EA keeps sending people who haven't sold yet

Fay

Thanks again guys, I have been in to see the EA today and decided not to ask them to restrict the viewings. The guy who viewed our house the other night was actually in there, he said that the third bedroom was too small, which is fine. However, when he viewed he said 'oh this is a good size room for my study'...guess he just needed to think of a reason for feedback.

loveandlight

I think when selling a house, it is important to be open minded and positive about all viewings, regardless of whether the people viewing are sold or not.

I used to be annoyed at our agents for sending people around who were not in a position to proceed although they always asked us first.

However it turned out to be a really good way of finding our buyers. We have just sold our house to a couple who, when they first viewed our house, did not even have their own house on the market. They loved our house so much they immediately put their own house on the market and found a buyer for their house a lot quicker than we did, whilst ours was still for sale. Because they had sold their house, to get our house, they always remained rock solid in buying our house, regardless of whatever problems cropped up whilst the sales were going through ( there were a lot of them! ) So in future, I will always show people around and not take much notice of whether they are sold or not.

Pal

If I read your post properly, didn't you start viewing other houses before having sold your own?

EdInvestor

O/T query for Fay in light of the debate we are having on this thread:


Would you have put your house on the market if you had had to spend 600 quid plus on a "Home Information Pack" first?

Fay

Pal wrote:

If I read your post properly, didn't you start viewing other houses before having sold your own?

Yup you're totally right, we saw the one house and went for a viewing on it. We put our house on the market the same day because of liking that and we were very open with the EA and the vendor. (EDIT: forgot to say that we also know the people selling the house)

I found out today from our agents that they are using our house as a way to get new properties; e.g. people are saying 'we might be selling do you have any properties in X location and they are saying yup we have a lovely one (ours) but you can only view if you have a valuation from us'...doesn't seem fair does it.

Fay

EdInvestor wrote:

O/T query for Fay in light of the debate we are having on this thread:


Would you have put your house on the market if you had had to spend 600 quid plus on a "Home Information Pack" first?

Do you know, I would have because as a buyer myself I would love to have someone else get the surveys and searches for me to see before hand. I have nothing to hide with my property, would love to sell it but its no heart ache if it doesn't sell, so I would have no reason not to get one. Although I don't know if I would fancy forking out the money, I guess if the surveys and searches on my next property had already been done it would even it out...thats if they would stand for a mortgage company, or would they want you to comission your own?

EdInvestor

The lenders have said they wouldn't accept the vendor's HIP, the buyer would have to get a separate one done and pay for it.

Fay

EdInvestor wrote:

The lenders have said they wouldn't accept the vendor's HIP, the buyer would have to get a separate one done and pay for it.

In that case (and I have to say that I haven't looked into this at all) it seems a total waste of time doesn't it? Yup the buyers benefit from seeing a survey first, but what does the seller get out of it...just another fee to add to the amount we already have to pay to sell our house.

Ian_W

EdInvestor wrote: The lenders have said they wouldn't accept the vendor's HIP, the buyer would have to get a separate one done and pay for it.

But it doesn't go live until June 2007, by which time I would be very surprised if lenders don't accept the HIP as indicating the condition of the property they're lending on and do a drive by/computerised valuation at a much lower cost than the present £2/300.

I thought you'd been reading the thread and understood that was a distict possibility? Or was simply a case of ask a loaded question to get the answer you want.

BobProperty

Ian_W wrote:

But it doesn't go live until June 2007, by which time I would be very surprised if lenders don't accept the HIP as indicating the condition of the property they're lending on and do a drive by/computerised valuation at a much lower cost than the present £2/300.

I thought you'd been reading the thread and understood that was a distict possibility? Or was simply a case of ask a loaded question to get the answer you want.

Ian, you're being very misceivious.(where's the spell checker?) The lender won't accept a HIP valuation as the seller has paid for it. Therefore no contractual duty of care. If they (HIP Inspectors) are going to give valuations, 1 they haven't been trained to do so and 2 that will take a lot of work off surveyors. And hence my constant asking for any HIP inspector to tell what their liability insurance is going to cost them.
And again where does the HIP come into it, if a lender wishes to change their valuation methodology? And where's the money saving? Seller pays £800 so that buyer's lender can save £100-£200 on a valuation.