
Specified that Early Termination Fees are only permitted when the agent is not in breach of the agreement or their agency duties. [numerous consumers notified Association that brokers would point to the Early Termination Fee when client wished to fire agent despite agent being in objective breach of the listing agreement]
Language on Indemnification modified for clarity.
Added space to additional provisions

Form 9.3B Multiple Offer Notice

New form, designed to assist sellers when they receive multiple offers. It notifies the Buyer that seller intends to continue accepting offers and resubmissions until a specific date, but that seller retains the right to act at any time. If seller chooses, they can attach copies of the other offers, and are encouraged to redact personal identifying information on those offers.

Form 9.3C Listing Agreement Addendum

New Form, allows a party to amend the listing agreement and modify the various terms of the listing through pre-drafted change language.

Form 9.4 Buyer Representation Agreement

Early termination fee clause in the Termination section modified to only apply when agent is not in breach of the Agreement while claiming the early termination fee.

Form 9.12A Real Estate Team Additional Names

Space added to permit a team to specify when it utilizes or employes a third-party transaction coordination company to provide transaction coordinators and allows the parties to specify the TC’s name and whether they are licensed.

Form 9.13 Transfer Agreement

New form, designed to comply with the requirements of OAR 863-014-0064 whenever a broker transfers from one brokerage to another. It requires explanation of how the receiving/sending brokerages plan to supervise, handle records, how agency and compensation are handled, and when the agreement goes live. Sending and receiving brokerages will sign it, and clients who are transferred will all sign their own separate appendix that is a part of the agreement [keeping the client’s identity private from other clients. If client just signed a list with theirs and everyone else’s name on it, they’d know who else the agent worked for].

Form 9.13A Appendix A to Transfer Agreement

New form, companion form to Transfer Agreement. Transferring the right to continue working on a listing after moving to a new firm requires the broker get permission from the client. To some degree, the fact that the client is working with the transferring broker is a form of confidential information, so handing each transferring client a list of all a broker’s client names and asking them to sign next to their name was seen as a potential violation of the agent’s duties. Instead, the form ensures that an individualized appendix approval is signed by each client, and all signed approvals can be compiled and provided to the sending and receiving managing principal brokers as a part of the transfer agreement.

Form 10.3 Lead Pamphlet

Updated based on the new language produced by the EPA in 2026.

Form Removed from Library

Form 9.3A Settlement Amendment to Listing Agreement
- The form was produced in early 2024 after the Sitzer/Burnett proposed settlement was released with the purpose of amending existing listing agreements into compliance with the settlement terms. It has been 2 years since that time, all listings from prior to the settlement are presumably closed or terminated, and the form’s usage window has passed.

Changes Not Made But Suggested:

Forms 1.1, 1.1A, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5 Sale Agreements
- Forms should have as much blank line space as possible on the financial terms to enable all sorts of entries.
  - Task force experimented with the form and found that there was sufficient space to describe up to a $1 billion transaction and determined that the visual of lined up blanks was preferable to ragged edge blanks considering the tangible benefit of a larger line was negligible.
- Removal of the FinCEN language entirely now that it has been voided as a matter of law.
  - Task force was concerned that eventual injunction on the Flowers Title Co. case would reinstate the real estate rule and opted for leaving the language in with modifications to make it only conditionally applicable if the injunction occurs/title company requires the report.
- A clear definition of “Delivery” should be added to the forms. Is it “upon receipt by a party” or “upon relinquishment to a mail carrier?”
  - Task force discussion noted that there are clean scenarios where either definition applies materially, but that these are fringe scenarios in the digital world. If you mail a document physically or digitally, it is “sent” as soon as it leaves your control, and it is “received” when it lands in the other person’s mailbox, even if they do not see the message [e.g. leave it in the physical mailbox or gets sent to spam folder]. In areas of Oregon with more spotty internet, there can be curious scenarios where a broker is unable to “receive” an acceptance on their inbox until they reenter cell-tower range, but in nearly all situations the abstract “inbox” or “mailbox” kept on the provider’s server will have received the message already and the individual’s account is simply awaiting the download of the already received document. In effect, an agent has the letter in their mailbox and simply haven’t opened the mailbox yet in those situations. As a result, a strict definition of “upon receipt” invites substantial confusion when an agent airplane mode’s collides with an escalation clause. Equally though, “upon sending” is insufficient because it can result in a person being bound by a contract they have not yet seen. The task force decided those fringe scenarios would be better left to courts and a strict definition would likely invite more confusion and pedantry
- Forms 1.2 & 6.2 Commercial Sale Agreement & Diligence Documents
  - Need a checklist of critical dates for commercial diligence items.
    - Task Force noted that there is a wide range of commercial transactions and the diligence items change for all of them. It results in a document that would be too large to be useful if it was designed to address the breadth of commercial transactions [anything from 5-plex through heavy industrial facility]. With that said, there is some substantial value to creating a timelines summary of the OR residential sale agreement.
  - 5 Repair Addendum
    - There should be a response deadline on the repair addendum, something where I can say “respond within __ days”
      - The task force rejected this on the grounds that the end of the diligence period already provides a firm response deadline. Imposing a moving repair addendum deadline in addition to the diligence period would both deviate from normal practice at present and invite complication about amending repair addendums when repair quotes are delayed.
    - There should be a third option for response. Right now I can just accept or reject, but what about when I want to counteroffer?
      - Task force rejected the idea of adding a “counteroffer” on the repair addendum on the grounds that counteroffering a repair addendum begs the question of whether it is a de novo counter or an “amendment to the previous terms” counter. g. if buyer asks for major roof repairs, but seller counters and their repair addendum states “seller to repaint interior of house,” it’s not clear if that means “seller will repaint interior AND do the roof” or “seller will ONLY repaint the interior.” The current binary process of yes/no ensures that confusion does not occur.
    - 6A Lead Hazard Notice
      - New Form separately providing the “lead hazard notice” REJECTED, Task Force opted to include the notice into the language of the 2.6 Lead Hazard Addendum
    - Form 2.8 & 2.9 Well and Septic Addendums
      - The OREF timelines for ordering tests are 3 days, yours are 2, why not line them up and make it easier for everyone?
        
        Task force found that the termination method was distinctly different between the two form libraries and there was limited reason to change existing timelines.
        Theory behind current 2 day timelines is that the Party could utilize Forms 5.1 or 5.2 Notice of Default to prod the opposite party into compliance. Notices of Default are drafted to give a person a minimum of 3 Business Days to cure the mistake, so the aggregate of the standard 2 business day timeline and the 3 business day default results in most minor breaches being resolved in roughly 1 business week [holidays throw that off slightly].
      - Form 2.15 Release of Contingencies
        
        There should be specific release checkboxes for home park rules, home park approval, onsite sewage and well tests, and review of HOA documents.
        
        Task force noted that these items are not specifically “contingencies,” but are things that a party can choose not to use. To some extent, the release form is meant to be used sparingly for contingencies. The “other” box lets you address all other things that may benefit from a release.
        
        Form 2.16 Seller Occupancy Agreement
        
        Why should the seller have to pay for any appliances that are damaged during their occupancy? It’s not their appliance anymore and should be the Buyer’s responsibility since they are the owner.
        
        Task force noted that the current form requires seller to reset the property to the original condition as it was during the offer. Also noted, the seller is distinctly not a “tenant” under the Residential Landlord Tenant Act, ORS 90, so imposing landlord maintenance and repair obligations on the buyer begins to blur the lines of tenancy and non-tenancy.
        
        Form 5.8 Mutual Termination Agreement
        
        There should be a single consolidated, streamlined form that addresses both termination and earnest money disposition when the parties agree while still preserving a clear pathway for disagreement and dispute resolution. In practice, most transactions terminate with mutual agreement and the current structure requires multiple forms and steps even when everyone agrees, creating unnecessary friction. The current forms are onerous and confusion leading to improper and incomplete execution, clients become frustrated having to sign multiple documents to accomplish what they perceive as a single decision, the extended process makes it difficult to keep clients engaged and responsive on failed transactions, escrow still requires their own disbursement instructions adding another layer, and the additional administrative work delays earnest money disbursement.
        
        REJECTED BY TASK FORCE. Task force noted that termination process in OR Forms is a unique feature of the form that was designed to provide a process that specifically met legal challenges and actively avoided questions of enforceability of the termination document. The unilateral notice document was designed to be a single document that ended the contract without need for the other party’s signature; ORS 696.581 imposes the requirement that escrow get matching instructions before sending out earnest money, making the “response” form a requirement of law rather than contract.
        Also noted that at present does not impose substantial burden on brokering the transaction, because it asks that there be a single additional page response sent by the terminated party. The view of the task force was that the current process does not add more signatures to the process because it is a unilateral termination document, at the end of a termination, the buyer still signs only one document to terminate and the seller signs only one document to respond [or vice versa]. The task force noted that with the new OREF 064 Notice of Unconditional Approval process added in 2026, the OR form “notice of termination and response to termination” format now ends up actually imposing fewer pages of documents and fewer total signatures on the termination process.
        Lastly, noted that the mutual termination process itself imposes confusion about whether the document is effective upon sending or upon mutual agreement. It therefore becomes an issue when a party refuses to sign the mutual termination document. Task force outlined concerns that a mutual termination agreement document would become overused even in situations where the normal notice and response procedure is preferrable.

Stay in the Loop

Sign up to receive the latest updates, news, and exclusive information about our Education & Events, including upcoming workshops, seminars, and special opportunities.

Crowd gathered at a business conference networking event

Summer 2026 Forms Updates

Stay in the Loop

Related Posts