Going Crazy with our Buyer!!!

Poppit

betmunch wrote: »

Can I just ask:

If you believe the funds were never in place, why didnt your EA pick this up?

Its one thing to gazunder, but a whole other thing to proceed with a sale when the miney is not even available. The EA has a duty to the Vendor to make sure the Buyer is in a position to proceed. The Corporate EA's will require a buyer to prove they have mortgage plus deposit to cover the total value of the offer, if they dont prove this they will recomend to the Vendor that they continue to market the property.

What did you EA do with regards to checking the financial situation of your buyer?

No idea how the EA did checks on our buyer. We were told when they made their original offer, they were OK and that their paperwork was all in order.

Poppit

We gave our buyer 48 hours and still nothing. Late in the day we get a call from the EA to say that our buyer had transferred the funds and that the mortgage offer was delayed but should arrive this week. Today (Friday 25th) we heard his mortgage offer arrived at his solicitors but still no deposit. We then found out that he had transferred his deposit but made a mistake and did another transfer on Wednesday (22nd) with BAKS but would take 3 days to clear which will be by Monday 27th. We all wanted completion set for 6th October but think this will be too tight. Our buyer is now stating that he wants completion after 10th October and has completely disregarded our requests all the way through this sorry ordeal.

However we are waiting until Monday now to see if the funds do actually come through and if not we will be calling it a day. We can no longer carry on with this whole charade. He has wasted 5 months of our lives with all his games and is absolutely disgraceful.

haras_nosirrah

And this is why it is a good idea for EA's to check the position of the buyers.

We get post after post on here of people complaining that they have to prove to the EA's financial advisor they can get the funds and why is it any of their business whether they can get the money etc

Here is a classic reason why it is in the vendors interest to check the buyers position.

wodgerdodger

I have some degree of agreement with you on this but you realise that many viewers will respond negatively to seeing the in house adviser.

The other inherent problem is that the type of proof of intent many will show from their chosen Lenders are often quite worthless as they will not have been fully undrwritten or credit scored by the Lender.

Its not until a full application has been actually submitted, valued and an offer issued that there can be any certainty that the funds would be in place.

betmunch

Does it not occur to anyone that the financial position could be checked AFTER the figure has been agreed?

Or maybe you can simply refuse to pay higher than you want to even if the EA knows you could go higher?

If someone offered on a property in our place and refused to prove they had the money then we would recommend the Vendor does not accept the offer. Simple as that. The Vendor is free to decline our recommendation, but we are protected from any claim the could arise from the situation that the OP is in

PS. A letter from the Solicitor confirming the fund are in place would be acceptable

betmunch

I'm not an EA, I just work in one. I get in trouble when I say what I do because I dont use the correct signature!

Yes I would recommend the Vendor doesnt accept an offer if there is not sufficient proof that the buyer has the ability to proceed. And I have countless examples of when this process was not followed and it ended in heartache for the Vendor, which is, after all, who the EA works for. Like I said, they are free to ignor my advice, but I give it for a reason.

Both partys are "wide open" until exchange. Whats to stop the buyer Gazundering? Even when the EA has proof they could go higher?

You can refuse to pay more even when the EA knows your maximum.

Knowing the maximum a buyer can go to could be seen as an advantage, yes, that is agreed. But, heres a personal secret, I have just over £1000 in my bank account right now and its pay day on thursday, ask me if I would like to give it to you......
Buyers should take responibility for their offers, if you do not think the house is worth what you are offering, dont offer it! And dont get me wrong, its the same for Sellers, if you are not happy with the ammount offered, dont accept it.

There seems to be a culture of it being acceptable for buyers to want property as cheep as posible, but not for sellers top achieve as much as they can

DVardysShadow

haras_nosirrah wrote: »

And this is why it is a good idea for EA's to check the position of the buyers.

We get post after post on here of people complaining that they have to prove to the EA's financial advisor they can get the funds and why is it any of their business whether they can get the money etc

Here is a classic reason why it is in the vendors interest to check the buyers position.

There are 2 questions the Estate Agent's Mortgage Adviser can be looking into

• Does the buyer have the wherewithal to support his offer?
• How much wherewithal does the buyer have?

The factual boundary between these questions is wafer thin, but ethically they are worlds apart.

While in principle, I can see the case for the Agent's Mortgage Adviser checking out the first question, the temptation to proceed to the second question makes asking the first question unacceptable.

There is a need to change the process - and I believe that the buyer's solicitor is the person to confirm that there is evidence of funds to meet the offer.

betmunch

I dont work for the Vendors.

I do however understand the need for all offers to be qualified so that a Vendor can make an informed decision on whether they proceed with a buyer and take their house off the market.

Can I take a guess at what your personal situation would be if you were offering on a property?
I reckon you have everything sorted and ready to go.
If you are using a mortgage to buy you have it agreed in principal before offering.
You would have your solicitors ready to accept your instruction.
For you, proving you are proceedable is a pain, because you wouldnt dream of wasting anyones time if you wasnt.
Is that accurate?

And thats were the problem lays, not everyone would take the steps above before offering on a property, and time and time again things go wrong, which could be avoided if simple checks were done.

By the way, you seemed to type my name wrong. Its actually a play on ButtMunch as I joined the forums for the Matched Betting - True Story

betmunch

DVardysShadow wrote: »

There are 2 questions the Estate Agent's Mortgage Adviser can be looking into

• Does the buyer have the wherewithal to support his offer?
• How much wherewithal does the buyer have?

I think this is wrong by the way, the second question should be, can I steal the mortgage business?

An EA will earn more commission for a house sale plus mortgage fee than it will for a slightly increased purchase price for a house they have already sold.

And just to clarify my personal position on that subject, rather than stealing business a comparison service should be offered with no pressure to use it if the client only wants to prove their offer is sound. But the offer still must be proven to be sound.

betmunch

Are we starting to agree? I think we are.

If you came into my EA and wanted to offer on a property you would be subject to the usual offer checking procedure like anyone else.
You would get a letter from your solicitor stating that you can proceed at the price offered.
I would be satisfied that you can proceed and would recomend the Vendor removes his house from the market.
Then I will have the cheek to offer you the services of an in house mortgage adviser
I suspect you will decline.

Either way, you have your offer accepted, your happy, the vendor is happy, the house is sold. No-one saw your bank statements, or made a mark on your credit file, or talked you into an offer you are not happy with.

Surely this is not too much to ask?

the_realist wrote: »

What really annoys me is ea's refusing to even allow viewings before being able to see your whole financial life. They have no right to ask and as far as I am aware this should be down to the vendors solicitor to confirm. It is what I asked my solicitor to do.

Well thats just plain stupid, especially in this market! I suspect it was Connells/Sequence. Can you give us a name?

There really is no need to financially qualify a viewer unless specifically asked by the Vendor, and then its going to reduce the number of viewings, and with less viewings what do we get? Less sales!