Should we Gazunder???

Nixxx

jw2003 wrote: »

I think, if you are doing this because of the impact to your financial situation then you should be pretty straight with your EA and vendors and explain the reason. I don't necessarily agree with it however it would be worse for you to take out a mortgage that you will be unable to afford soon.

If you are doing it because of recent housing trends then maybe you shouldn't be buying a house at all, I don't know what it's like where you live but here it is definitely cheaper to buy your house than it is to rent so therefore buying at the originally agreed price would still be the most viable option.

this advice is spot on :T

neverdespairgirl

telfordwhite wrote: »

Yes but the transaction has been agreed and the buyer is welshing on it isn't he?

No - the "agreement" in law is at exchange.

neverdespairgirl

One_Day_Rodney wrote: »

3. I would have harsh words with the estate agents, who are supposed to be there working to get me the best the price and protect me from people like you. Not just lazily accepting any offer because they would still get their sizeable fees.

I don't follow that. How could an EA know if someone will gazunder down the line?

neverdespairgirl

whitesatin wrote: »

And here's me thinking child benefit was to help feed and clothe a child.

It is. But I have one child, and when child benefit is withdrawn for higher rate taxpayers, our household income will be down £20 a week.

chewmylegoff

OP: this is a financial decision for you to make, not a moral one. if you are no longer happy with the price then either attempt to renegotiate or pull your offer out. the legal system we have in this country for buying houses allows you to do so, so use it to your advantage if you feel you should. far better to annoy your vendor than annoy yourself by paying more than you are happy to.

no doubt a large percentage of the people who are harranguing you would happily either (i) gazump someone else for their "dream home" or (ii) accept a higher offer from a gazumper. obviously they will claim they wouldn't because it is a "moral issue". put £10k on the table in front of them and see how long they retain their hypothetical moralising for.

dizziblonde

citizen11 wrote: »

Okay you think I'm contemptible, I've noted it and you clearly feel quite strongly about it. Perhaps now that you can see I've read your post you won't feel the need to post again until you have something new to add.

Perhaps you can stop hurling abuse at anyone who dares disagree wtih you.

Newsflash: you posted this on an open forum - can't come crying demanding people don't post when they tell you you're being distinctly slimeballesque in your behaviour.

citizen11

dizziblonde wrote: »

Perhaps you can stop hurling abuse at anyone who dares disagree wtih you.

Newsflash: you posted this on an open forum - can't come crying demanding people don't post when they tell you you're being distinctly slimeballesque in your behaviour.

Brilliant.

dollydiva

Interesting how CHB got drawn into this. As someone who worked at Child Benefit Centre for many years, it was nice to know that on my Section princesses Anne and Di were claiming along with the rest of us, allegedly as 'an example' to the lowly that they should claim child benefit. Of course, to those two, the lowly meant anyone who didn't have a title...still...I bet Charles and Anne both enjoyed the extra few quid they got from the Single Parent component..

Dd

ben500

Don't give it a second thought 10k is 10k better in your pocket than someone elses, if the markets are good gazumping's the game and not a second thought given to the victims now is the time to bargain for a discount.

iolanthe07

I have one child, and when child benefit is withdrawn for higher rate taxpayers, our household income will be down £20 a week.

But if you're a higher rate taxpayer then your income is such that £20 a week is neither here nor there.