"Exclusivity Agreement" - Your Thoughts?

princeofpounds

Silly idea.

If vendors are looking for commitment from the buyer, then the money spent on surveys and searches is precisely that evidence of a buy-in to the transaction.

Vendors are smoking dope if they think that you can possibly get commitment from a buyer without the option of doing a survey and searches. The buyer won't know if the place is going to be compulsory purchased, is on contaminated land, has subsidence.

You as vendors choose not to volunteer such information so you must be prepared for buyers to be subject to contract until such information is obtained.

The only exception is in an agreed 'blind' purchase like an auction, in which case you don't need these silly agreements anyway as the exchange happens more or less coincident with the offer being accepted.

Besides, gazumping has historically been just as common, if not more so, than gazundering, so the question is should the vendor also pay a deposit to the buyer?! And then they net off... absurdity within absurdity.

Someone pointed out the Danish model - this was very interesting, and it was kind of what HIPS were meant to become before they were watered down into uselessness. I agree that they should have been scrapped in the form that they eventually took, but they did represent our main chance of moving to a better model.

rosyw

But if you were selling and the buyer OFFERED?? I doubt you'd turn down the extra cash!
This CAN work, if the agreement is carefully worded and not too heavily weighted to either party, but it's not something that I would have asked for. In my case it was offered by the buyers, my EA assures me this is common practice with developers.

missile

It may be unusual but it seems like a very reasonable request to me. If I were serious about buying, I would have no problem paying a deposit. I was asked for a deposit when I signed to purchase my new build and when buying other items, car, furniture etc you would be expected to pay a deposit.

I doubt your solicitor would approve.

Richard_Webster

Specifically, I'd be interested in hearing any advice on trying for the following agreement (directly with my new buyer). I appreciate it may be simplistic, but if he's serious I would think he'd be willing to put up something.

---

Buyer = ____________ <-Buyer's Name
Seller = ____________ <-Seller's Name

Received: GBP __(Amount)__ from Buyer as payment towards the purchase of __(Address)__ for __(agreed price)_.
Fully refundable in the event that Seller does not proceed with the sale to Buyer at agreed price. Otherwise refundable at Seller's discretion.

Seller agrees to cease marketing of said property and to not provide conveyancing documentation to any other interested parties for __(number eg 60)__ days from the date of this agreement.


(Seller's signature) (Date)
____________________ ____________________
(Seller)

---

Thanks!

Well no buyer's solicitor is going to advise his client to accept that because there could be some very serious defect in the title or the property could have an adverse survey. There may well be other points e.g. related to any chain below the buyer.

However just on the legal title and the survey - how bad does it have to be? That's in a nutshell, why neither set of solicitors referred to by Mrtwis were prepared to be involved in such an agreement.

There would be lengthy discussions between them in trying to define what title defects and survey problems should entitle the buyer to have this money back and while they were doing that they could have been doing the real conveyancing work!