Offers Over...

DVardysShadow

Incyder wrote: »

It would be nice if it were law that if someone clearly states in their advert, that they require offers over then a buyer cannot make an offer under.

This is the way it works in Scotland. An offer over 100k for instance means you write your offer over 100k down and it is sealed in an envelope. All offers are opened on a given day and the highest wins. Marvellous. That should be law in England too.

And if someone were to break this law and offer under? How would you punish them? Prison? ASBO? Fine?

Some things do OK without laws.

Nikel

madmish00 wrote: »

I would ignore the Offers Over to be honest and just go for what you think it is worth.

And what you can afford.

Incyder

DVardysShadow wrote: »

How would you punish them? Prison? ASBO? Fine?

Yes, all three. The messge would soon get round that offers over means just that.
Or else the request is meaningless, as would be OIEO.

If sellers choose to use these restrictive phrases, it may work against them and they don't get a sale. So be it.
BUT, thats their choice, and as they are paying for the advert and the house is theirs, they must have a right to have their wording respected and not totally ignored by hopeful chancers.

DVardysShadow

Incyder wrote: »

How would you punish them? Prison? ASBO? Fine?

Yes, all three. The messge would soon get round that offers over means just that.

You know, for a long time I have thought that laws are the cause of a lot of crime. This would be a case in point.

googler

Incyder wrote: »

Yes, all three. The messge would soon get round that offers over means just that.
Or else the request is meaningless, as would be OIEO.

If sellers choose to use these restrictive phrases, it may work against them and they don't get a sale. So be it.
BUT, thats their choice, and as they are paying for the advert and the house is theirs, they must have a right to have their wording respected and not totally ignored by hopeful chancers.

In that case, I suggest you speak to your MP or raise a petition to lobby for a change in the law.

How much support do you think you'll get?

Incyder

Probably not enough to change anything, as those that work in the housing markets would like to keep their waters as murky as possible. It makes it harder to spot any irregularities, and that suits them.

googler

How much support do you think you'll get from the buying public, since you'll essentially be dictating the minimum that they'll be paying, and removing any element of bartering from their negotiations?

I can't see how Offers Over pricing and the processes associated with it are an 'irregularity'..... clarify, please?

Incyder

clarify.......well what I mean is that if we have phrases that are to be used, and are being used, then they must have real meaning, backed up in law if needs be.

Offers in the region of is quite clear and is used often. So why do you think its wrong that offers in excess of or offers over can be ignored as though the words do not even exist in the advert ?

Either such phrases should be scrapped totally and not be allowed to be used in house adverts OR they must be given meaning and value. I'm happy either way. Just a clear decision and ruling would be nice. Directions on adverts that people are free to ignore are pointless for all concerned.

DVardysShadow

Incyder wrote: »

clarify.......well what I mean is that if we have phrases that are to be used, and are being used, then they must have real meaning, backed up in law if needs be.

Offers in the region of is quite clear and is used often. So why do you think its wrong that offers in excess of or offers over can be ignored as though the words do not even exist in the advert ?

Either such phrases should be scrapped totally and not be allowed to be used in house adverts OR they must be given meaning and value. I'm happy either way. Just a clear decision and ruling would be nice. Directions on adverts that people are free to ignore are pointless for all concerned.

The fact that people do ignore them indicates that they are pointless. So effectively , you are arguing that people should be given ASBOs, fined or put in prison for ignoring something which is pointless. A bit of a heavy handed way of propping up something which is pointless.

googler

Incyder wrote: »

Offers in the region of is quite clear and is used often. So why do you think its wrong that offers in excess of or offers over can be ignored as though the words do not even exist in the advert ?

I don't think it's 'wrong' - it happens, and it's part of the natural bartering process wherein a buyer offers £X, the seller wants £Y, and they settle on £Z after negotiation. The house buying process is founded on the basis of the buyer making an offer to buy the house from the seller, and all advertising styles are merely an invitation to offer, however you phrase it.

I think there's far more important things to be legislated on in the E&W house buying and selling system before this.