rent out property for 6 months whilst selling or sell empty?

logan5

So you guys would sell your houses for less than they were valued at in 2007? When I discussed the price reduction it wasn’t the ea that suggested it, I did and the one before to try and get things moving. If an ea values it at £127500 I’d expect maybe 123-125. Not getting chancers at 115. I agreed to drop it to 119950 offers in excess of, as some agents put it. The agent didn’t think this tactic worked, so I said well we need that amount then, he agreed and said they would work on viewers who were interested to get to the asking. Now they bother me with 115.

Another seller I know on the same estate has just taken his off the market for the winter, he had his up for 120 o.i.e and had an offer of 121 which he rejected, due to 2 other houses nearby getting 124 and 127.

logan5

foxy-stoat wrote: »

Sounds like you should of sold in May but at least you have a close offer now......I would call them back up and accept it or keep it vacant and visit the property regularly and chase the other £4950.

Yes if I’d know the tenant was serious about moving I probably would have taken that offer, but she didn’t let on until I got the notice letter giving me 3 weeks notice.

logan5

P.s. I’ve been in regular contact with the ea and at no time have they suggested there was anything wrong with the property or price. They just blamed the hot weather for a slow month or two. Now it seems brexit is the cause. Maybe it will be the snow over winter.

Wyndham

A house, any house, is worth exactly what someone will pay for it.

Hold out of you want to, but you'll lose money in the meantime. And please, please, please do not become a landlord just because you can't think of a better idea.

LandyAndy

logan5 wrote: »

Yes if I’d know the tenant was serious about moving I probably would have taken that offer, but she didn’t let on until I got the notice letter giving me 3 weeks notice.

Wyndham wrote: »

A house, any house, is worth exactly what someone will pay for it.

Hold out of you want to, but you'll lose money in the meantime. And please, please, please do not become a landlord just because you can't think of a better idea.

Sounds to me as if the OP is already a LL at the property that is for sale.

If so, they could have made it clearer in their first post.

Pixie5740

What a house was valued at in 2007 is irrelevant. It's what someone is willing to pay for it now that's important.

Let me get this straight, when you originally marketed the property there was a tenant in-situ. You received a reasonable offer but you turned it down because you didn't know when the tenant was going to be leaving. I assume that you hadn't served notice when you started marketing the property? Now you are proposing to get another tenant in and continue marketing in property. What is they say about doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome.....?

Do you know for certain that the two other houses nearby actually sold for £124k and £127k. Are they comparable to your property? If so I wonder why buyer snapped up those houses and not yours.

AnotherJoe

logan5 wrote: »

So you guys would sell your houses for less than they were valued at in 2007? When I discussed the price reduction it wasn’t the ea that suggested it, I did and the one before to try and get things moving. If an ea values it at £127500 I’d expect maybe 123-125. Not getting chancers at 115. I agreed to drop it to 119950 offers in excess of, as some agents put it. The agent didn’t think this tactic worked, so I said well we need that amount then, he agreed and said they would work on viewers who were interested to get to the asking. Now they bother me with 115.

Another seller I know on the same estate has just taken his off the market for the winter, he had his up for 120 o.i.e and had an offer of 121 which he rejected, due to 2 other houses nearby getting 124 and 127.

There's no law that house prices always increase.

Comms69

logan5 wrote: »

So you guys would sell your houses for less than they were valued at in 2007? - Well no, but then you want to sell. so.... When I discussed the price reduction it wasn’t the ea that suggested it, I did and the one before to try and get things moving. If an ea values it at £127500 I’d expect maybe 123-125. Not getting chancers at 115. - if an ea values it, I'd do my own research I agreed to drop it to 119950 offers in excess of, as some agents put it. The agent didn’t think this tactic worked, so I said well we need that amount then, he agreed and said they would work on viewers who were interested to get to the asking. Now they bother me with 115.

Another seller I know on the same estate has just taken his off the market for the winter, he had his up for 120 o.i.e and had an offer of 121 which he rejected, due to 2 other houses nearby getting 124 and 127.

There could be a number of reasons why they're getting 3 or 6k more.

foxy-stoat

LandyAndy wrote: »

Sounds to me as if the OP is already a LL at the property that is for sale.

If so, they could have made it clearer in their first post.

He is a landlord...

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5905888

The property will sell at the right time and price - as its interest only you will want to sell sooner rather than holding out for the highest price due to the running costs.....or put another tenant in it and sell it in a couple of years after the BS has stopped smelling the market up.

Marvel1

logan5 wrote: »

So you guys would sell your houses for less than they were valued at in 2007?

Yes I would have too, I have no choice.