When a listing just sit there with no reduction and no sale

System

Bossypants wrote: »

I was just expressing my amazement that the topic posted has been able to sustain such a lengthy discussion. I wish you the best of luck with your search.

I am glad I have brought some amazement to you!

It also amazes me that sellers seem to think that stale unsold listings get more appealing with increased time unsold.

System

jimbog wrote: »

The vendor is probably fast asleep oblivious to someone they have never met bashing away furiously at 4am on their keyboard about their house listing

My insomnia, like 56% of the UK population has, is giving that house extra advertising.

jimbog

Good luck with the house hunting, I hope you get the house you like

Cakeguts

vroombroom wrote: »

I haven't read all the posts so my apologies if I have missed anything.

This post is literally us. Our house has been up for just shy of a year. We've had two offers, but had to say no. The reason why? We're in a shared ownership property bought through our local council and we have to sell it at a price set by them.
If we sell at that exact price (currently around £117k), we walk away owing nothing and gaining nothing. If we sell above that price we would walk away with a small amount of shares. If we sell at the price the last buyer wanted (£105k) we'd owe loads back to the housing scheme, which they would want in one payment which we don't have, and then we'd have to find the money to move somewhere else.

So we're certainly not being difficult or anything, but our hands our tied as to what we sell for.

Take it off the market. There is no point in leaving it on because you are not going to be able to sell it. It sounds as if the market price for shared ownership properties has gone down in your area and so unless you are able to sell it for that market price you won't sell it. A property is not worth what you think it is worth it is worth what someone will pay you for it. At the moment no one wants to pay your asking price because it is about £10k too much judging by the offers you have had.

System

Cakeguts wrote: »

Take it off the market. There is no point in leaving it on because you are not going to be able to sell it. It sounds as if the market price for shared ownership properties has gone down in your area and so unless you are able to sell it for that market price you won't sell it. A property is not worth what you think it is worth it is worth what someone will pay you for it. At the moment no one wants to pay your asking price because it is about £10k too much judging by the offers you have had.

That's what I said. Keeping a listing endlessly on the market will just make it look more stale to buyers. Take it off the market for a year or so to freshen it up, and then have another stab, which might work, depending on whether the market has improved or deteriorated further.

AnotherJoe

vroombroom wrote: »

I haven't read all the posts so my apologies if I have missed anything.

This post is literally us. Our house has been up for just shy of a year. We've had two offers, but had to say no. The reason why? We're in a shared ownership property bought through our local council and we have to sell it at a price set by them.
If we sell at that exact price (currently around £117k), we walk away owing nothing and gaining nothing. If we sell above that price we would walk away with a small amount of shares. If we sell at the price the last buyer wanted (£105k) we'd owe loads back to the housing scheme, which they would want in one payment which we don't have, and then we'd have to find the money to move somewhere else.

So we're certainly not being difficult or anything, but our hands our tied as to what we sell for.

As i posted to the OP way back at the start, there's a dozen reasons why someone may not have reduced the price, but he just stuck rigidly to his single assumption about what was happening. And now he's coming up with the stunningly illogical recommendation that the best way for you to sell is to, errrm, not sell it, for a year. Oh dear.

Mind you, this is a know-it-all that knows so much, that he gave someone £2,400 not to buy a house for him :rotfl:



In your case, getting back to practical solutions, is there not a mechanism to challenge the price they have set? Where did they get the £117k from?

Davesnave

Diocletian_II wrote: »

It's next door to the massive Dairy Crest Davidstow Cheddar processed cheese factory, You are definitely an estate agent.
Exposed after all these years! Yes, I admit it, I've been creating a false identity on here since 2006.

Or for £200k cheaper you could get this bigger, much better house, with an acre more, from the same estate agent, (which isn't selling either) : https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-69969274.html

I quite like that. It's something I could enjoy. I already have one similarly set up, but it's larger and not set in a bog. I was over there a few weeks ago and the soil's appalling; all stones and clay. Equestrians wouldn't want it, but OK for tree huggers and yogurt knitters. That's its main problem, I think. Horsey folk can usually splash the cash, and they don't care much about the house itself if the land, stables and outriding are good.

System

AnotherJoe wrote: »

And now he's coming up with the stunningly illogical recommendation that the best way for you to sell is to, errrm, not sell it, for a year. Oh dear.

You clearly haven't noticed that other people are suggesting exactly the same thing as me - take it off the market to stop the listing going more and more stale, then put it back on in a year or so, depending on prevailing market conditions at the time.

System

Davesnave wrote: »

I quite like that. It's something I could enjoy. I already have one similarly set up, but it's larger and not set in a bog. I was over there a few weeks ago and the soil's appalling; all stones and clay. Equestrians wouldn't want it, but OK for tree huggers and yogurt knitters. That's its main problem, I think. Horsey folk can usually splash the cash, and they don't care much about the house itself if the land, stables and outriding are good.

That region has some of the lowest incomes in the country, though, so I'm not sure from where the funds would come to pay £695K cash for a glorified wooden shed. It's not even a popular part of Cornwall for second home buyers. Who would pay that to own a yurt campsite next to a processed cheese factory? But the owners obviously think it is special enough to warrant a £300k over valuation.

Davesnave

Diocletian_II wrote: »

That region has some of the lowest incomes in the country, though, so I'm not sure from where the funds would come to pay £695K cash for a glorified wooden shed. It's not even a popular part of Cornwall for second home buyers. Who would pay that to own a yurt campsite next to a processed cheese factory? But the owners obviously think it is special enough to warrant a £300k over valuation.

I was talking about your other one, the smallholding in Devon. It does look overpriced and I've suggested why it wouldn't make top dollar, as it might in a better connected part of the county with drier land.