Estate Agent not listing property as Sold STC or Under Offer (Update)

LAD917

T_J_A_8691 said:

Where we are , our biggest EA by far will not mark as under offer or STTC until the Exchange has taken place.
This way they still get all of the calls / clicks on their website.
Its a really frustrating practice.
That said they wont entertain any other offers on these properties.

When I sell, I don't want my property marked as "under offer" or SSTC until exchange.  These are meaningless terms with no legal definition.  At minimum, I want the estate agents to collect the details of other interested parties. 

The vendor is spending money and time, too.  Marking the property as "under offer" or SSTC only benefits the buyer.  The vendor is giving the buyer a benefit, with nothing in return.

If a buyer or their attorney starts making unreasonable requests during the diligence process, I don't want my recourse to be remarketing the property.  I want my recourse to be I have backup buyers / offers already lined up.

It has always seemed crazy to me to list any property as "sold" (subject to contract or not) based on a verbal offer and with no funds changing hands.  But the whole system seems crazy to me.  Given the amount of sales that fall through, the "SSTC" signs actually mean "2/3 chance of actually being sold." None of my foreign friends believe me when I tell them about it.

jazzyja

LAD917 said:

T_J_A_8691 said:

Where we are , our biggest EA by far will not mark as under offer or STTC until the Exchange has taken place.
This way they still get all of the calls / clicks on their website.
Its a really frustrating practice.
That said they wont entertain any other offers on these properties.

When I sell, I don't want my property marked as "under offer" or SSTC until exchange.  These are meaningless terms with no legal definition.  At minimum, I want the estate agents to collect the details of other interested parties. 

The vendor is spending money and time, too.  Marking the property as "under offer" or SSTC only benefits the buyer.  The vendor is giving the buyer a benefit, with nothing in return.

If a buyer or their attorney starts making unreasonable requests during the diligence process, I don't want my recourse to be remarketing the property.  I want my recourse to be I have backup buyers / offers already lined up.

It has always seemed crazy to me to list any property as "sold" (subject to contract or not) based on a verbal offer and with no funds changing hands.  But the whole system seems crazy to me.  Given the amount of sales that fall through, the "SSTC" signs actually mean "2/3 chance of actually being sold." None of my foreign friends believe me when I tell them about it.

Do you allow others to bid? Just out of interest. Or do you just ask EA to keep other potential buyers details incase it all goes to pot? 

LAD917

jazzyja said:

Do you allow others to bid? Just out of interest. Or do you just ask EA to keep other potential buyers details incase it all goes to pot? 

The latter. If I accept an offer, I honour it on the condition that the buyer moves quickly, has reasonable enquiries, and does not come back with a list of demands following a survey.  If anyone calls, the EA is clear that the vendor has accepted an offer and is committed to that offer, but they're still allowed to view in the event things fall through.  (Hardly anyone does.)

I will give the buyer a written assertion that I will give them every opportunity to complete, but will not take the property off the market until the buyer is ready to exchange.  I've seen far too many situations where vendors are back at zero after 3, 4, 6 months due to flaky buyers. 

Don't want to get gazumped? Don't fret over a relatively small potential loss of money - line up surveys, searches, solicitor, and mortgage on day one, and aim to get it all done super quickly.  Only a fool would abandon a quick-moving buyer.

warby68

I don't think the marking as sold is the issue.

Some conversations needed for reassurance probably via the agent - are the vendors still accepting viewings/seeking offers and what is their overall rough preferred timescale. They may be slow to respond with a solicitor as they want time to find an onward purchase or are not in a rush for other reasons. Its best to be open about preferences and circumstances early on.

Its possible you are being perceived as slow too.

This is where the agent should earn their money - chatting to the parties and obtaining/providing reassurance and making sure both sides are agreed on a mutual way forward. What do the vendors want to do their next step/what do you want to do yours?

Irishpearce26

Did you make it a condition of your offer? They can if the vendor wishes to keep it live in case the sale falls through, its also a way to encourage more potential customers through the door to show them other similar properties.

Don't get too hung up on it and just focus on progressing the sale.

Tokmon

LAD917 said:

T_J_A_8691 said:

Where we are , our biggest EA by far will not mark as under offer or STTC until the Exchange has taken place.
This way they still get all of the calls / clicks on their website.
Its a really frustrating practice.
That said they wont entertain any other offers on these properties.

When I sell, I don't want my property marked as "under offer" or SSTC until exchange.  These are meaningless terms with no legal definition.  At minimum, I want the estate agents to collect the details of other interested parties. 

The vendor is spending money and time, too.  Marking the property as "under offer" or SSTC only benefits the buyer.  The vendor is giving the buyer a benefit, with nothing in return.

If a buyer or their attorney starts making unreasonable requests during the diligence process, I don't want my recourse to be remarketing the property.  I want my recourse to be I have backup buyers / offers already lined up.

It has always seemed crazy to me to list any property as "sold" (subject to contract or not) based on a verbal offer and with no funds changing hands.  But the whole system seems crazy to me.  Given the amount of sales that fall through, the "SSTC" signs actually mean "2/3 chance of actually being sold." None of my foreign friends believe me when I tell them about it.

They may have no "legal definition" but they are far from meaningless. As a buyer they let me know that those properties have already had an offer excepted so that means the most likely outcome is that it won't be back on the market with a "1/3" chance of it coming back on the market in a few months. 

So these are properties that i want to filter out when searching because i don't want to be seeing properties that are under offer as these usually far outweigh properties that are currently going through the legal process due to how long it takes. So if nobody marked them when they accepted an offer buyers will end up ringing up about 10 properties and only finding one is actually not under offer. This would be a big waste of time for the buyers and the estate agents in most cases.

In todays market you won't have many issues with finding buyers again if the sale fell through and would you really want to accept an offer from someone who rang up and made an offer without even being able to view it?

I really don't see how this would benefit you much at all really as a seller and would be a right pain for buyers.