We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Foul Play/case for legal action
Comments
-
Although the more I read the more sympathy I have for OP, the bottom line is that all estate agents operate in this way. Once they have an offer that a seller has accepted, they don't make much effort to get another offer, instead they concentrate on their other properties with no accepted offers. So whereas OP may have a point on the conflict the EA put themselves under, it is standard EA practice to stop work once an accepted offer has been made.I'm a Forum Ambassador on the housing, mortgages & student money saving boards. I volunteer to help get your forum questions answered and keep the forum running smoothly. Forum Ambassadors are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an illegal or inappropriate post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com (it's not part of my role to deal with this). Any views are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com.0
-
Sometimes a buyer is prepared to make an offer to a seller like TW because they know there is no onward chain and they know the seller won't decide not to sell. So the offer may be worth more to the buyer ie they may not have been prepared to make the same offer to OP due to the risks of OP changing their mind or then going off and finding a different property to buy, delaying EOC.
But TW did not even own it at that stage! They were reliant on the OP not changing their mind (all the things you said).
No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
But TW did not even own it at that stage! They were reliant on the OP not changing their mind (all the things you said).
The OP would need to explain their lack of activity during the period prior to EOC to argue their own case. As the whole issue appears to have triggered by the price paid by their neighbour for a similar property. Which clearly was with hindsight after the event. Therefore suggesting that the OP was happy with the deal that they had concluded some months previously. In fact only more recently has the OP appeared to read and comprehend what they signed up to over 6 months ago.0 -
Discovering the price my neighbor paid has encouraged me but my complaint originated on the day I handed the keys over to the new buyer, I recognised her immediately as I had shown her around twice before accepting the offer from TW. At that point I questioned the 2 completion dates and wondered how she managed to make an offer and have it accepted without my knowledge and seemingly before any contracts were exchanged between TW and me.0
-
Although the more I read the more sympathy I have for OP, the bottom line is that all estate agents operate in this way. Once they have an offer that a seller has accepted, they don't make much effort to get another offer, instead they concentrate on their other properties with no accepted offers. So whereas OP may have a point on the conflict the EA put themselves under, it is standard EA practice to stop work once an accepted offer has been made.
This is obviously what has happened, having read a little more into the EA Act 1979, it confirms that it is indeed a legal obligation for an EA to pass on all offers even after one has been accepted.
I can understand why they didn't. Unfortunately for the EA I think they misinterpreted the px when it was handed to them and believed that we had actually sold the property already giving TW full rights to market with them and proceed with a sale, as a result of this they decided not to bill me for going outside the contract but settled that they would be getting 1% when they had found a buyer for TW.
In actual fact all that took place was I had an offer on my property that I accepted but had not committed to. I didn't end my contract and did not do anything to warrant a termination of contract so had to assume it was still in place and my best interests were being tended to. If you look at all documentation with regards to contract of sales they are only interested in compensation if you have completed a sale, agreeing to an offer is not a crime so I didn't breach my contract.
I think the EA may have just made a genuine mistake but that's not my fault.0 -
In actual fact all that took place was I had an offer on my property that I accepted but had not committed to.
How many "offers" have penalty clauses if the vendor pulls out prior to EOC.If you are querying your Council Tax band would you please state whether you are in England, Scotland or Wales0 -
Quite a few general ones I assume such as say I accepted an offer from you on my house, you instructed your solicitor to draw up all the contracts, you had a survey completed and exhausted perhaps £500+. Unless I had good reason to back out you could sue me for the costs you incurred.
Which is all TW said, if I backed out and later sold to someone they had introduced I would owe them 3% for marketing costs, surveys, solicitors fees etc. Obviously in my case they would have had a difficult case to prove this when they never introduced the buyer.
Anyone can make an offer with conditions/clauses right? getting people to agree to them is another story. I agreed to TW's because my house couldn't sell, there were viewings, lots of them but the price was obviously too high. Once the price dropped it generated the interest and a buyer was found.0 -
This is obviously what has happened, having read a little more into the EA Act 1979, it confirms that it is indeed a legal obligation for an EA to pass on all offers even after one has been accepted.
No - they had a legal responsibility to pass the offer to their client, which they did.I can understand why they didn't. Unfortunately for the EA I think they misinterpreted the px when it was handed to them and believed that we had actually sold the property already giving TW full rights to market with them and proceed with a sale, as a result of this they decided not to bill me for going outside the contract but settled that they would be getting 1% when they had found a buyer for TW.
No, the EA did not misinterpret anything. They know what a px agreement is and they will have read yours. They knew you owned the house, however, they also knew that on a set date in the future TW would be the owners of the house and they were marketing the property on behalf of TW to secure a buyer that could purchase the property after that date. Quite normal in the property world, particularly where Option Agreements are in place - your px agreement was just a form of option agreement.In actual fact all that took place was I had an offer on my property that I accepted but had not committed to. I didn't end my contract and did not do anything to warrant a termination of contract so had to assume it was still in place and my best interests were being tended to. If you look at all documentation with regards to contract of sales they are only interested in compensation if you have completed a sale, agreeing to an offer is not a crime so I didn't breach my contract.
No, you signed an agreement with TW that they could take over the marketing of your property and were allowed to use your EA to do this. Thereafter TW became the client of your EA.I think the EA may have just made a genuine mistake but that's not my problem.
They've not made a mistake, they've done exactly as they were instructed.0 -
No - they had a legal responsibility to pass the offer to their client, which they did.
No, the EA did not misinterpret anything. They know what a px agreement is and they will have read yours. They knew you owned the house, however, they also knew that on a set date in the future TW would be the owners of the house and they were marketing the property on behalf of TW to secure a buyer that could purchase the property after that date. Quite normal in the property world, particularly where Option Agreements are in place - your px agreement was just a form of option agreement.
No, you signed an agreement with TW that they could take over the marketing of your property and were allowed to use your EA to do this. Thereafter TW became the client of your EA.
They've not made a mistake, they've done exactly as they were instructed.
And what if I had backed out before EOC or was I not allowed?;) then what would have happened? IMO my future chances of selling it would have been slim based on the price fluctuations. Your suggesting that my rights to my own property were relinquished the minute I signed the PX.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards