Is this usual? Buyer wants to do painting/tiling before exchange etc

Pinto2013

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

The next point here is obviously just how to sack the EA without any financial comeback. That stuff they tend to put in their contract about having "found a ready and willing buyer" or whatever the exact wording is....

The EA definitely needs sacking, no question about it, but its how to do it in the circumstances without that EA presenting a bill for a buyer that turned out to be rather less than "ready".

Feeling so spooked by all this that I have dug down a bit and am pretty certain the buyer is not the individual whose name I have been given but the company of which he is a director.

Does this affect the offer/relationship with ea/contractual obligations etc in any way if I am right about this?

The company doesn't appear to have sufficient assets to buy (which fits with the scrabbling around) and also business 'buy to lets' I think get lent less than private buyers?

moneyistooshorttomention

Pinto2013 wrote: »

Feeling so spooked by all this that I have dug down a bit and am pretty certain the buyer is not the individual whose name I have been given but the company of which he is a director.

Does this affect the offer/relationship with ea/contractual obligations etc in any way if I am right about this?

The company doesn't appear to have sufficient assets to buy (which fits with the scrabbling around) and also business 'buy to lets' I think get lent less than private buyers?

I don't know the answer personally to the first question re contractual obligations. Someone else might. My own suspicion would be that it wouldn't matter whether it was the individual you thought it was or their company.

The scrabbling round for finances would tend to suggest a company operating "right on the edge" to me and I would feel even warier in your position to know that it had been made out to be a personal buyer and then turned out to be a company instead. Wondering what else you will find out if you research on them even further...

Pinto2013

kingstreet wrote: »

FWIW surveyors aren't remotely interested in decor.

They will be looking for a working toilet and washbasin in the bathroom, a worktop and sink in a kitchen and that's about it.

Otherwise, a property with an untiled bathroom wouldn't be mortgageable?

HI. Can I ask you a bit more as you seem clued on on what surveyors/valuers look for.

My conveyancer is now suggesting that I - yes me - pays for tiling and painting as otherwise I won't be able to sell except to a cash buyer! ie that it won't be mortagagable!

He seems to have forgotten than some tiles and a coat of paint actually won't make the property 'ready to let' as there is considerable plasterwork etc etc needing to be done + lining walls etc. Also that the offer I accepted WAS for cash.

I have been told that there is a 100% retention until
tiles (2 levels) on kitchen walls, tiles (3 levels) on bathroom and painting walls of flat are done. If only this were done it would still leave holes in the walls where old plaster has been knocked out ready for replastering, large gaps in the kitchen ceiling following a poor patch job when there was leak from above and so on.

All the estate agents I got to value before I appointed it said NOT to cosmetically doit up as people would like to buy a doer upper and make it their own!!!

Sorry - I know I am ranting but it is driving me around the bend!

Thanks for all your help everyone.

I think I will just have to get out of this asap and start again with better ea and solicitor/conveyancer.

I will have lost some money if I do this but not the amount I would have to spend if I follow my conveyancer's advice to do the work prior to exchange ie effectively lowering the price.

AAAAARRRGGGGHHHH!

Thanks all.

Errata

I can help you out a bit. Tiles are very last year, modern kitchens have upstands!

Pinto2013

Errata wrote: »

I can help you out a bit. Tiles are very last year, modern kitchens have upstands!

I'm smiling now too!


Thanks v much.