Extract every condition and its expiry from the agreement at the moment it is signed, put each one in a register with a named owner and a reminder schedule, and count backwards from the deadline rather than forwards from today. Software is very good at the arithmetic and the nagging. What it must never do is decide that a condition is satisfied, or send the waiver — a waiver is the client’s decision, made on advice, and it converts a conditional deal into a binding one.
Key takeaways
Missed condition dates are rarely a knowledge problem. Everyone involved knows the deadline exists. They are a handoff problem: the date lives in a PDF, the work lives with a lender or an inspector, and the reminder lives in someone’s head. A register fixes the handoff by making the date an object that other systems can act on.
The register should be created the moment the agreement is firm on its face, not the next morning. Every conditional clause becomes a row: what has to happen, by when, who is responsible for making it happen, who has to be told, and how the notice must be delivered. Those fields all come out of the agreement itself, which is why this step belongs immediately after reading the agreement of purchase and sale.
What each row needs
The condition, quoted. Not paraphrased. Paraphrase is where the meaning drifts.
The expiry, as a date and a time. Including whatever the agreement says about how days are counted.
The dependency. A financing condition depends on a lender; a status certificate condition depends on a condominium corporation. The dependency sets the lead time.
The owner. One named person, never a team address.
The delivery method. How a waiver or notice of fulfilment has to reach the other side under the agreement.
The escalation. Who is told if the owner does not respond, and at what point.
A single reminder the day before every deadline is close to useless, because the deadlines are not the same shape. A home inspection can often be arranged inside a few days. A lender’s written commitment cannot be conjured on a Friday afternoon. Our sister firm’s note on how many days to allow for a financing condition in Ontario explains why buyers routinely underestimate this, and its answer on what a financing condition actually protects a buyer from is the version to give a client who is being pushed to shorten one.
So set the reminder schedule from the dependency, not the calendar. A useful default is three touches: one when there is still enough time to start the underlying work over, one when there is enough time to complete it, and one when the only remaining option is to ask for an extension. The last of those should also alert someone other than the file owner.
The failure mode a calendar cannot see is a waiver that was signed in time and delivered the wrong way. Agreements specify how notices are given and to whom, and the register row should carry that instruction, so the reminder that fires says “deliver by the method in clause X to the named address” rather than “waiver due”. The consequences of getting this wrong are not administrative. Our sister firm’s guide to conditions, waivers and bully offers in Ontario sets out the position bluntly: waiving turns the offer into a firm, binding contract with no built-in exit, there is no general cooling-off period for resale homes in Ontario, and once firm a buyer who walks risks the deposit and a claim for the seller’s further losses. The related answer on waiving a financing condition and then not getting the mortgage is worth sending to any buyer competing in a multiple-offer situation.
It stops at the signature. A tool can prepare the waiver document, populate it, remind the client that a decision is due, and record the moment it was delivered. It cannot form the view that the condition has been satisfied, and it cannot advise the client on whether to waive. RECO’s professional-conduct bulletin defines conscientious service as exercising care in doing what you are supposed to do and doing it thoroughly and correctly — being reliable, holding yourself accountable, and demonstrating attention to every aspect of the service, and adds an obligation that automation makes easy to forget: it is not enough to provide information; the agent must take steps to satisfy themselves that the client understands it and how it might affect their decisions. A reminder email is not that conversation.
Both national and provincial guidance land in the same place. BCFSA tells B.C. licensees that using AI does not exempt them from their legal and ethical obligations and that they remain fully accountable, and CREA advises REALTORS® to require human review and verification, and to exercise caution using AI for tasks that touch legal advice. A waiver decision is squarely in that category.
The following is illustrative — a composite of how the register is usually assembled, not a measured result.
A firm-on-Tuesday deal carries three conditions: financing, inspection, and a status certificate review. At signing, the extraction step writes three rows. Financing gets a lead time set by the lender’s stated turnaround plus two business days; inspection gets a lead time set by the inspector’s next available slot; the status certificate row is created with its clock starting only when the certificate is actually received, with a separate reminder chasing the condominium corporation in the meantime.
On the financing row, the first reminder goes to the agent and copies nobody. The second goes to the agent and the brokerage’s transaction coordinator. The third, at the point where an extension is the only remaining move, goes to the broker of record as well. Each reminder carries the quoted clause and the delivery instruction, not just the date.
On the day the inspection condition is due, the client calls with a question about a finding. The waiver is not sent because a reminder fired. It is sent after the conversation, by a person, once the client has said what they want to do.
No. A lender confirming financing and a client deciding to waive are two different events, and only the second one binds the client. Automate the preparation and the prompt; keep the send behind a human action. If the client is unreachable as the deadline approaches, that is an extension conversation, not a default.
Usually yes, with care about content. A factual message about a transaction the client has already entered into sits within the exception in CASL for messages that facilitate, complete or confirm a commercial transaction the recipient previously agreed to enter into, but the identification and unsubscribe requirements in that section still apply, and the contact information given has to stay valid for at least 60 days after the message is sent. Keep transaction updates separate from marketing so the distinction stays clean; the mechanics are covered in keeping clients updated through closing.
Then you have two registers that must reference each other, because the second property’s conditions gate the first property’s deadline. Model the dependency explicitly rather than trusting anyone to remember it, and give the linked row the earlier of the two escalation points.
The dates in the register come from the agreement itself, and the documents the conditions depend on are chased through a structured document request.
A 30-minute call is enough to tell you whether AI pays for itself here.
