Am I being unreasonable?

Chris_English

lookstraightahead said:

Noneforit999 said:

Chronotrigger said:

You are still paying 10k over the valuations and add to the fact the lease length isn't as initially advertised.

Lender valued it at £320k. Technically that is the only valuation which matters as they can pay whatever they want for the house as long as they have the funds in place to buy it, which they do.

If I were the seller and I had a buyer with a full mortgage offer of £320k, why on earth would I drop the price £10k because a home buyer valuer disagreed?

Once the offer has been made and the buyer has a full mortgage offer, unless the survey found something which needed money spending on it, I wouldn't even entertain renegotiating with the buyer at that point. 

Which is why the buyer should walk - vendors choice of course but their loss, depending on the buyers mindset.

It’s not their loss if they then sell for more though. They had one buyer who was willing to pay the higher price, they may well find another.

lookstraightahead

Chris_English said:

lookstraightahead said:

Noneforit999 said:

Chronotrigger said:

You are still paying 10k over the valuations and add to the fact the lease length isn't as initially advertised.

Lender valued it at £320k. Technically that is the only valuation which matters as they can pay whatever they want for the house as long as they have the funds in place to buy it, which they do.

If I were the seller and I had a buyer with a full mortgage offer of £320k, why on earth would I drop the price £10k because a home buyer valuer disagreed?

Once the offer has been made and the buyer has a full mortgage offer, unless the survey found something which needed money spending on it, I wouldn't even entertain renegotiating with the buyer at that point. 

Which is why the buyer should walk - vendors choice of course but their loss, depending on the buyers mindset.

It’s not their loss if they then sell for more though. They had one buyer who was willing to pay the higher price, they may well find another.

Ok fair enough. It depends how much they value their time 😬. 6 months later zzzzzz

HotPantsCruiser

greenleaves70 said:

lookstraightahead said:

greenleaves70 said:

The seller thinks £320k is achievable and isn't desperate to sell. The other flat is irrelevant, it's a different property and market conditions change quickly.

If the down valuation isn't affecting your mortgage that isn't good a reason to try and chip down the price. If you weren't prepared to pay it, you shouldn't have offered it in the first place. 

On the other hand, it does sounds like you were misled about the lease, which I personally would not be happy about.

You can pay what you offered or walk away. 

Like there's any morals from the vendor. What they want is to have their cake and eat it. I would have already walked to be honest.

I probably would have walked too. The seller sound like they've set the asking price too high, which is dumb if they want to sell. It's also up to them. 

My point was that it's up to the buyer to do their due diligence before putting in an offer. If they put in an offer and then find out negative information about the property because the seller is unethical, the right thing to do is walk away before wasting any more time and money. As someone upthread said, the buyer can always say bye and move on. 

Trying to chip down the price after an offer has been accepted is gazundering. Any seller is going to find it enraging.

If you love a place and end up buying it, but pay slightly over the odds because you didn't know key details in advance, well great. You still get what you want. 

Unless as you say they have been "unethical", then they might expect it and drop their price?

greenleaves70

Sellers will drop their price if they come to realise they set the asking price too high in the first place when they fail to get an offer from a serious buyer.

Buyers who use a survey as leverage to force a seller to drop an already competitive price at the eleventh hour are being unreasonable. 

Only the buyer and seller between them can decide on what's acceptable. In this case, possibly the asking price has been set too high, but the buyer made an offer and the ethical thing to do is stick to it or walk away before wasting more of everyone's time and money. 

Trying to renegotiate after an offer has been accepted is not something I would do as a buyer. As a seller, I would always rather set a competitive price and attract a serious buyer than feed the cycle of greed.  

tracytown

In 9 years time you will reach an issue with the lease and have to pay about £10-15k or keep letting it run down and the lease renewal will cost even more. You could put this to the seller.

BikingBud

caprikid1 said:

"Whereas I bought for 10% under asking in a popular area because I stuck to my guns. "

Alternatively the sellers knew it was marketed at 10-15% over its value so were happy to accept a 10% under offer. There is no strong system or logic behind offers, on each side there are multiple people with emotional attachment and individual circumstances.

I was reading a thread on a forum the other day where someone had spent 3 years looking for a specific model of car and still not found one, I suspect those cars have gone up 30% in that time and will continue to do so. There is a point you just need to get on the ladder and move on. Very few people these days die in their first home, so why stress about the forever home.

Looking for a specific model of car and not finding one is entirely different from buying a house. You do not need to live in a car and if you want a Ford Capri Cosworth then buying the underpowered 1.6 just will not cut the mustard.

Whereas you buy a house because you need somewhere to live. 

Property should not be about ladders and given that people are committing to mortgages up to 35 years for a first home with increasing gaps between those much fabled rungs I am not sure how much movement there will be.

BikingBud

greenleaves70 said:

Sellers will drop their price if they come to realise they set the asking price too high in the first place when they fail to get an offer from a serious buyer.

Buyers who use a survey as leverage to force a seller to drop an already competitive price at the eleventh hour are being unreasonable. 

Only the buyer and seller between them can decide on what's acceptable. In this case, possibly the asking price has been set too high, but the buyer made an offer and the ethical thing to do is stick to it or walk away before wasting more of everyone's time and money. 

Trying to renegotiate after an offer has been accepted is not something I would do as a buyer. As a seller, I would always rather set a competitive price and attract a serious buyer than feed the cycle of greed.  

Given the comment in bold I cannot understand how you feel able to comment that some behaviour is unreasonable.

Often we know nothing other than what one party wishes to put on her,  that may be open and honest or they may only post aspects that may support their skewed perspective and we all know there are at least 3 aspects to a dispute; party 1, party 2 and the truth.

greenleaves70

BikingBud said:

Given the comment in bold I cannot understand how you feel able to comment that some behaviour is unreasonable.

Often we know nothing other than what one party wishes to put on her,  that may be open and honest or they may only post aspects that may support their skewed perspective and we all know there are at least 3 aspects to a dispute; party 1, party 2 and the truth.

Not sure I understand what I said that's controversial. What I meant was that, on here, we don't have the information to know whether the asking price quoted by the OP was competitive or not. 

I was speaking generally that trying to chip a price down after the fact based on minor faults uncovered by a survey is being unreasonable. 

Reasonable behaviour is putting in an offer you'll be happy to go through with under normal circumstances.

There may be cases where renegotiating is reasonable - when both seller and buyer are happy to enter into it. Speaking from my skewed perspective, it's a nightmare and I'd rather avoid it. oObjectively, the Scottish system where once an offer is accepted it's legally binding is much fairer. 

eidand

yes you are unreasonable. The only valuation that matters is the bank's as they are the ones providing the cash. If they said the house is worth as collateral then that should be good enough for you. A valuation is not an exact science anyway.

If I was the seller I would send you on your way quite happily to be honest.

Your choice is simple, pay the price you already offered and the bank agreed with or walk away, your choice. If you want the house more than the 10k then buy the house. This really doesn't require 7 pages of pointless discussions.

Walking away sounds like a pretty stupid move to me, but each to their own. Make a decision.

eidand

lookstraightahead said:

Chris_English said:

lookstraightahead said:

Noneforit999 said:

Chronotrigger said:

You are still paying 10k over the valuations and add to the fact the lease length isn't as initially advertised.

Lender valued it at £320k. Technically that is the only valuation which matters as they can pay whatever they want for the house as long as they have the funds in place to buy it, which they do.

If I were the seller and I had a buyer with a full mortgage offer of £320k, why on earth would I drop the price £10k because a home buyer valuer disagreed?

Once the offer has been made and the buyer has a full mortgage offer, unless the survey found something which needed money spending on it, I wouldn't even entertain renegotiating with the buyer at that point. 

Which is why the buyer should walk - vendors choice of course but their loss, depending on the buyers mindset.

It’s not their loss if they then sell for more though. They had one buyer who was willing to pay the higher price, they may well find another.

Ok fair enough. It depends how much they value their time 😬. 6 months later zzzzzz

I think you'll find that a lot of people would rather wait than sell at a discount.
The fact that it might sell in 6 months is irrelevant to the OP as it doesn't concern them anyway. The only question is do they want the house or not. That's it. Everything else is simply noise.