Is your house worth 260-310? Would you pay 2% stamp?

Dan-Dan

silk wrote: »

You wanted 300, you'd refuse 300 because of 5k stamp? Interesting. Surely the same !!!! off logic applies to someone offering you 295?

Anyway it was a poll so all inputs are fair.

What are you talking about , if my house is up for 300k , i would sell it for 300k if offered and let my buyer worry about stamp

If my buyer needs my help to pay stamp , i would assume he is probably getting ideas above his station and keep my house on the market until exhange :money:

silk_2

Dan-Dan wrote: »

What are you talking about , if my house is up for 300k , i would sell it for 300k if offered and let my buyer worry about stamp

If my buyer needs my help to pay stamp , i would assume he is probably getting ideas above his station and keep my house on the market until exhange :money:

Ah so all the other advice here telling buyers to offer less than asking is a load of rubbish then?

I don't think it's nice to be so easily judgmental.. if it was aimed at me then FYI I can afford the fees, I just don't feel comfortable paying so much up front, because I'm careful with my money and I like a healthy buffer hence I'd probably just save some extra up beforehand.

Also to me I don't see why the seller would care if he accepted 295 or 300 but paying stamp. For me the former is more convenient, to him they're both the same. And yes if he wants to hold out for 300 total that's entirely his prerogative - never suggested otherwise.

Dan-Dan

All i am trying to get across is the fact that if a house has fairly healthy interest , and is that far above the SD threshold , your going to have to find a desperate seller who is going to entertain these wacky ideas you have of getting round the fact you are coming across that you CANT AFFORD SD....hence my comment about not taking you seriously as a buyer

I have a house for sale , right now , for 325k , if i started getting all this crazy talk about how to help you pay SD in return for a certain offer etc , i would dismiss you out of hand because i could NOT be sure you were going to try to stiff me down the road before exchange

hcb42

I wouldnt entertain such a proposal to pay the stamp duty as the seller, no way.

That is the price the buyer has to pay, and I definitely wouldnt do a deal under the table for that sum of money.

In 2006 I was relocating and trying to stay under £250K. I realised that I just could not get what we wanted and needed at the time, and I would have regretted buying an unsuitable house just to save the £5K in additional stamp duty that the first £250K would accrue, so we pushed the budget up by another £25K or so and got a wonderful home in an extremely desirable area. It's annoying that stamp duty isn't incremental, but it is a fact of life.

I sold the same house for nearly £80K more(it was a renovation project), and no I didn't even dream of paying their stamp duty, that was my buyer's problem!

isisini

When we were buying our place, we considered putting an offer on a place which was going for £265k but with a seller offering to pay half of the stamp duty (they put this in the ad, a clear ploy to get people to go above the SD threshold). We spoke to our mortgage advisor and our solicitor (a family friend) and they both separately told us that we (or our solicitor) would have to declare it the lender, who would downvalue what they'd lend to us by that amount, since in effect it is a discount on the property. There is no getting away from stamp duty.

In the end we decided not to get into it as it all felt a bit dodgy and complicated and we found somewhere else. The EA did tell us it was pretty common - but EA's say a lot of things... plus it is quite common with new builds, but these guys have agreements with lenders directly. We found lenders *very* cautious on valuations especially in London where prices seem to be rising very quickly all the time, so were happy to stay on the right side of them.

sinbad182

I dont know whether Silk is expertly trolling everyone in this thread, or just genuinely dim, but either way it makes great reading!

silk_2

Dan-Dan wrote: »

All i am trying to get across is the fact that if a house has fairly healthy interest , and is that far above the SD threshold , your going to have to find a desperate seller who is going to entertain these wacky ideas you have of getting round the fact you are coming across that you CANT AFFORD SD....hence my comment about not taking you seriously as a buyer

I have a house for sale , right now , for 325k , if i started getting all this crazy talk about how to help you pay SD in return for a certain offer etc , i would dismiss you out of hand because i could NOT be sure you were going to try to stiff me down the road before exchange

Weird, I see it as a mutually acceptable way to legally beat away the ever greedy taxman but hey ho.

I don't understand this concept of thinking the buyer can't afford.. if that were the case his application for a mortgage wouldn't go through - or he wouldn't have the 32.5k deposit.. so it seems illogical for you to make that assumption.

I do understand the point that the seller might not be "desperate" enough to consider anything below what they have listed, and like I said that is completely understandable, in fact I don't want to sell my house up north for anything less than I paid which is why it's being rented.

In that particular case then the seller wouldn't humour any SDLT buyer incentives like you say, but then again they won't take 1p off the value of the house regardless so it's same thing skinned a different way.

We're all different people at the end of the day. An offer of 295 is still an offer of 295 no matter how you spin it, in my books at least.

silk_2

sinbad182 wrote: »

I dont know whether Silk is expertly trolling everyone in this thread, or just genuinely dim, but either way it makes great reading!

Troll-ception!

kmmr

silk wrote: »

Why would the bank know or care that once he gets his 300k he then pays some of my stamp? Isn't it his money once it's in his bank?

You maybe haven't been made aware of linked transactions before, so they do get to know.

It's all about the value of the security for the mortgage. In the past there were cases of people getting 90% mortgages on properties valued at, say £500k, but they were really worth £250k. The vendor would pass back £250k of the money after the transaction was complete. This required a lot of collusion, and resulted in massive losses for the banks. I'm not saying you are doing that, but that is why all linked transactions have to be reported as a term of the mortgage offer.

As your lawyer is working for the mortgage company as well as you, s/he will ensure you comply with this law.

So, in answer to one of your original questions, not declaring this transaction would be illegal.

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

The seller cannot directly make an undeclared contribution towards your stamp duty, as neither his conveyancing solicitor nor yours would be a party to it. They could get struck off.
....
If you cannot see why that is a fraudulent declaration, so be it.

In that case may I suggest that you have the courage of your convictions and discuss your proposals openly and honestly with your conveyancing solicitor.

Apologies LD, I've made a minor change. It's allowed, just can't be kept secret.

Silk - LD wasn't saying you would be fraudulent, she is saying the only practical way to achieve an undeclared stamp duty payment would necessarily be illegal.

silk wrote: »

I think I've made it perfectly clear that I'm trying to find a legal way to satisfy all parties. I don't understand why anything is fraudulent (house worth x, pay x, stamp is y, y is paid.. what's the issue), but if it is, then so be it, I will steer clear. I don't think I ever suggested that I didn't want it to go through the solicitors legally, rather I was trying to comprehend why a tax that can be paid by anybody (even my Mum!) affects the literal value of a property. And I still don't.

Anyway..

I've just spoken to a couple of estate agents and they say it isn't uncommon for the seller to pay some or all of the stamp (legitimately), that they see it happen and in some cases see the seller promote it.. and that mortgages still do go through.

So why do most posts here suggest it isn't possible?

We aren't say they can't do it - we are saying the mortgage company will take it into account as a reduction in price. (And hence, your LTV will change)

I'm joining marinsurrey for a lie down. :rotfl:

kmmr

silk wrote: »

We're all different people at the end of the day. An offer of 295 is still an offer of 295 no matter how you spin it, in my books at least.

Unless you ask the vendor to pay stamp duty of course. Then it is an offer of £289!