The TC agreement says "reminders only." So who owns the deadline?

What you're buying is process, not a warranty. A coordinator's product is that somebody whose only job is the calendar is watching the calendar, sends the reminders, collects the signatures, and keeps the file assembled. The disclaimers exist because verifying dates and interpreting contract language starts to look like the licensed activity her agreement is designed to stay away from, and where that line sits varies by state.

On who owns the deadline: the agent and their broker carry the representation duties in most states, and hiring a coordinator does not move that. So the answer to "who's on the hook if inspection is blown" is not the person with the $395 cap. Whether it lands on the agent, the broker, or you depends on your contract and your state, and that's a question for an attorney rather than a forum.

The two edits worth asking for, in order. First, tier the cancellation fee, something like a reduced amount if the file dies before a defined milestone. That's routine and most coordinators will agree. Second, ask for the deliverable to be named: a written date schedule within 48 hours of opening and a weekly status email. That converts "reminders" into something you can tell whether you received.

The indemnity is the clause where amateur redlining goes wrong. If you want it narrowed, have counsel do it, and expect her to say no if it's her standard form. Signing a broad indemnity you don't understand to save $395 of friction is the trade to think about before Monday.

$395 to have one person whose whole job is remembering things sounds cheap to me. In the trades the guy who tracks the schedule is the reason the job finishes.

Ask her what happens on an extension. On slower closings, and land closings run long, the date schedule gets rebuilt two or three times and that's exactly where a reminder-only setup drifts out of sync with reality. If her answer is "I rebuild it and resend within a day of the signed extension," fine. If she doesn't have an answer, the calendar is going to be wrong by week six.

@rena-expert's second edit is the one I'd take. "Reminders" is unmeasurable and a named deliverable isn't. I'd add that I want the schedule in a format I can see, shared doc or portal, rather than delivered as prose in an email I have to search for later.

Slightly lost. If the coordinator isn't checking whether the dates are right, who typed them in the first place, and who checks that person?

@juniper the dates come out of the signed contract, so the contract is the source and the coordinator is transcribing it. The disclaimer means if she transcribes it wrong you can't hand her the consequences. Which is a bit circular, honestly, and I think that's the thing @warrant is annoyed about.

I'd sign it. The clauses that look scary in a $395 services agreement are the ones every vendor puts in every services agreement, and none of them stop her from doing the job well or badly. What tells you whether she's good is the first week: does the schedule arrive, does she answer on a Thursday afternoon. If it's bad, you've lost $395 and you handle your own dates next time.

Different view from @trellis on the cancellation fee, I don't think it's worth a negotiation before Monday.

@bramble the indemnity isn't standard-vendor boilerplate in the same way the liability cap is, and it's the one clause here that can cost multiples of the fee. That's the point in @rena-expert's reply I'd act on. Have someone read it, ask for it narrowed to claims arising from your own acts, and if she refuses, decide with your eyes open. Everything else in that document I'd sign without a second thought.