Bank-owned flat: making an offer?

redonion

Thinking about putting in an offer on a flat that turns out to be bank owned, no lender (according to the land registry). When I viewed it the estate agent talked about it as if it were a private seller, though he didn't actually lie. It's up as a regular sale, not auction. It is tenanted at the moment.

Any advice about how to take this situation into consideration in the price? What added risks of delays and/or the deal falling through should I expect? Will I find it hard to get basic information from them during conveyancing?

The EA certainly had very little info when I viewed the place...

googler

Are you hoping to move in, or do you want to be a landlord?

redonion

googler wrote: »

Are you hoping to move in, or do you want to be a landlord?

I would move in.

phill99

If its owned by the bank, it's likely to be a repossession. It sounds like the landlord defaulted on the mortgage.

There will be no lender shown on the land registry details as they are no longer the lender. Not all repossessions go for auction.

Buying it is the same as buying a private sale, although they won't be able to give info on day when the boiler was serviced etc, and your offer needs to reflect this.

redonion

phill99 wrote: »

If its owned by the bank, it's likely to be a repossession. It sounds like the landlord defaulted on the mortgage.

There will be no lender shown on the land registry details as they are no longer the lender. Not all repossessions go for auction.

Buying it is the same as buying a private sale, although they won't be able to give info on day when the boiler was serviced etc, and your offer needs to reflect this.

That was my thought also, but if so, I'm surprised that there are tenants? Couldn't it just be the bank holding property?

What is an appropriate discount over a normal seller, given that this is not an auction?

Is it common for agents to try to avoid telling buyers that it's a bank selling?

googler

redonion wrote: »

I would move in.

How do you know the tenants will move out when you want to move in?

redonion

googler wrote: »

How do you know the tenants will move out when you want to move in?

As I understand it, either they can be served 2 months notice, they vacate and sale goes through, or they can't and it doesn't:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4755625

So I see that as another risk to whether the sale goes through. That's in addition to increased gazumping risk from bank sale... though on the other hand I'm confused re whether this actually is a reposession, given the presence of tenants.

If it isn't a repo, does that make a difference to banks' behaviour re gazumping?

I've viewed flat and it certainly looks like tenants living there, not ex-owner occupiers - and I presume they wouldn't lie about that anyway.

redonion

Just want to draw attention again to the question of price implication: What discount would you look for in this situation?

phill99

It sounds like a landlord that defaulted on his mortgage. Quite a common occurrence. That's why tenants are till there.

Dave_the_Ginger_Cat

In times gone by, banks and building societies used to own properties, mostly for relcoating staff. I would not get too distracted by this point. There should be no chain and this is to your advantage

I would focus more on the fact that it is tenanted, and that you will all need to ensure vacant possession before sale.

Any price negotiation should be on the basis of condition - I can see no defect in the title from what has been said here.

antrobus

redonion wrote: »

Just want to draw attention again to the question of price implication: What discount would you look for in this situation?

Why would you expect a discount on the property simply because the current legal owner is in possession of a banking licence?