"sold subject to contract" ...what now?

G_M

'Sold STC' = a deal has been agreed between buyer/seller but is not legally binding.

'Sold' = a contract has been Exchanged by buyer/seller which IS legally binding.

Debt_Free_Chick

Sold subject to contract doesn't mean a lot, in my book. It just means that you've accepted an offer, but now the negotiations start. You must instruct a solicitor and your solicitor will send a draft contract to the buyer's solicitor. The buyer will get a survey and the buyer's solicitor will do the searches.

The price is negotiable until you exchange contracts - in fact, just about everything is still negotiable. Hold your breath - you're now on a roller-coaster!

Martyn1981

Just to expand on the Sold STC theme, what actions are the estate agents required to take?

My aunt has been negotiating to buy a house for nearly 6 months, and we finally agreed a price. Unfortunately, this was 1 week after the house was listed by an estate agent.

The other party had declared (and reserved) our interest, so there's no commission on our deal.

Now, we agreed the deal Wednesday 15th, and exchanged solicitors details on Thursday 16th Aug. On Thursday 23rd we discovered that the estate agents were still arranging viewings.

When we spoke to the other party (there are 3 daughters who have inherited the house, and one son-in-law who keeps trying to 'keep all options open'), the 'son-in-law' dealing with the estate agents said he'd told them to 'ease off on the marketing' and it was all just a misunderstanding.

Are the estate agents under some sort of requirement to tell potential buyers/viewers that the property is SSTC? Are they allowed to keep marketing it, when it is SSTC?

I strongly suspect the 'son-in-law' didn't tell them the whole truth. But I'm not sure if the estate agents would 'have' to act differently one way or the other, are there rules / guidelines.

Mart.

macman

The agent acts solely on instructions from the client, i.e. the vendor. If the vendor wants to keep it on the market after accepting an offer STC, then they can do so-however any potential buyer should simply withdraw their offer if the agent continues to market it and offer viewings after an offer has been accepted.
'Sold STC' has no legal status whatsoever; either party can withdraw at any time before exchange of contracts, regardless of whether surveys or searches have been done and costs incurred.

googler

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Now, we agreed the deal Wednesday 15th, and exchanged solicitors details on Thursday 16th Aug. On Thursday 23rd we discovered that the estate agents were still arranging viewings.

See para 7 'Continuation of Marketing' in this document;

http://www.tpos.co.uk/downloads/Code%20of%20Practice%20for%20Residential%20Estate%20Agents.pdf

This code applies if the agents are TPO or NAEA members. If they're continuing marketing on their clients' instructions, you should have been informed as such in writing.

rpc

Martyn1981 wrote: »

When we spoke to the other party (there are 3 daughters who have inherited the house, and one son-in-law who keeps trying to 'keep all options open'), the 'son-in-law' dealing with the estate agents said he'd told them to 'ease off on the marketing' and it was all just a misunderstanding.

He's fobbing you off. You either market it or you don't. They may not be advertising in every newspaper every day, but it is still be marketed.

If you have a realistic offer, you could demand that viewings be suspended or walk away. This will probably only work if you are at the stage of having surveys and searches (i.e. spending money). It sounds like you are.

Martyn1981

Cheers guys, so it could be a situation where 'between two stools you fall to the ground' as we haven't gone through the EA. So they haven't had to inform us. Or ....

as I suspect, the EA is innocent, and was entirely non-informed on this matter.

We kinda agreed a deal some months back, but my aunt had to sell her house, and out of the blue that 'son-in-law' knocked on my door and advised that we had 2 weeks to complete or else they'd put it on the market - but we'd still be first choice.

I told him flat, that our direct offer, was the same as an offer through an estate agent, requiring that no further viewings be taken. If they tried to arrange 'back-ups' as he put it, or seek 'gazzumpers' as I put it, we would withdraw our offer.

At that stage, the other 2 daughters (and their husbands) told him to go away. All three daughters know me very well, as the house is the other half of my semi-detached, and when their parents became infirm, I took on all the gardening duties, and was on speed dial for any emergencies. Lovely neighbours who both reached 90, one passing away this March, and one last March, very much missed.

We get on so well, that after having little interest in my aunt's house, we agreed, no hard feelings, and they put the house on the market. At that stage, we found another way of doing it, by taking out a mortgage. Messy, but should be fine in the long run.

I've been told that if he did try anything, he'd be out voted (or more accurately, his wife's 1/3 share would be outvoted), but this is all a little stressful for my aunt.

What fun and games!

Mart.