Final answer:
Joshua's act of holding onto the earnest money check without depositing it due to the suspicion that the purchase contract might not be finalized is questionably compliant. Real estate professionals are obligated to follow specific protocols regarding earnest money, which typically involve timely depositing of such funds.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question revolves around whether Joshua's action to hold on to the earnest money check without depositing it, because he anticipated the purchase contract might fall through, is compliant or not.
The duty of a real estate professional is to handle earnest money deposits in a manner that is in accordance with their fiduciary responsibilities and state laws, which generally require depositing the check within a specified timeframe.
If the professional suspects a transaction may not be completed, they should still follow the standard procedures unless a written agreement or exceptional circumstance dictates otherwise. It appears Joshua's action to hold onto the check could raise questions about whether he complied with those regulations.
Situations depicted in various scenarios, such as a refusal to quit premises, difficulties in contract enforcement, or a change of decision due to personal circumstances, all point to the complexities involved in managing contracts and transactions.
Decisions based on forebodings or expectations, rather than on legal and procedural guidelines, can jeopardize the integrity of a transaction and could potentially result in legal and ethical consequences for the involved parties.