A two paragraph JV addendum asking for 2,500 dollars deserves more terms
Consider a land assignment JV where one partner is the money and the other is the work. Say the deal is 22 acres, seller is an out of state owner who inherited it, contract price 47,500, expected assignment to a repeat builder buyer at about 61,500. The money partner's contribution is 2,500, covering 1,000 earnest, a title search, and a survey sketch, in exchange for 40 percent of the fee, roughly 5,600 if it lands at 61,500. The purchase agreement itself is often fine in these deals: buyer and/or assigns, a 21 day feasibility period, earnest refundable during feasibility and released to seller after. Where these deals tend to fall short is the JV addendum. A two paragraph version that names both parties, states the contribution, splits fees 60/40 after reimbursement, and promises good faith leaves out who holds the underlying contract, what happens if the working partner assigns it and does not pay, what happens if the deal dies after earnest goes hard, and who decides whether to accept a lower price. A money partner new to this kind of document, though experienced with documents generally, is right to treat those as material gaps rather than boilerplate. Asking for the missing terms in writing before funding is the standard move, not an overcautious one, and it rarely reads as difficult when framed as protecting both sides equally.
