The government should change the law regarding buying/selling

fart

Propertyfan wrote: »

I disagree. If the deposit is pointless then any deposit you've ever made on any item is pointless. Clearly not. Deposits are there to secure the transaction, not jeopardize it.


Anyway, the simple reality is UK people don't live in Scotland. We don't have your system so a deposit might be the only form of protection we've got. Perhaps I should move my home to Scotland. (sarcasm meant)

Ok i'm going to be brutally honest here:

It's clear you're peeved because you came up with a 'solution' which is not practical and wouldn't be supported by anyone because it's !!!!!!.

Do you understand the purpose of leaving a deposit in the situation you described? You would leave £X as to ensure if you got mucked about you could be compensated financially ONCE AN AGREEMENT HAS BEEN MADE.

Do you not understand that you can achieve the exact same thing without having to stump up money up front? I'm not saying you should all live in Scotland (although if you're going to be petulant and idiotic i may treat you as such) i'm saying that there exists a way right next door which is infinitely better than the tosh you came up with, and achieves the exact same thing as what you're proposing but takes less time, less effort and costs people less money.

Propertyfan

With respect, Fart, (!) I am British, English, live in the South East. I could be more specific but I like some anonymity.;)

The Scottish system sounds good but I do live there? Nope. So I'm not sure what your point is by explaining it to me. I live in the UK where gazumping is allowed, where there is no time frame for a survey, where the estate agent can lie to you and say "my client is a cash purchaser and doesn't need a mortgage" and you find out - seven weeks later - he did need a mortgage.

So while it's all jolly wonderful up in Scotland down here in the United Kingdom of !!!!!! Estate Agents, things don't run to plan. There is no contractual commitment in the UK. People can say yes, let's go ahead with the deal, then stall, make it up as they go along, get the EA to make up excuses, and all the while the buyer/sellers are wasting money on solicitor's fees and other related expenses.

My idea is not stupid because the DEPOSIT - DEPOSIT - hope that's clear enough for you will not be returned or taken off the sale price if the buyer defaults. WE DO NOT HAVE MANDATORY DEPOSITS FOR THE SALE/PURCHASE OF PROPERTY IN ENGLAND AND WALES.

Okay, is that clear enough for you!

That's why the 'deposit contract' proposal is necessary. To help protect the seller's interest. To make sure the buyer is serious about the sale and not just wasting everyone's time. Plus the deposit proposal would STOP gazumping. The two go hand-in-hand. Once deposit is sent to seller, seller cannot accept a higher offer on the property.

Hardly a stupid idea, surely?

With respect, just waffling on about the Scottish system means very little down here in the UK.

Propertyfan

Do you understand the purpose of leaving a deposit in the situation you described? You would leave £X as to ensure if you got mucked about you could be compensated financially ONCE AN AGREEMENT HAS BEEN MADE.

Do you not understand that you can achieve the exact same thing without having to stump up money up front? I'm not saying you should all live in Scotland (although if you're going to be petulant and idiotic i may treat you as such) i'm saying that there exists a way right next door which is infinitely better than the tosh you came up with, and achieves the exact same thing as what you're proposing but takes less time, less effort and costs people less mone

Mr Fart....

The deposit is (cue CAPTIALS....)


AN ACT OF GOOD FAITH.

Ever heard of the concept? Go 'Google' it. That's why the deposit proposal should be mandatory. IT REPRESENTS GOOD FAITH. If you can't understand that then you're the one writing "tosh."

fart

You're extremely, extremely dim.

Are you so short sighted that you can't see i'm simply suggesting a way which is infinitely better than yours, and the fact that it's already in operation in a different country is irrelevant?

The Scottish system sounds good but I do live there? Nope. So I'm not sure what your point is by explaining it to me.

Your system isn't in operation where you live, so why did you bother explaining it to us?

When you see why this answer is relevant then you'll see why your last post was tripe. I won't explain any further because you've missed so many points you're a circle.

googler

Propertyfan wrote: »

Anyway, the simple reality is UK people don't live in Scotland.

The UK consists of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland, when last I checked. Therefore, 'UK people' do live in Scotland.

We don't have your system so a deposit might be the only form of protection we've got. Perhaps I should move my home to Scotland. (sarcasm meant)

...but you could amend the system in E&W to be like that in Scotland.....

fart

googler wrote: »

...but you could amend the system in E&W to be like that in Scotland.....

He literally doesn't understand how silly he's made himself look.

The deposit is (cue CAPTIALS....)


AN ACT OF GOOD FAITH.

He quite clearly doesn't understand that i'm saying a deposit is not needed if you replace that ACT OF GOOD FAITH with one that comes into place as soon as the offer is accepted, IE, the contract itself if an act of good faith. But because he doesn't live in Scotland his deluded fairytale solution is the only acceptable one.

Wanna buy my house?
Yep, Ok, I accept.
Ok, well now we've agreed, you have to give me money in case you bottle it because i don't want to be out of pocket.
Ok, i'll try and find the deposit.

Wanna buy my house?
Yep, Ok, I accept.
Ok well now you've accepted you can't pull out without giving me compensation.

The EXACT SAME THING. Financial protection. One is logical, makes sense, saves time effort and money, the other is propertyfan's suggestion.

Propertyfan

You're extremely, extremely dim.

Are you so short sighted that you can't see i'm simply suggesting a way which is infinitely better than yours, and the fact that it's already in operation in a different country is irrelevant?

But I don't live in Scotland. So why you mentioning your system? The ENGLISH government is not going to adopt the SCOTTISH system so what is your point? And I still think the deposit system I propose is a simple method of avoiding a lot of hassle.

As for my being extremely dim, at least I'm not named Fart. That's a great username to win over an argument. Not. :rotfl:

Perelandra

But what about protecting the interests of the buyer?

If a buyer pulls out, the seller loses time. If the seller pulls out (happened to me), there are survey costs/solicitor fees that may have already been incurred.

If you're requiring a deposit for buyers, there should at a bare minimum be a requirement for sellers to provide a deposit to compensate the buyer, if the seller pulls out...

googler

Propertyfan wrote: »

With respect, Fart, (!) I am British, English, live in the South East.

The Scottish system sounds good but I do live there? Nope. So I'm not sure what your point is by explaining it to me.

His point, and mine, is that E&W would be well served by amending the buying and selling system to be more like that in Scotland, rather than by your methods.


I live in the UK where gazumping is allowed, where there is no time frame for a survey, where the estate agent can lie to you and say "my client is a cash purchaser and doesn't need a mortgage" and you find out - seven weeks later - he did need a mortgage.

No, you live in A PART OF THE UK where this happens. E&W is part of the UK, not the sum total of it.

So while it's all jolly wonderful up in Scotland down here in the United Kingdom of !!!!!! Estate Agents, things don't run to plan. There is no contractual commitment in the UK. People can say yes, let's go ahead with the deal, then stall, make it up as they go along, get the EA to make up excuses, and all the while the buyer/sellers are wasting money on solicitor's fees and other related expenses.

Again, you're in one part of the UK - in another part of the UK, things are done with decency and honour, in the main.

WE DO NOT HAVE MANDATORY DEPOSITS FOR THE SALE/PURCHASE OF PROPERTY IN ENGLAND AND WALES.

Yes, we got that. We're merely suggesting that you can improve the E&W system without the necessity for deposits. We don't have mandatory deposits in Scotland, yet we manage, on a day-to-day basis, to have offers accepted with clear entry dates specified, and to achieve entry on those dates for the majority of cases, thus implying that it's not really necessary to have a system of mandatory deposits, surely?

With respect, just waffling on about the Scottish system means very little down here in the UK.

You're not 'down there' in the UK. You're in a part of it.

googler

Propertyfan wrote: »

But I don't live in Scotland. So why you mentioning your system?

Because it works well without mandatory deposits. Because it's free from the gazumping and gazundering, the delays, the faffing over surveys, etc that you seem to want to avoid, and it does so without the need for mandatory deposits.

The ENGLISH government is not going to adopt the SCOTTISH system so what is your point?

Why not? If they wanted to improve the system, would they not look at other countries with more successful systems?

I see you do recognise the difference between England and The UK after all, then .....


As for my being extremely dim, at least I'm not named Fart. That's a great username to win over an argument. Not. :rotfl:

That's just a cheap shot. Bad form on that one.