Vendor will only sell if he can buy house back - is that legally enforceable?

kinger101

Walk away. He isn't sure he wants to sell, and you don't want him to pulling out after you've spend the best part of two grand on solicitors fees and surveys.

AnotherJoe

GeorgeDawes wrote: »

He can't have his cake and eat it, you either sell something or you don't, it works that way with other commodities like art, cars etc esp if someone is paying over 700k for it!!

You're looking at it logically, he is looking at it emotionally and irrationally. Walk.

Shahni

Its possible, yes. But for all the reasons above its probably not a good idea. It'd also likely cause you problems if you were to take out mortgage finance (from the cml handbook, which is the standard set of instructions from mortgage lenders):

"Rights of Pre-emption and Restriction on Resale

6.12.1 You must ensure that there are no rights of pre-emption, restrictions on resale, options or similar arrangements in existence at completion which will affect our security. If there are, please report this to us (see part 2)."

AdrianC

If you have a contractual obligation to offer him first refusal, then that's enforceable - although quite what he'd claim his loss would be is unclear.

But is there anything to say how that offer has to be wrapped? You could always say "Here is your offer of first refusal. Your acceptance is subject to a 10% deposit and exchange of contracts immediately, and completion within 28 days." Since that's basically auction-purchase terms, he wouldn't have a hope of claiming it was unfair

Also, is there anything to say how the price of such an offer is determined? If not, then there's nothing to say you can't offer it to him at the open market value plus <say> 25% (let's not be greedy and add too big a hike...)

Let him have his pointless little victory, if it'll keep the sale on tracks. If you lean on him to remove the clause, then he could either pull the sale completely or just add all sorts of delays and headaches.

It's not the agent's problem - it's his solicitor who should be putting the lid on him, but they ultimately have to go with the client's instruction, even if it is against advice.

There's no way he can make you pass the clause on, unless he adds a covenant to the property.

stator

Only go along with it if it really is a special house. If you can find somewhere else then do so.
But you are in quite a strong position because very few other people would agree to it, so maybe drop your price.
As others have said it does depend on the wording. Make sure you agree the details up front rather than letting it drag on.
And there is a good chance he will pull out before exchange but you could always ask for a deposit from him.

PasturesNew

This is quite reasonable as a request. Just make sure it's written correctly.

Many years ago I read of a story where a seller's contract said that the buyer had to sell them the house back at the price they paid - and the new owners didn't spot it until it was time for them to sell. That sort of thing is less likely to occur these days, but you never know

AnotherJoe

AdrianC wrote: »

But is there anything to say how that offer has to be wrapped? You could always say "Here is your offer of first refusal. Your acceptance is subject to a 10% deposit and exchange of contracts immediately, and completion within 28 days." Since that's basically auction-purchase terms, he wouldn't have a hope of claiming it was unfair.

He has every hope of claiming it was unfair. What you mean, presumably, is his chance of winning a legal case made on those grounds. Two very different things.

And that's what the OP could end up with, a costly and drawn out legal battle. Who'd want to get into one of those even if they are assured they will win?

All those saying "go ahead" or its "reasonable" have forgotten the practical details. OK so you have to offer him first refusal. How do you do that? T

hat means knowing where he is. How do you trace him? How long do you need to look for him if you cant find him or if he doesn't respond? You think that means he doesn't want to buy but he was away,and he sues when he gets back. Do you draw up a contract detailing all this? As someone said, how does that fit with the mortgage co? Will they be happy being bound by this condition (what do you think GeorgeDawes??? )

The potential complexities are boundless and costly. This is all aside what will likely happen, which is after you've spent a lot of money and a lot of time, he pulls out. I'd be looking for other houses right now.

AdrianC

AnotherJoe wrote: »

He has every hope of claiming it was unfair. What you mean, presumably, is his chance of winning a legal case made on those grounds. Two very different things

You are, of course, right.

Dan-Dan

PasturesNew wrote: »

This is quite reasonable as a request. Just make sure it's written correctly.

Many years ago I read of a story where a seller's contract said that the buyer had to sell them the house back at the price they paid - and the new owners didn't spot it until it was time for them to sell. That sort of thing is less likely to occur these days, but you never know

A fool and his money

HappyMJ

How old is he? What would happen if he were to die? I wouldn't mind giving him first refusal if that's what he wants. If you want to sell it to a family member and he outbids them wouldn't that be a good thing as you would get more money for it. I would think you could name your price rather than being forced to accept any offer he makes.