How do valuers sleep at night????

rlc22

GDB2222 wrote: »

To be frank, valuers sleep better at night if the they value low!

Particularly as some lenders have decided that it was the surveyor's over-valuing that led us to the high property prices and subsequent crash.

Nothing to do with them lending 5 times salary and 100+% mortgages then

notisis

Unfortunately valuers do tend to rely on local averages for streets so in streets where the majority are 2 bedders with the odd 3 bed, and just the one 5 bed (or other slightly out of the ordinary property) then that brings the average right down for the "odd" property. It happened many years ago when I owned the only 4 bed in a Victorian terrace and the value was based so I was told on the average of the road, and ignoring the fact that two properties (2 two beds) had literally just sold for more than mine was valued (and these both needed work whereas mine had new bathroom, kitchen and good decor). I think this was because the buyers wanted a 100% mortgage as later buyers had no problems. This was before you could see the sold prices online. Valuers can get it wrong particularly I think with drive by or no visit valuations as reliance is made on stats or where the property is not the norm in an area so they are over cautious.

myhouse_2

Nice to hear that banks are being careful about their lending. I would be horrified if they were lending at previous valuation levels.
Now what was the OP saying - couldn't bear reading all those caps,

brit1234

I'm glad surveyors are undervaluing (or as I call it realistically valuing), we had years of them overvaluing before the credit crunch.

Your going to make a huge amount of money if you sell at the right price, if you wanted more you should of sold in 2007 at the height of irresponsible lending, over valuing and fraud.

Be happy with what you got.

suki1001

Horlicks!

Seriously:

Firstly, people always value their things more than other people would.

Secondly, when you are given a value to something and then it is lowered, it can be difficult to get your head round it being worth less. My mother was selling her house privately, when the buyer suggested he'd be happy to pay 200k (5k more than a house that had been done up in the boom) for it without a valuation, she got it into her head it was worth that. I had all on explaining to her when 3 ea's valued it for less (around 170k), that the purchaser's offer of 175k was more than fair and she would save ea fees etc. She did see sense in the end, but because this figure had been plucked out of thin air she initialy thought she was losing out, I told her she was so lucky in this climate that she had a buyer straight away and she should bite his arm off! She also couldn't see any work needed to be done to the house and there was loads.

The_Palmist

So buyers in high paid secure jobs have no deposit at all ?

I think they are very expert buyers, I mean look at the skills, and the amount of money they are saving by telling tales of valuation etc. I should have read this thread before buying my house.

tbs624

The_Palmist wrote: »

So buyers in high paid secure jobs have no deposit at all ?

I think they are very expert buyers, I mean look at the skills, and the amount of money they are saving by telling tales of valuation etc. I should have read this thread before buying my house.

Most vendors would of course require firm evidence of the valuation if a buyer was seeking to use that to achieve a lower purchase price so its unlikely to simply be "telling tales of valuation". The fact that the valuation figure was hugely lower than the apparent agreed purchase price meant they effectively had a shortfall in what funding the lender would be prepared to offer and as others have highlighted that private loan could well prove to be problematic. Doesn't sound like "expert buyers" to me - more a case of a vendor who has placed too high a price on the property they wish to sell and simply can get their head around their imaginary loss.

The "lots of viewings" but no sale over the previous *3 years* says pretty unequivocally that the property was over priced and possibly over spec for the location.

tbs624

pioneer22 wrote: »

House is worth what someone will pay for it not just a fantasy number but what the bank is willing to lend and what the valuer says the full circle. Sorry about that but your better off waiting and selling when prices level off.

Agree with the first sentence but there is no guarantee of an improvement in selling prices for the forseeable future - vendor meanwhile carries on paying out on C Tax, insurance, general maintenance of the property and so on.

ciano125

Any house will sell if it is priced correctly. The fact that everyone has been saying "No thanks" for three years should tell you that you've got it wrong.

Put another way, if you put it on the market at a level significantly below the market value, you will get loads of people interested and they will bid it up to what the market value for it is. People will drop out one by one as it increases above what they are prepared to pay for it until there is only one left. If that level is below the amount you want for it, nobody is forcing you to sell it.

I sleep pretty well at night as well thanks knowing that I can back my valuations up with evidence, but then again maybe you know how to do my job better than I do after all.

myhouse_2

Houses are not worth what someone will pay for them. They are worth what someone CAN pay for them. There is never a shortage of people dumb enough to pay over the odds. It takes the bank to bring them back to reality...well maybe not over the past 10 years, but certainly going forward.
If OP had been a bit more aggressive about pricing their house initially, they wouldn't be in this situation. Watch this Rightmove video - they'll tell you the first few weeks of marketing are critical. Particularly in a buyer's market. Price too high and you waste a major opportunity.