seller doesn't want to use a lawyer

[Karen F.]

I'm buying a small apartment building.  The owner is a realtor.  Owner says they don't want to use an attorney, that they will represent themselves.  Owner is giving some seller financing.  I'm uncomfortable with this, so is my attorney.  He says that seller must have representation.  Is it legal in CT for seller who is not an attorney to represent self for a closing, and for a seller's financing loan?

[Ned Carey]

@Karen F. I am not an attorney so the following is simply my laypersons opinion. You should have an attorney and it should be settled by a title company with title insurance. As long as the company settling the transaction does not care, I don't see any problem whatsoever. 

Personally I wouldn't give a damn if the seller had an attorney. This is a commercial transaction. I find it hard to believe that CT would require the seller to have an attorney, nor to have any sympathy for a seller who chose not to use one, if there is a dispute. 

If my attorney was not smart enough to put in disclaimers that the seller chose not to use an attorney or similar language to cover the issue I would be looking for a new attorney. 

I would point blank ask the attorney to quote me the code requiring it.  I find that hard to believe it is true. 

I think the seller is a fool for not wanting an attorney. However if the roles were reversed, I would feel quite insulted that you feel, I as a seller can't make my own choices.