Public Notice on repossessed properties and STC

equiwear

Dear All,

Hope you can help, about 3 weeks ago we had an offer accepted on a repossessed property and the public notice was put on right move etc. 3 days ago a higher offer was put in place by someone else and we were told that we were no longer getting the property unless we bid higher. I thought i would leave it until today to make the new bid after talking it over with my wife. But the property has now been removed off the normal searches on Rightmove and changed to STC. My question is can they do this as it basically put the property out of most peoples search scope and also if they had done this when our original bid was placed and accepted other people probably would not have seen the property and we would probably still be in a position to be purchasing, it just seams a little unfair what they have done and wondering if this was legal. What makes it worse is all our paperwork arrived today to sign for exchange of contracts!!!:(

I would appreciate anybodies feedback

Carl

anselld

Yes they can do it, but it does not stop you making a further offer if that is what you want to do.

equiwear

But why would they change to STC now and not when we had our accepted it sounds like a friend of friend thing going on to me.

anselld

equiwear wrote: »

But why would they change to STC now and not when we had our accepted it sounds like a friend of friend thing going on to me.

Presumably because they have gone through public notice. There would be limited value in repeatedly issuing public notices so they probably feel they do not need to repeat that step.

equiwear

Yes i understand that part but my query is the Sold subject to contract bit and taking of rightmove. They did not do this when we had our offer accepted but with the new offer they have after 3 weeks of the property being advertised as normal.

Thanks

Carl

G_M

By placing a Public Notice they were effectively saying "we've received an offer. we've accepted it, we'll accept higher offers if anyone wants to make one"

In other words, the property is ....sold STC!

If you still want the property, put in a higher offer!

Jason74

equiwear wrote: »

Yes i understand that part but my query is the Sold subject to contract bit and taking of rightmove. They did not do this when we had our offer accepted but with the new offer they have after 3 weeks of the property being advertised as normal.

Thanks

Carl

It does seem odd to be fair. Generally with a repo, the "rules of engagement" are quite different to a normal sale. Normally when you buy a place, an offer is accepted, and while there is no legal obligation to take the property off the market, this is what usually happens. this gives all parties reasonable time to sort things out, and the property only then gets remarketed if there is a problem.

With a repo, it's very different. A third party (the bank) is selling the property to realise their security on the loan after the previous owner defaulted. Given that the property is being sold from under someone in financial difficulties, the Bank has an obligation to demonstrate that they have got the best price for the asset, thereby providing the best outcome for the previous owner (any surplus after the loan and costs are repaided is returned to the previous owner, or if there is none they remain liable for the shortfall).

This is why the different rules exist. The "public notice" is quite literally an invitation to gazump, designed to flush out anyother interest and effectively create an auction. If anybody else comes in, a new public notice should go in at the higher price, until such time as exchange takes place. This ensures that the best deal is obtained for the unfortunate person who was reposessed, and prevents the Bank from selling at a very low cost simply to cover their own interests.

Based just on what you have said, it sounds like this procedure hasn't been followed. That being the case, if you still want the property and are prepared to pay the higher price, it is imho reasonable to ask the question as to why this is the case.

Dockside

Hi

I've been thru similar lately. Put in offer and had it accepted on repo property. Websites advertised my offer with public notice. It did she sstc on right move. Then we got out bid, it went to best and finals, we walked away. Higher offer was published for public notice and house remained sstc...but did show as still being on right move etc,
At the end of the day the bank want the best price so if you want to increase your offer then do it. If you already put your first offer in 3 weeks ago I expect youve started in searches etc so will be in good position
Good luck

G_M

Jason74 wrote: »

Based just on what you have said, it sounds like this procedure hasn't been followed. That being the case, if you still want the property and are prepared to pay the higher price, it is imho reasonable to ask the question as to why this is the case.

Although there is often a procedure that repos follow, it is not a legal one. There is no obligation on the seller (bank, Official receiver whoever) to follow a specific procedure.

IF the original owner who lost their home thought the bank had sold the property for less than it is worth, in theory he could take the bank to court in order to reduce his outstanding debt to them. But
a) I've never come across this happening and suspect it happens once in a blue moon
b) In court the seller would have to show they had attempted to get a fair price. Hence the Public Notice, which is one way they could demonstrate they made that effort. As they've done here.

I don't see anything the OP can do here excpet either increase his offer or walk away.