Threatening letter from unsuccesful buyer

moggylover

Londonsu wrote: »

I really hope that none of you find yourselves in the same position as me then maybe you will stop being holier than thou,


I was sent a very nasty letter which i didnt go into too much detail about it but it was nasty and threatening and in any other circumstances I would have called the police, but havent and I wont

as for asking for pity how have I done that, you all jumped to the conclusion that I was some greedy person who made a killing out of selling my flat and refused to help some poor FTB, I have explained that the situation is different to your conclusions and I have explained why, the fact that most of you cannot grasp the concept of someone facing a lifetime of no work and no money coming in is due to the fact I suspect that a lot of you have never been in my position and hopefully never will.

And I am sure that a lot of people can live on 1.5 a month but a mortgage is not the only out goings a person has as well you know

I am not going to attempt to explain my actions only to say again that I will write a polite letter explaining that I cant afford to give them a good will gesture at this time, should I or my Husband get jobs and we have monery coming in then I will give them something towards it

If you wish to call me any more names please feel free me, I am going to bed

I'm 52, I have two children and no mortgage. We live VERY comfortably on less than £18K per annum net despite being disabled and having some extra expenses caused by this. Unless of course your necessary expenditure includes a cruise for Christmas, and a sunshine holiday or two per annum;).

This is MSE, we know what reasonable expenses can be expected from life and your sob story doesn't cut it at all.

RX-78

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

I am having difficulty following the arguments here.

1 There is no contract race unless both parties have been issued with contracts, in which case they must both be informed of this - but that was not the case here, so the solicitor has done nothing wrong.

2 Either party is free to pull out of a house sale/purchase right up until contracts are exchanged. This results in all sorts of gazumping and gazundering, and leads sellers to do what they think is best for them in order to achieve a sale, especially in the current market where a sale can drop through at any time. In this case the seller did nothing wrong in law, and in my view it is unreasonable to impose a moral argument on a financial transaction.

3 Despite the above comments, I really cannot understand why OP decided to publish what happened on a public forum - it seems to me that is just inviting people to have a pop!!

Obviously as a retired lawyer, you have more understanding of the law than I have. But my understanding of contract race was;

1. When more than one offer is accepted.
2. Verbal acceptance (though more difficult to prove) has just as much weight as written acceptance
3. Law society's regulation stipulates the seller's conveyancer has to inform the client & the buyer's solicitor the seller has accepted more than one offer

And from OP's post she has clearly accepted more than one offer.

zzzLazyDaisy

RX-78 wrote: »

Obviously as a retired lawyer, you have more understanding of the law than I have. But my understanding of contract race was;

1. When more than one offer is accepted.
2. Verbal acceptance (though more difficult to prove) has just as much weight as written acceptance
3. Law society's regulation stipulates the seller's conveyancer has to inform the client & the buyer's solicitor the seller has accepted more than one offer

And from OP's post she has clearly accepted more than one offer.

I think you must be in Scotland, where the conveyancing process is certainly different, and you may well be correct (I don't know enough about Scottish jurisdiction to be able to comment)

However I have understood that OP is in England - if I am right, then my comments above still stand. There is no binding contract until contracts have been exchanged, and there is no contract race unless contracts have been sent out to two (or more) parties.

Milliewilly

new_home_owner wrote: »

I just hope the people who are buying your house gazuder, i would laugh my t!ts off, but thats all about the buying house game hey???;):cool:

We was gazumped but at least we was told about it, and the other persons offer was 15000 pound more than ours, we wouldnt have gone knowhere near that much more we offered 180,000 house was on for 200,000 pound and the other people offered 195,000.

I even know the people who gazumped us, i dont blame them or the buyer, has they told us and we could have offered more if we wanted to, but i wasnt prepared to play them games.

One day ill have great pleasure in telling the buyers who gazumped us they could have got it 15000 pound cheaper, i did think they would have offered more and then knocked the price down after the survey, but ive seen the land registry and they actually have paid the extra 15000 pound we offered.

Nice comment..... dreadful spelling and grammar says a lot.

Of course they paid the extra £15K thats why the sale proceeded. How can you conclude they could have got the house £15K cheaper when your offer was already on the table (for you to be gazumped)? They would have had to have paid more than £180K to win the house so not £15K cheaper at all.

However, if I get gazundered then that's part of the process. I will either stop the sale (not being dependant on it to buy another property) or renegotiate depending on the gazunderer's new price. I have already been stung for £500 because of one buyer but i'm not chasing them for it.

Milliewilly

RX-78 wrote: »

I think this thread highlights the great problem we have as a ntion. On one hand we have money clenching materiaristic americanized "rights" people, and on the other we still have old British live for the country "duty to the society" people.

I'm not saying which is better but it is clear which kind of people are causign social problems in this country.

p.s. I find it interesting those in support of OP seems to be deliverately ignoring the posts pointing out the fact OP did not tell the FTB abut accepting another offer

I have addressed the last point several times. Legally no obligation. Morally - possibly.

moggylover

Milliewilly wrote: »

Nice comment..... dreadful spelling and grammar says a lot.

Of course they paid the extra £15K thats why the sale proceeded. How can you conclude they could have got the house £15K cheaper when your offer was already on the table (for you to be gazumped)? They would have had to have paid more than £180K to win the house so not £15K cheaper at all.

However, if I get gazundered then that's part of the process. I will either stop the sale (not being dependant on it to buy another property) or renegotiate depending on the gazunderer's new price. I have already been stung for £500 because of one buyer but i'm not chasing them for it.

What your post says to me is that you may have the education, the grammar and the spelling: what you seem to lack is the decency, moral standards and ethics of the Op at whom you decided to have a pop:D

Perhaps the education allows us to better water our morals down because we can count the pounds in our pocket more easily and do not count any measure of moral fibre as being worth their weight in gold;)

Some things in this life may be legal, they may even be "the way it is": that does not always make them admirable at all:(

RX-78

Milliewilly wrote: »

I have addressed the last point several times. Legally no obligation. Morally - possibly.

Millie, you have acknowledged other posters pointing that out. But you keep on coming back to how both parties can legally pull out at any time etc - I dont think anyone here is contesting that point (have you seen any post that said the OP cannot pull out of the deal?), yet you & many others who wants to defend OP seems to be stuck on that point.

The point many of us that oppose the OP stated are;

1. The FTB were NOT informed of contract race - hence they had no chance of re-negotiating or pulling out of the purchase
2. The OP specifically told EA not to inform the FTB to use them as back up knowing very well the cost they will incur. This is morally wrong.
3. There is nothing wrong with putting a lower offer or accepting a higher offer.

Hence my comment about "ignoring" these points.

dander

Milliewilly wrote: »

Nice comment..... dreadful spelling and grammar says a lot.

Wow. I suppose that kind of comment proves that mean people are mean through and through, not just on the big things.

moggylover

dander wrote: »

Milliewilly wrote: »

Nice comment..... dreadful spelling and grammar says a lot.

Wow. I suppose that kind of comment proves that mean people are mean through and through, not just on the big things.

Lol! Excellent point:rotfl:

terryw

RX-78 wrote: »

<Loads of snips>
THIS IS MORALLY WRONG

.

Apologies, RX, for snipping your post.

The four words above stated by you sum up this situation with the minimum of words.