Buyer demanding I leave items in house..

micflair_2

mynameisdave wrote: »

You could always go back to them and tell them your price has gone up accordingly for leaving it behind.

Ask them exactly how much they would reduce the offer by if the item is not left

Yeah, its kinda a no win situation for anyone here. We are going to be on the `who blinks first' game here. I will say my price goes up with the oven, they will say there price goes down without it. What a stupid thing to be arguing over!

sonastin

They made an offer on the assumption that there would be a cooker in the kitchen. You accepted an offer on the assumption that you would be removing the cooker. Both of you are entitled to maintain your stance. If neither one of you is prepared to compromise, the deal will fall through. I would hazard a guess that you have more to lose if it falls through than they do. Call their bluff if you want but be aware of what you are risking and for how much.

Doozergirl

micflair wrote: »

Why do you keep going back to edit your posts after I have already replied to them?

Anyyyyyyway, what has your fist post got to do with anything? I was answering your line of `They are giving you a cooker so you should give them one'..

No we have not exchanged contracts yet, Im going to have a long chat with my oven tonight and see what she wants to do about it. Clearly no-one in this thread is taking her feelings into consideration here.. (okay, its getting late...)

Because I always edit my posts. You can check if you like. I can't help it if you're hanging on every word I say can I

I'm referring you back because I was indicating that I'd always said it was fine for you to try and negotiate your way out of it.

However, it's not the end of the world. If they insist then you have a new cooker to go to and your BIL will have to find one, just like he would have done if you hadn't been moving house yourself. Or maybe he can pay for that cheap ebay one to replace yours and take your nice one. Everyone gets what they want. Not least him with his cheap fancy cooker. Not as good as free, but better than a kick in the teeth, eh?

taxsaver

Perhaps I'm the only one here, but I tend to agree with the OP. I think Barratts have a damned cheek and are trying to bully the op to get their own way. It's unfair to suggest the OP is the one 'creating the bad feeling' rather it is Barratts; or at least their stupid monkey. Barratts will have loaded their sale price to reflect all that the OP is getting, so they are NOT doing anyone any favours at all and they too are unlikely to want the sale of their (overpriced) new build house to fall through over a ruddy cooker!

I'd say stick to your guns. Cooker NOT included!

phoebe1989seb

We nearly lost our buyers recently over a misunderstanding regarding whether or not our range cooker was included in the agreed sale price. Even though I was totally peed off as our oven originally cost us around £2000 and the same model was selling second hand for in excess of £1000 on ebay, we gave in to avoid losing our buyers. Very luckily we managed to pick up the same model on preloved for only £350, so all was well in the end

I would agree with other posters that all things considered it isn't worth arguing over in case of losing the sale.

paddedjohn

Op, since they dont have a clue what make or condition your cooker is in get yourself down the tip or scrappy and get a knackered one to put in its place.;)

Old_Git

go to the scrap yard and get a cooker .It dosent need to be working .
they have a cooker you have a sale .

ceridwen

I suspect this has arisen because of a jobsworth blindly following "company policy".

A LOT of houses these days have built-in cookers and Barratt have probably found that the odd toe-rag owner has taken the cooker out and off with them - even though they ARE built-in and therefore obviously and legally get left in the house.

Therefore Barratts probably came up with some "company policy" to automatically ask people to leave the cooker - in order to avoid people taking out built-in cookers (ie not in order to get their hands on peoples freestanding cookers).

So - in that case - I would be trying to find a Barratts employee who was high enough ranking + with some commonsense and saying to them "I expect your policy is x and I understand why - but I guess no-one has realised that mine is a freestanding cooker and are just applying this policy - even though its not correct in MY case. So - I just thought I'd let you know that my cooker is freestanding and I'm willing to send you a photo of it to prove the fact. So - could you point this out to your employee and ask them to delete this request. Thank you."

The way you contact a firm in such cases depends on whether you can present a neat/articulate/well-typed letter or you have a good voice to use over the phone. Personally - I use my voice over the phone - as its a nice clear middle-class/middle-aged voice (ie a good one to use in circumstances like this). If I had a different voice - then I'd use a neatly-typed letter instead.

micflair_2

taxsaver wrote: »

Perhaps I'm the only one here, but I tend to agree with the OP. I think Barratts have a damned cheek and are trying to bully the op to get their own way. It's unfair to suggest the OP is the one 'creating the bad feeling' rather it is Barratts; or at least their stupid monkey. Barratts will have loaded their sale price to reflect all that the OP is getting, so they are NOT doing anyone any favours at all and they too are unlikely to want the sale of their (overpriced) new build house to fall through over a ruddy cooker!

I'd say stick to your guns. Cooker NOT included!

Yes - I have a supporter haha. I am paying a lot for there overpriced new build (obviously thats my problem though..) so everything they put in there Im paying for, they are not doing me any favours as such, and they are paying under the odds for my house in PX. We are both in the same boat, with both equal to lose if this causes further problems.

micflair_2

sonastin wrote: »

They made an offer on the assumption that there would be a cooker in the kitchen. You accepted an offer on the assumption that you would be removing the cooker. Both of you are entitled to maintain your stance. If neither one of you is prepared to compromise, the deal will fall through. I would hazard a guess that you have more to lose if it falls through than they do. Call their bluff if you want but be aware of what you are risking and for how much.

They made an offer on the assumption that there would be a cooker? For a huge company like them thats a mistake is it not? You surely never assume that items are included, even someone with no house buying experience would surely know this so Im not having that at all!