Buyer has taken the property off the market

jezzer_72

Hi,

I had an offer accepted in August and was progressing towards purchase. My mortgage was in place late September and all searches were finished by 1st week of Oct.

I had a few questions and was seeking answers to them from my conveyancer. Nonetheless, i signed the contract, title transfer and mortgage deed and sent it over to the conveyancer. The only thing i had to do was get my deposit verified. The same week i sent everything off and 2 days before i was due to verify my deposit, the Estate Agent calls to say the vendor has decided not to sell anymore and has taken the property off the market.

To this point i have spent over £1000 on fees etc. to get me to where i was comfortable (whilst awaiting answers to specific questions) to proceed. The reasons for taking it off the market was that something happened in their family life and possibly someone lost their job (so the estate agent tells me) which has meant they have decided to stay put (notwithstanding having the estate agent on 3 occasions threaten that the vendor may accept another offer if things don't speed up... which they couldn't as the mortgage application was being processed).

Anyway to my question. For me, £1000+ pounds is a lot of money that i can't really afford to just let go for nothing in return... its 5 months of saving for me. Is there any entitlement to recover these costs from the vendor? Or do i need to seek legal action through small claims?

It seems ludicrous to me that a vendor can just pull out at any stage with no recourse particularly when there are a number of upfront fees to be paid before you come close to buying the property... Is it the case that all the risk is with the buyer?

Thanks in advance.

shortcrust

It may seem unfair but both buyer and seller can pull out for any reason they like right up until exchange of contracts. Yes it's a risk you live with and there's nothing you can do to get the money you've spent back. The seller hasn't done anything wrong.

For the future, you can buy insurance that will pay out if the same happens again. I think mine was 30 quid and covered me for about 1000.

eddddy

Unfortunately, you have no basis for reclaiming any costs from the seller.

For what it's worth, had the situation been reversed... and you lost your job, you could have backed out, and the seller would not have been able to claim any of their costs from you.

konark

Buyer has taken the property off the market

You are the buyer . If you don't know the difference between the buyer and the seller maybe its best you stay away from the the property market

jezzer_72

konark wrote: »

You are the buyer . If you don't know the difference between the buyer and the seller maybe its best you stay away from the the property market

Thanks for your ever insightful post, it has been a long day. I will amend. Ps. you missed a full stop. Maybe you should stay away from typing...?

jezzer_72

Thanks for the reply all. It is a shame that buyers stand to lose such an amount of money. Seems to me that there needs to be some form of protection in law to prevent this. I understand in Scotland, once an offer is accepted neither party can pull out unless there is a problem with the sale.

eddddy wrote: »

Unfortunately, you have no basis for reclaiming any costs from the seller.

For what it's worth, had the situation been reversed... and you lost your job, you could have backed out, and the seller would not have been able to claim any of their costs from you.

Well this is what the estate agent has said... i obviously do not know if this is true or not (particularly as the estate agent has previously said the vendor would accept another offer). Also i understand that it is not him the vendor who has lost the job... just someone in the family.

I do understand what you are saying though if the shoe was on the other foot but i'd probably sell as i wouldn't be able to afford the mortgage if i lost my job.

glasgowdan

jezzer_72 wrote: »

I understand in Scotland, once an offer is accepted neither party can pull out unless there is a problem with the sale.

.

No.

In Scotland, once missives have been concluded THEN it's legally binding.

Davesnave

jezzer_72 wrote: »

Thanks for the reply all. It is a shame that buyers stand to lose such an amount of money.

Yes, it is, but sellers may stand to lose even more when buyers pull out.

We were down by tens of thousands after our buyers had their mortgage offer withdrawn in the Northern Rock debacle, and all that followed. There was nothing wrong with the house or the location, but we were on buyer number 4 by the time the house sold.

These are the rules by which the property game is played in England and Wales, so everyone should be aware of them before entering the process.

The differences between Scottish and English property transactions are often debated here. There are certainly pros and cons on both sides, but to use that terrible modern expression, ' we are where we are!'

MobileSaver

jezzer_72 wrote: »

Is there any entitlement to recover these costs from the vendor? Or do i need to seek legal action through small claims?

No and no until the point of exchange of contracts.

jezzer_72 wrote: »

Is it the case that all the risk is with the buyer?

No, the seller may also have incurred large legal fees instructing his solicitor - if you decided to pull out for any reason the seller would have no legitimate claim against you to recover those fees.

davidmcn

jezzer_72 wrote: »

I understand in Scotland, once an offer is accepted neither party can pull out unless there is a problem with the sale.

Then you understand wrongly, and I wish people would stop spreading these myths, as even punters in Scotland believe them. The main difference is that we tend to be in a contract at an earlier stage than would be the case in England. But people still hold off until e.g. they have their mortgage offer, or their sale or onward purchase has been tied up. After all, here you said you still had unanswered questions - would you have been happy to be bound into buying the property before you had satisfactory answers to those questions?

Well this is what the estate agent has said... i obviously do not know if this is true or not

It is true.

And of course the seller has also incurred costs which they're going to have to absorb.

jezzer_72

davidmcn wrote: »

It is true.

And of course the seller has also incurred costs which they're going to have to absorb.

Maybe so but then they took the property off the market. I can understand that they will have to absorb the costs they have incurred but that is entirely their fault, not mine. I see this as no defence of the vendor to be honest.

Maybe i do not understand the extent of the scottish market, i was only repeating what i have heard and knowledge is power... The correction is welcomed.

MobileSaver wrote: »

No, the seller may also have incurred large legal fees instructing his solicitor - if you decided to pull out for any reason the seller would have no legitimate claim against you to recover those fees.

I'm not partisan here... in this opposite situation the buyer should also be responsible for fees incurred by the seller.