Unreasonable purchaser can we do anything?

ian103

We had a buyer pull this stunt, our reaction was to tell them to 'go away' and we instructed the EA to remarket the house immediately as the price was not renegotiable. They paid the agreed price a few days later. Definitely a low life stunt.

The only time in my opinion that this is acceptable is when something comes to light that alters the basis of the offer. One place we brought needed a new garage roof, the vendor said it was being replaced, we offered / he accepted and then cancelled the roof works - we reduced our offer by the cost of the roof works when we found out which was about a week before exchange

maninthestreet

Surely this problem is owned by the OP's buyer and not the OP, as it's the OP's buyer's buyer that is asking for the price reduction?

Okydoky25

I really would be telling them where to go. Instead if all clubbing together to pay her off. All tell her were she can get off. I doubt she really wants to start all over herself and the EA won't be to impressed with her either.

moneyistooshorttomention

Contessa wrote: »

I'm reminded of the old saying that in relationships it's the person with the least commitment (or the least to lose) who has the most power. I think it applies here too.

I'd not heard of that saying before...

...but it makes a lot of sense to me (whether in relationships or in this case).

The "What the heck...it isn't that important to me anyway...so I can just walk if I want to" mindset...

Hmmm....remembers from my working days that having a bit of savings meant I could (quite literally) afford to turn down jobs that represented A Really Bad Idea, as opposed to just a Bad Idea.

Good point Contessa.

pinkteapot

Okydoky25 wrote: »

I really would be telling them where to go. Instead if all clubbing together to pay her off. All tell her were she can get off. I doubt she really wants to start all over herself and the EA won't be to impressed with her either.

We're in a chain of four and I dread something like this happening. But a single EA is selling three out of the four houses, so they're pretty motivated to push it all through. I'm hoping they'll put a stop to any shenanigans.

Good luck OP - let us know what happens. It is utterly immoral given the costs that four other people have incurred to get to this point, but there will always be a minority out there who try this stunt. :mad:

ERICS_MUM

maninthestreet wrote: »

Surely this problem is owned by the OP's buyer and not the OP, as it's the OP's buyer's buyer that is asking for the price reduction?

they are in a chain so every link is affected - all exchanges have to be simultaneous. I can understand why the other links in the chain would be searching for a solution.

lessonlearned

MaxTheCat wrote: »

There is nothing morally wrong about doing this it is simply a negotiation tactic within the law it's just that you and the rest of the chain somehow feel you were closer to moving and on more firm ground than you actually were. I would suggest that negotiations be held up the chain in which everyone drops their price that way the person with the most to gain I.e. the person at the top gets to take the hit as the rest of you will be no worse of. Otherwise call your purchasers bluff and risk the chain.

Nothing morally wrong. What???? Words fail me.

Legal yes, morally wrong YES, YES, YES.

Pulling a stunt like this is not simply a negotiating tactic - it is blackmail - pure and simple and it stinks.

Whilst the immediate reaction of anyone faced in this situation is to tell the perpetrator to take a hike, this isn't always the best option - unfortunately.

Just about everyone in that chain will have incurred substantial costs, some may have time limits on their mortgage offers, there may be someone in the chain who is relocating and simply has to move asap.

Sometimes calling the culprit's bluff and getting the EA to try and talk some sense into them will be enough to get everything back on track. Sometimes the other members of the chain have to get together and somehow negotiate discounts along the chain to save the day.

This is not acceptable behaviour - by any stretch of the imagination.

Hoof_Hearted

It is not immoral to ask for a reduction. However, it is immoral to ask at this stage when others are over a barrel. I would probably be so angry I would not give in, but others may be more desperate to move.

Gordon_Hose

IMO any negotiations should have been done at the offer stage.

Road_Hog

MaxTheCat wrote: »

There is nothing morally wrong about doing this

Of course it is morally wrong. Legal yes, morally right, no.


I hope that the seller tells the buyer to take a running jump off of a short pier.


I had this recently, fortunately it was a rental property I was selling and I wasn't moving home. The whole thing took about four and a half months, he was a first time buyer and I wasn't buying a property. The day before we were due to exchange, he sends a letter through his solicitor to ours, dropping the price by £15K.


My official response by email to the EA, was FOAD you C. I honestly did send that, but in full, not just an acronym. My view is, that if you give into these low lifes, then you only encourage them.