Gazumpers- SO RUDE!!!!

pjread

rosie383 wrote: »

I think there will be times when people gazump unknowingly if the EA hasn't told them there is already an offer on a property, but to do it on purpose is just so wrong!!

Yeah plus it wouldn't happen (or would rarely happen) if vendors and EA's didn't continue marketing properties after an offer is accepted. Really it's the seller who should be compelled to follow through on an agreed sale, but up to exchange nothing's guaranteed and it'd be messy to change that in any legally enforceable way.

I'm not sure why a rival purchaser (who may be unaware, or being fed a line) is the object of frustration rather than the vendor.

Missus_Hyde

nzseries1 wrote: »

As a gazumper, if I really want a particular house (same as you do), and I have a choice between me missing out on a house I really want, and somebody whom I don't know and will never meet getting a bit upset for a while, then I'm sorry, you're going to be the one that loses out.

Rude? Perhaps... but there's a saying - don't hate the player, hate the game. What I mean by that is, it's the system that needs to change, not the buyers.

Hmm..... I would blame the greedy vendor for disappointing the original buyer, rather than an opportunist gazumper. Quite apart from the valid points that Money makes in her post above, I'm not sure that I would want to do business with a gazumper, who having ridden rough shod over the original buyer, could perhaps be capable of deciding they wanted to drop the amount of their offer just before exchange; thereby putting the sale in jeopardy.

IMHO, although obviously it's important to get the maximum amount possible for a property, there are other important factors in a successful sale rather than just the amount of money involved.

moneyistooshorttomention

pjread wrote: »

Yeah plus it wouldn't happen (or would rarely happen) if vendors and EA's didn't continue marketing properties after an offer is accepted. Really it's the seller who should be compelled to follow through on an agreed sale, but up to exchange nothing's guaranteed and it'd be messy to change that in any legally enforceable way.

I'm not sure why a rival purchaser (who may be unaware, or being fed a line) is the object of frustration rather than the vendor.

It is down to the vendor here, rather more than a rival purchaser. In some cases the rival purchaser will know an offer has been accepted (and that makes them part of it). On the other hand, if the marketing of a house stopped as soon as an offer was agreed, then no rival could put in a bid in all innocence one had already been accepted.

When I bought my first house - I was allowed to look at a house, having been told in advance it was STC already, and told my name would just be kept in readiness in case the person who had already offered dropped out for some reason. I didn't even put an offer figure, but just waited hopefully in case they did drop out. They didn't drop out - so that was as far as it went.

When I sold that house my EA instantly put "sold STC" up on my details (without my having said a word about it - as I wasn't sure of procedure) and then told me they would keep a list of anyone else interested in case my buyer dropped out and wouldn't be even showing the house to anyone else unless my buyer did drop out.

***************

So I think there have to be very very strong mitigating circumstances to offer/accept an offer when someone else has already had theirs accepted. The only mitigating circumstances I can think of for it is if a strangers offer on a house has been accepted, but a member of the family hadn't been aware that might happen and wanted the house themselves. Obviously, in those circumstances, the family member would come first (even if someone else's offer had been accepted) - but I cant think of any others.

ognum

My recent experience is I offered on a flat, so did several other people, I lost the flat on sealed bids so I decided to leaflet the development to see if anyone else wanted to sell.

No reply to the leaflet and another flat was put up for sale in the same development, I offered on sealed bids and won. I proceed with purchase and then get a call from the vendor who doesn't realise it is me who was the purchaser. They explain they have found my note and would I like to offer higher. Huge embarrassment from them when they understand I am their purchaser.

A week later another flat in the development comes on the market, I am the first person to see it, it is in a better position and requires less work, I offer immediately while there with the EA, he contacts the vendor who accepts immediately and the flat comes off the market.

I happily back out from the vendor who attempted to gazump me. Did I feel guilty, no.

jjlandlord

Everyone's looking after his best interests.

I'm sure that those who complain here, will rationalise their decision the day they gazump, accept a gazump offer, or walk away as ognum did.

As said, don't hate the player, hate the game.

Missus_Hyde

ognum wrote: »

My recent experience is I offered on a flat, so did several other people, I lost the flat on sealed bids so I decided to leaflet the development to see if anyone else wanted to sell.

No reply to the leaflet and another flat was put up for sale in the same development, I offered on sealed bids and won. I proceed with purchase and then get a call from the vendor who doesn't realise it is me who was the purchaser. They explain they have found my note and would I like to offer higher. Huge embarrassment from them when they understand I am their purchaser.

A week later another flat in the development comes on the market, I am the first person to see it, it is in a better position and requires less work, I offer immediately while there with the EA, he contacts the vendor who accepts immediately and the flat comes off the market.

I happily back out from the vendor who attempted to gazump me. Did I feel guilty, no.

Good for you,Ognum! I would call that poetic justice!!:rotfl:;)

moneyistooshorttomention

ognum wrote: »

My recent experience is I offered on a flat, so did several other people, I lost the flat on sealed bids so I decided to leaflet the development to see if anyone else wanted to sell.

No reply to the leaflet and another flat was put up for sale in the same development, I offered on sealed bids and won. I proceed with purchase and then get a call from the vendor who doesn't realise it is me who was the purchaser. They explain they have found my note and would I like to offer higher. Huge embarrassment from them when they understand I am their purchaser.

A week later another flat in the development comes on the market, I am the first person to see it, it is in a better position and requires less work, I offer immediately while there with the EA, he contacts the vendor who accepts immediately and the flat comes off the market.

I happily back out from the vendor who attempted to gazump me. Did I feel guilty, no.

In those circumstances - that is a somewhat different situation to what we are talking about on this thread.

If a vendor plays dirty on you in that sort of way (ie accepting your offer and then deliberately trying to get a higher offer) then they "started it" (ie made it plain that the "rules" wouldn't be abided by by them). As they had already decided not to play by the rules themselves - then that meant you were free not to "play by the rules" either.

If they hadn't tried for a higher bid, after accepting yours, then you would have been morally obliged to continue with the purchase.

But, in that case, they broke morals first and did that, which left you free to "retaliate" (ie by bidding on another place instead).

Davesnave

I think it's quite hard sometimes to put a value on a particular property, so the market often decides. Inevitably, people may have their fingers burned, so long as the buying system remains as it is.

Ours is like that, which is probably why an attempt was made to gazump us quite late in the day. It didn't succeed because the vendor was in a hurry to sell, but otherwise it might have done.

From a cool-headed, purely economic point of view, I think we paid the right price, but with my emotional hat on, I can see why we might easily have paid 10%-15% more.

moneyistooshorttomention

It's just struck me that maybe some vendors might quite like immoral type buyers, instead of one who "plays by the rules". Any immoral type buyer would probably just shrug shoulders and move on if they had the dirty done on them - whereas the moral ones are probably the ones who feel quite free to retaliate (as they're outraged - as well as upset and minus some money).

jjlandlord

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

If they hadn't tried for a higher bid, after accepting yours, then you would have been morally obliged to continue with the purchase.

But, in that case, they broke morals first and did that, which left you free to "retaliate" (ie by bidding on another place instead).

:rotfl:

As I said: rationalisation.

Ognum would have been in no obligation to continue with the purchase.