Threatening letter from unsuccesful buyer

cloudninety

Leaseholder49 wrote: »

I don't think there's any problem with that part of it - I think it's this element which is causing the most lack of sympathy for OP:

"We did asked the EA not to let the second buyers know until we had exchanged contracts with the first buyer incase something went wrong."

i.e. seems as though OP was deliberately stringing failed buyer along, rather than just saying 'sorry, we've accepted a better offer'.

I agree with you Leaseholder49; deliberately withholding that information from the second buyers was in my estimation morally wrong.

Milliewilly

cloudninety wrote: »

I agree with you Leaseholder49; deliberately withholding that information from the second buyers was in my estimation morally wrong.

But we need more information - was the OP sending back the fixtures and fittings form SPIF form etc etc to the £10K less buyer and letting them think the house was theirs and the conveyancing was proceeding or did they just get to the survey stage?

The OP did tell them the house would be kept on the market.

If there had only been a flow of paperwork from the £10K less buyers in one direction then I would only feel a little guilty as the conveyancing would not have been able to proceed very far, I would however have paid their costs when the EA asked.

If the OP has let the conveyancing proceed in a 'contract race' then no that is unnaceptable and he should compensate them - but not to the tune of £5K.

keith969

Milliewilly wrote: »

I agree the OP has been a bit sneaky but thats the process and who on here would take the moral high ground and go with a buyer who may not even proceed to completion over someone offering to exchange there and then with a £10K higher offer?

That's not the point though is it - they deliberately misled their 2nd buyer. They could have said "we have a higher offer now and intend to proceed with it". Instead they acted in bad faith.

Milliewilly

keith969 wrote: »

That's not the point though is it - they deliberately misled their 2nd buyer. They could have said "we have a higher offer now and intend to proceed with it". Instead they acted in bad faith.

Agreed not right but not illegal.

new_home_owner_3

They may have had to pay a big fee up front for the morgtage, i personally think the person is bang out of order, you never even told them before exchanging, the least you should do is pay their exspenses and if they are out of pocket by 5000 pounds because you have treated them like !!!!!!, you deserve all you get.

House buying is like a business transaction, but if i agree something i try to keep my word, im glad theyve found out where you lived, and im sure if you dont pay their expsenses, if it was me i would be sleeping with one eye open every night, i hope you enjoy your new house.....

I would ask for proof of what they paid and i would feel obliged to pay it but thats me and i wouldnt have backdoored someone and treat them like you did.

People will tell you, house buying and selling, you can treat people like dirt, but like someone said before how would you have felt?

My motto is treat how you like to br treated and you sneaky xxxxx even told the estate agent not to say anything what was you thinking, your just scum bags.

pawpurrs

RX-78 wrote: »

I may be wrong but I'm sure your solicitor is leagally obliged to inform both purchaser that they are in a contract race if you accept more than one offer

http://www.practicalconveyancing.co.uk/content/view/10334/1129/

Thats not the same as YOU having to tell them - I'm not sure about the law surrounding disclosure on your part. Perhaps you should ask you solicitor why he didn't advise you to disclose the information?

Thats correct, By law society guidelines a soliceter must inform any party that there has been another contract issued, your soliceter acted wrongly, and could be in trouble, if I was the buyer, I would claim my costs against the solciceter.
So its not just morally wrong, its also not supposed to be done. Of course you can have a contracts race, but both partys have to be aware.
When I last sold, I had a buyer that offered lower than I wanted, but said he was happy for me to keep the property on the market and if some one else came along that offered more so be it, in the end he had trouble with money laundering (dont ask) but when another buyer came along, and the buyer was still struggling with the money laundering issues, I issued another contract, but my soliceter refused untill either the first contract was withdrawn or the new buyer was aware of that there was another contract out which was looking doubtfull.

lellow_lorry

This happened to my parents and cost them 1000's due to survey, legal and mortgage application fee.
An awful postition to put someone in and through. Pretty selfish but you got to live with it. Nothing they can do however, but do not reply to any letters as this will just add fuel to an upset buyer. The decent thing should have been to inform them of a possible contract race or slow their survey up. All i can say is if you were in their position how would feel.

new_home_owner_3

Eton_Rifle wrote: »

I assume they've picked the £5000 figure because they intend to use the small claims track, and will probably apply online.

i wouldnt worry about that, they wont be getting any money from the other person if they go down the legal route.

I think if they have just picked a figure out the air, i would tell them to do one, ask for proof of costs.

And then do the right thing, youve mad a extra 10,000 and i suspect the cost's they have really lost are knowhere near that much, but they are trying to take half of what you made extra.

pinkshoes

So basically, buyer 1 was a nightmare, messed you around for months.

In Jan 2010, you had to put it back on the market, and had an offer from buyer 2. You told buyer 2 you were keeping it on the market, so (amazingly!) they agreed to this, and moved as fast as they could to make sure you could exchange ASAP. In short, a dream buyer.

Then, buyer 1 comes back, and offers £10k more, so without even giving nice buyer 2 the chance to match the offer, or even have the decency to notify them of a second person in the race, you just go ahead and sell to buyer 1, who had previously treated you like cr*p.

Legally, you don't owe them a penny, but morally, if you don't refund buyer 2's survey costs and genuine expenses, then you are a cold hearted tw*t, and I really hope that one day someone else treats you with equal disrespect. Send a polite letter back saying you will refund their costs, and could they send them a detailed list of costs with receipts.

Treat others as you would expect them to treat you.

Ditch_Crawler

I have posted on here before that the property market operates to a set of rules and conventions which has its roots in the Middle Ages.

The twin concepts of 'consumer rights' and 'fair trading' have no meaning in the property market, despite the fact that property ownership in the 21st century is mostly to do with 'consumerism' and almost nothing to with 'feudalism'.

Car Dealers have taken the place of Horse Traders, and have to operate in 21st century conditions - it is time for House Buying to become as straightforward as Car Buying, but there is little chance of that happening because there are too many people making too much money out of meaningless smallprint.

DC