Pulling out of house purchases at the last minute

Sweetcaz_2

Pulled out to add a garage, that is the stupidest reason I have heard for a long time!!

Cannot see how that would add much if any value.

Like OP said is their lose and I am also a big believer in things happening for a reason. I got gazumped on a property once (only by £500 it turned out!!) but ended up getting a better house in the end so it worked out ok.

Chin up, a better house must be out there and hopefully you will think it was worth it in the end.

edgex

i bet their estate agent isnt too happy about it either, their commission has just disappeared


it is time the process was changed:
once the vendor has agreed to start selling to a particular buyer, both parties should have to sign to say that they will be responsible for the other parties reasonable costs if they are the ones to pull out for no good reason

& building a garage isnt a good reason
surely its something that takes thinking & planning, & is something youd do for yourself, not on the offchance that a buyer might want what youve just built

jamief

LandyAndy wrote: »

Unfortunately the Scottish system has one huge, overriding disadvantage in that, to enjoy its benefits, you have to live in Scotland.

That is clearly a benefit, not a disadvantage.

Milliewilly

jamief wrote: »

No, they certainly don't.

The advent of the Home Report has put paid to this - the vendor must pay for the survey before putting the house on the market.

In fact we purchased a house (moved in last week) and didn't have to pay a penny for surveys or valuations because the vendor already had via the Home Report.

Also, the Scottish system is far superior in that it becomes legally binding much earlier (when missives are concluded, over 4-6 weeks before the date of entry). This way, if the vendor pulls out, they are financially liable, whereas darn sarf you lot don't know whether it'll go through until the 11th hour.

I agree things should be binding earlier but I don't agree with the blind bidding involved in 'offers over'

ninky_2

can't some canny injury lawyers put themselves to some use and find a way of suing vendors who do this? if you give someone whiplash by hitting the back of the car you have to pay compensation (or at least your insurance does), but if you willfully put your house up for sale, allow someone to spend time and money investing towards buying it and then just change your mind you walk away scott free. seems a tad unfair to say the least.

tek-monkey

Making the vendor have the survey done would save time and money, as it would only need doing once. Obviously the house prices would rise a touch to reflect this, but surely thats better than several people all paying surveyors for the same house?

jamief

Milliewilly wrote: »

I agree things should be binding earlier but I don't agree with the blind bidding involved in 'offers over'

Offers over, whilst still appearing on schedules, is pretty much dead. When buying 3 years ago, almost every house went to a closing date. When buying this year, the house was "offers over" but we offered £5k under the price which was accepted. Generally "offers over" has been replaced by fixed price here.

ernie-money

See, I knew people on here would have loads of clever ideas of way of improving the system! Now, how do we go about getting them into Downing Street...?!?

axomoxia

tek-monkey wrote: »

Making the vendor have the survey done would save time and money, as it would only need doing once. Obviously the house prices would rise a touch to reflect this, but surely thats better than several people all paying surveyors for the same house?

I'd want a surveyor that is answerable to _me_ when I'm buying somewhere.... Otherwise there's nothing to stop a vendor "surveyor shopping" till they get the result they want, possibly one that misses the terminal subsidence, hidden toxic waste dump in the back garden and unusally extensive collection of woodboring insects.....

tek-monkey

If the surveyor was responsible to the property, not the person, this would not be an issue.