Putting an offer on a SSTC house

Soubrette

Fly_Baby wrote: »

True.

But in this case I am struggling to understand how something that's perceived very immoral by many, can still be perfectly legal.

Legal does not equal moral although there can be an overlap.

There are lots of things that many people think are immoral but are legal,

I'm sure there are some things that many people think are at least morally neutrally but are illegal.

Stop looking for excuses to do something a bit !!!!!! - it's not illegal so if you want to do it - then do it.

Don't pretend it's ok from a moral point of view though.

googler

Benji_Brown wrote: »

There are no rules as to when you can and cannot make an offer.

There should be.

If there were either a law prohibiting submission of offers on SSTC property, or if offers were only submitted by solicitors, and the law society had a code of practice preventing their members from doing so until the previous offer had been rescinded, wouldn't that improve matters?

Fly_Baby

Thanks soubrette, that's a useful perspective.

I did not come here to ask whether it's OK to screw whoever or not - of course, that's a personal thing to decide.

My question was - is it really screwing? If both buyer and seller can pull out at any point without explaining a reason, if some sellers continue marketing the property after accepting the offer? When an EA calls a potential buyer and tells them that they got another offer and do you want to up yours? Is vendor happy to authorise this approach in order to get more money? Does it mean that they all are potentially happy to screw each other if that benefits them? And entitled to do so by law - hence it's not really screwing, just a tough market?

Soubrette

Fly_Baby wrote: »

Thanks soubrette, that's a useful perspective.

I did not come here to ask whether it's OK to screw whoever or not - of course, that's a personal thing to decide.

My question was - is it really screwing? If both buyer and seller can pull out at any point without explaining a reason, if some sellers continue marketing the property after accepting the offer? When an EA calls a potential buyer and tells them that they got another offer and do you want to up yours? Is vendor happy to authorise this approach in order to get more money? Does it mean that they all are potentially happy to screw each other if that benefits them? And entitled to do so by law - hence it's not really screwing, just a tough market?

It's screwing people over because it's a tough market

Some people will and some people won't. You don't know what the buyers in your scenario are like until you make contact with them.

They might bite your hand off your offer, they might refuse it but bear you in mind if their current sale falls through, they might tell the EA that they never want to sell to you.

Who knows, everyone has a different standard of morals.

Soubrette

On the question of whether it is screwing over a buyer to gazump them.

My thoughts are:
a) House buying is a stressful and long winded purchase so to have found a house and then lose through no fault of your own will be upsetting.
b) Time spent putting things in motion will be lost.
b) As soon as you have your offer accepted, most buyers will start having to pay out for solicitors fees, surveys etc so money will be lost.

So gazundering costs a buyer in emotion, time and money.

It would be hard for me to say that wasn't screwing someone over.

googler

Fly_Baby wrote: »

But in this case I am struggling to understand how something that's perceived very immoral by many, can still be perfectly legal.

Because for some reason, the house buying and selling legal framework in England and Wales developed this way. It's different in Scotland.

E&W submit offers verbally at first, later in writing, and as you've seen here, nobody can stop you offering on a house that's almost sold to someone else, and the transaction seems to be almost unregulated.

In Scotland, offers are submitted in writing by solicitors acting for buyers. The offer letter forms part of the contract between the two parties. Further letters between the solicitors on each side clarify the contract. There's standard forms of the contract set down by the law society.

Whilst I'm not sure there's actually any legal impediment to a second solicitor making an offer where another's has previously been accepted, my impression is that the second solicitor will refuse to do so until the first offer has been rejected.

If E&W had adopted the same principle, you wouldn't be asking here.

Fly_Baby

Soubrette wrote: »

They might bite your hand off your offer, they might refuse it but bear you in mind if their current sale falls through, they might tell the EA that they never want to sell to you.

Aren't you a little exaggerating here? I know that I would be upset if something like that happened to me as a buyer. But as a seller, if I had a sale going through and then had another person come and say that they like my house so much they can pay over the asking price if I am happy to consider new offers (with the last one accepted just three weeks ago), then I would have two thoughts:

1. Such a shame I didn't price my house higher - it is obvously worth more!
2. The sale is going through so I think I'll proceed with it but must make sure to ask the EA to contact these people in case my buyer pulls out, and have a ready-made buyer.

I don't think I would be offended or scandalised by people who fell in love with my property and have come to offer me more money for it! (not to mention people who are chain-free, with MIP and proceedable immediately and lovely persons at that). I might refuse but would not think bad of them, maybe sorry that they missed it.

honey9

I would be furious if this was done to me. If it's SSTC the buyers are likely to have paid out for survey, searches etc. So you missed out on this one - tough. Something else will come up that won't be halfway through the process.

Pepzofio

Fly_Baby wrote: »

I don't think I would be offended or scandalised by people who fell in love with my property and have come to offer me more money for it! (not to mention people who are chain-free, with MIP and proceedable immediately and lovely persons at that). I might refuse but would not think bad of them, maybe sorry that they missed it.

You might not be, but then you are seriously contemplating gazumping someone! I know for a fact my dad would never accept a gazumper's offer, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he refused to sell to them at a later date.

Soubrette

Pepzofio wrote: »

You might not be, but then you are seriously contemplating gazumping someone! I know for a fact my dad would never accept a gazumper's offer, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he refused to sell to them at a later date.

Here's two of us.

I'd never sell to someone who offered to gazump someone else. Housebuying is stressful and risky and involves a certain amount of trust.

However, if it's any consolation to the OP I feel we'd probably be in the minority.

However, I also think most people wouldn't automatically accept the higher offer either.