House on market for 18 months, how low can you offer?

onyx911

I haven’t read all the other comments. Just wanted to say that when we listed last year the first offer we got was £100k under asking and we weren’t offended at all. We just declined. Another viewer offered £55k under asking. We later accepted £25k under asking price. Just wanted to say it’s worth a try and didn’t upset us that people tried their luck.

Crashy_Time

onyx911 said:

I haven’t read all the other comments. Just wanted to say that when we listed last year the first offer we got was £100k under asking and we weren’t offended at all. We just declined. Another viewer offered £55k under asking. We later accepted £25k under asking price. Just wanted to say it’s worth a try and didn’t upset us that people tried their luck.

Wrong website. LOL.

Crashy_Time

Seriously, offering anything more than 200k for this house is bonkers IMO, in fact I think it is worth way less than that.

AnotherJoe

Crashy_Time said:

noitsnotme said:

Crashy_Time said:

noitsnotme said:

jamesanderson1980 said:

Everyone is ignoring the Elephant in the room....that being that Banks and other lenders who will NOT want to lend on properties where there is no right of possession. They certainly didn't want to prior to the introduction of Assured Shorthold Tenancies, which were brought in in order to encourage investment in the domestic rental market because of a shortage of properties available to rent. Indeed, when I considered the option of offering 5 year tenancies myself, my Bank advised that it would be in breach of their covenants and that they would not alter them to accommodate such a change. As I understand things it would appear that my Bank is not unique in this regard.

I see our resident persistent troll is back posting copy/pasted stuff from the comments section here again - https://www.landlordtoday.co.uk/breaking-news/2020/10/abolishing-section-21-means-rent-up-stock-down-more-tenant-insecurity

If it has relevance to the OP`s question then what is the problem?

Forum team obviously think it’s a problem as they’ve banned 20+ of his accounts in the last few months 🤣

I commented on the content of the link though, not the poster, and I asked you about your views on the content of the link?

Its got literally nothing to do with the OP's question. Zero.

Crashy_Time

AnotherJoe said:

Crashy_Time said:

noitsnotme said:

Crashy_Time said:

noitsnotme said:

jamesanderson1980 said:

Everyone is ignoring the Elephant in the room....that being that Banks and other lenders who will NOT want to lend on properties where there is no right of possession. They certainly didn't want to prior to the introduction of Assured Shorthold Tenancies, which were brought in in order to encourage investment in the domestic rental market because of a shortage of properties available to rent. Indeed, when I considered the option of offering 5 year tenancies myself, my Bank advised that it would be in breach of their covenants and that they would not alter them to accommodate such a change. As I understand things it would appear that my Bank is not unique in this regard.

I see our resident persistent troll is back posting copy/pasted stuff from the comments section here again - https://www.landlordtoday.co.uk/breaking-news/2020/10/abolishing-section-21-means-rent-up-stock-down-more-tenant-insecurity

If it has relevance to the OP`s question then what is the problem?

Forum team obviously think it’s a problem as they’ve banned 20+ of his accounts in the last few months 🤣

I commented on the content of the link though, not the poster, and I asked you about your views on the content of the link?

Its got literally nothing to do with the OP's question. Zero.

It was mentioned that the OP`s seller might have to become a landlord if they don`t cop themselves on about their asking price, that was the relevance.