Several readers suggested a topic on selling a home. "Are there any moral implications for selling your home at the top to someone who can’t afford it? Are there any moral implications for selling your home at the top to someone who can afford it?"

"Did you warn the person you sold your house to about the housing bubble or the disadvantages of too much leverage? My scenario is not that the buyer is not some flipper, but is a younger couple with kids who were scared by the rising costs of RE and bought."

A reply, "It is your duty to sell to the least qualified buyer. Why wouldn’t you want to be the smartest person at the table?"

Another, "The very fact that you are willing to sell a house for X number of dollars shows that you believe X dollars is worth more than the house, any analysis beyond this is the responsibility of the buyer.'

A perspective from Australia, "Why do you need to know? In 5 transactions outside my own family, I’ve only once met the people I’ve either bought from or sold to. Things might be different in the US, but in Australia the Real Estate Agents make sure the sellers are absent when they conduct open houses."

"The one time I did meet the buyers. Now this was in 1992, which was in my (correct) opinion indeed a market peak in my area. So did I feel guilty? Not at all; the young couple were burningly eager to buy in that specific area for family reasons, and had in fact been outbid at above my selling price twice in the previous fortnight."

Another looked at the time-frame. "I don’t know how to answer this. I would have felt HORRIBLE to sell to an underqualified buyer in 2003 when I really felt the market was going to collapse. I would have cost them two years of incredible gains. So was I moral or not?"

"As a buyer I really don’t think it’s the seller’s right to know anything about me except whether my offer is legit or not. As a seller I don’t want to know anything but can the person keep the contract."

"I’m a bleeding heart who paid too much for my last two houses because I wanted to help out the sellers. And I know that if a young couple like the one described tried to buy a house from me now I would try to discourage them, just for sound financial reasons if nothing else."

"There’s no easy answer. I’m not sure it’s even legal to refuse to sell to a qualified buyer no matter how moral the reasons. On the other hand, if I owned a house right now it would be priced to move and even 10% below comps someone is going to get screwed somehow. Guess that makes me a happy renter!"

Another points to the anonymity, "Maybe why we have 'arm’s-length transactions,' Has a particularly ugly ring to it now, don’t you think? Is anyone in charge? Does anyone really care? You do, I do, my wife does, most of us on this blog do. Must we mandate education in home economics or finance in high school? Maybe not a bad place to start."

Another said, "How many of us in a selling position nowadays would ask that the squirrels be cared for, right to approve paint colors, etc.? Presently, IMHO, sellers are lucky to get out at a reasonable price including roof and carpet or flooring allowances, and covering closing costs. If they were a young couple with kids, I’d probably advise them to rent for a while."

One had a short answer, "For peace of mind, let them know you are selling because, 'in your opinion,' prices are heading south…from that point, it’s their responsibility."