Is this a little fishy

eddddy

dsdhall wrote: »

Why bother to go to the effort of putting it on rightmove then?

If it's a repossession the law requires that the property is advertised publicly, and that the best possible price is achieved.

If the EA really is 'up to no good', it would be very difficult to explain in court why it was not advertised.

But it's relatively easy to say something like "We've no record of a phone call from Matt L requesting a viewing. If a call was made, whoever took the message must have lost it."

Which is also why sending emails or letters requesting a viewing is a better idea.

moneyistooshorttomention

"Vendor" might not have been an accurate choice of word - but "previous owner" is obviously what I meant.

"Previous owner" could darn soon tell "vendor" that EA tried to agree a sale to someone offering less than maximum possible amount.

AdrianC

eddddy wrote: »

If it's a repossession the law requires that the property is advertised publicly, and that the best possible price is achieved.

Not quite that simple. A fast and certain sale may well be deemed preferable to one that's a small amount more, but at risk of limping along for months before fizzling out.

Marvel1

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

You could always ask the neighbour if they have any idea where the vendor has gone (eg their workplace or a relative) and ask if they could pass a message on.

Going from your previous post about being annoyed (not stalking you I promise) with the child gate and saying you have given it away and phone down. I find it funny as ok to annoy a neighbour and then asking them to act as a messenger.

Pricivius

I bought a repo a few years ago. Luckily it was being marketed by a couple of estate agents. The first EA had an offer from an overseas investor and made it impossible for me to view it - dodging calls, trying to put me off etc.. So I rang the other EA and they were only too keen to show me round in the hope of stealing the sale from the other EA!

I viewed it once and made an offer £6k above the previous offer - £158k to his £152k. It had to be enough to persuade the vendor to start the process with me and it worked, partly due to the higher price but also because he was out of the country and they were concerned about getting everything tied up. I only saw it once, it had been trashed by the previous owners - hole in the ceiling, doors taken off hinges, debris everywhere - and I completed about 6 weeks later.

So... if you can take a punt, make an offer. If you need to see it first, you are probably going to struggle. You can find out who the owner is from the Land Registry as it whoever repossessed it will have a charge against the LR entry - if you care enough, you could try and make them aware that the EA is not marketing the property properly, although whether they will be bothered is anyone's guess. Or you could use the info to scare the EA...? If your morals permit, you could fight fire with fire and put in a really high offer (providing you can evidence the funds), then when it is accepted, demand to view it! An offer is not binding so you can then reduce or retract.

Whatever you do, you must move quickly if you want it. As another poster said above, not for the fainthearted.

AdrianC

Pricivius wrote: »

If your morals permit, you could fight fire with fire and put in a really high offer (providing you can evidence the funds), then when it is accepted, demand to view it! An offer is not binding so you can then reduce or retract.

Their acceptance is not binding, either, so you may well find yourself bumped and the original purchaser reinstated if you try that trick...

AlexMac

It is a repo and the website now invites higher offers;
"an offer has been made for the above property in the sum of £115,000 Any persons wishing to increase on this offer should notify the agents of their best offer prior to exchange of contracts...."
So increase it?

Then "Your Boat may Come In" and you may be lucky enough to "have a little fishy... on a little dishy"...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utkMQJeiK50

eddddy

eddddy wrote: »

If it's a repossession the law requires that the property is advertised publicly, and that the best possible price is achieved.

AdrianC wrote: »

Not quite that simple. A fast and certain sale may well be deemed preferable to one that's a small amount more, but at risk of limping along for months before fizzling out.

Oh... I think you must have mis-read my post.

You must have thought I said something like "the vendor must proceed with the highest offer" - which I didn't.

As I'm sure you realise, accepting an offer "that limps along before fizzling out" wouldn't be a route to "achieving the best price possible".

AdrianC

eddddy wrote: »

Oh... I think you must have mis-read my post.

You must have thought I said something like "the vendor must proceed with the highest offer" - which I didn't.

As I'm sure you realise, accepting an offer "that limps along before fizzling out" wouldn't be a route to "achieving the best price possible".

"...at risk of..." is not the same as "...definitely will...", of course. And by factoring that risk in, and rejecting that offer in favour of a lower one, your suggested law has quite probably been broken.

kingstreet

http://cdn1.arkive.org/media/65/657BAE03-E957-4FB0-BA51-9225D606A171/Presentation.Large/Three-spined-stickleback.jpg

It's been a long hard day!