Agent wants to " substantiate" our offer before he puts it to vendor?

Cheeky_Monkey

Wrong!!!!

Of course the vendor will still have to pay the EA their commission as they 'introduced' the buyer

kingstreet

The 1979 EA Act places an obligation on agents to qualify purchasers. Sadly, it did not prescribe how this should be done.

You can't point to the Act to insist your offer be put forward, then try to deny the EA the right to fulfill its legal obligation under the same piece of legislation.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Cheeky_Monkey wrote: »

Wrong!!!!

Of course the vendor will still have to pay the EA their commission as they 'introduced' the buyer

Not if the EA refused to meet their legal obligation in passing on the offer. I am fairly sure this would void the contract (and leave the EA open to further legal action).

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

kingstreet wrote: »

The 1979 EA Act places an obligation on agents to qualify purchasers. Sadly, it did not prescribe how this should be done.

You can't point to the Act to insist your offer be put forward, then try to deny the EA the right to fulfill its legal obligation under the same piece of legislation.

If the act does not prescribe how this be done then the EA can't put a particular method of doing it above the clear legal obligation to pass on an offer, so yes you can. I would have thought.

Does it specify they must qualify purchasers before passing on any offers?

Surrey_EA

The agent is obviously on fairly sticky ground, and in clear break of the 1979 act, in refusing to pass on an offer until a conversation with their in-house broker has taken place, however, I don't think a prospective buyer should be too surprised to be asked for some evidence of their financial capability.

kingstreet

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

If the act does not prescribe how this be done then the EA can't put a particular method of doing it above the clear legal obligation to pass on an offer, so yes you can. I would have thought.

Does it specify they must qualify purchasers before passing on any offers?

The problem is that as there is no firm direction as to how financial qualification should take place, it leaves agents with a lot of "latitude" in which they can operate.

I don't recall any set order being set out either, but it would seem somewhat odd to insist an offer be submitted to vendor without it first being qualified.

TBH the EA Act is now over thirty-five years old and is showing its age. It certainly can't have intended to permit the growth of EA financial services by allowing the kind of coercion of purchaser which is regularly reported on here.

Rambosmum

It's just a way of trying to get you to use their broker. Don't do it - they won't refuse to pass on your offer if you stand firm.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

kingstreet wrote: »

The problem is that as there is no firm direction as to how financial qualification should take place, it leaves agents with a lot of "latitude" in which they can operate.

I don't recall any set order being set out either, but it would seem somewhat odd to insist an offer be submitted to vendor without it first being qualified.

TBH the EA Act is now over thirty-five years old and is showing its age. It certainly can't have intended to permit the growth of EA financial services by allowing the kind of coercion of purchaser which is regularly reported on here.

I don't think it's odd at all to say "They have offered x, are you interested" and then check the finances once the offer is accepted. In fact I think it is very odd not to tell the vendor you have an offer if someone refuses to be checked; I haven't bought a house in 8 years but never have I been asked to prove anything before an offer has been accepted. It has to be the vendor's decision how to proceed in any rational world.
By your interpretation EAs could refuse to pass on any offer unless the buyer comes in with a suitcase full of cash and justify themselves by saying "That's the way we do things."

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Rambosmum wrote: »

It's just a way of trying to get you to use their broker. Don't do it - they won't refuse to pass on your offer if you stand firm.

Doesn't matter if they do if the vendor lives in the house. Just knock on the door or drop a note through it. I would tell the EA immediately they suggested not passing on my offer that I was going to do this at my first available opportunity; their reaction would be interesting.

kingstreet

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

I don't think it's odd at all to say "They have offered x, are you interested" and then check the finances once the offer is accepted. In fact I think it is very odd not to tell the vendor you have an offer if someone refuses to be checked; I haven't bought a house in 8 years but never have I been asked to prove anything before an offer has been accepted. It has to be the vendor's decision how to proceed in any rational world.
By your interpretation EAs could refuse to pass on any offer unless the buyer comes in with a suitcase full of cash and justify themselves by saying "That's the way we do things."

The three EAs I worked for in the 1990s wouldn't have submitted the offer without qualifying it first.

Qualification was a two minute phone call back then and my response to the negotiator would have been a yes or a no and not details of what I thought the potential purchaser could afford or be dragged up to...

As a vendor, if you got an acceptable offer then three days later your EA had to come back and tell you it was a non-starter for financial reasons, wouldn't you ask why they didn't check that in the first place?

I would.

I don't like what goes on, particularly amongst the national chain estate agents who seem to think every sale is their god-given opportunity to flog every over-priced crappy service they can shove down throat of buyer and seller.

The EA Act requires replacement.