Best Practice Offer Letter

Schwarzwald

TheJP said:

Schwarzwald said:

Slithery said:

Schwarzwald said:

Plus I attached conditions to my offer, e.g. offer is only valid for 72 hours, acceptance of offer must result in property being taken off the market, offer is made on the basis that the property is in good and sound conditions, without any material or structural issues, I am being granted access at least [x] times between offer acceptance and exchange, etc.

If I was selling that would put you near the bottom of my list, it makes it sound like you'd be an annoying buyer.

Interesting to hear, I obviously wld argue that it makes my offer well thought through and just lays out the conditions upfront, so rather professional than annoying.

Nothing is more annoying than somebody who keeps changing the terms of a deal.

There is no deal at this stage! You lay out the terms after you have an offer accepted and also be prepared that not all your terms will be welcomed/met. Your over thinking this part of the process. 

Sorry this doesnt make sense IMO. Sure everything is non-binding, but to say you offer a price, get it agreed and then ADD conditions is like saying you buy a washing machine and afterwards they tell you it doesnt come with any warranty. I might just turn around and return it. 

The offer has more aspects than just a number ... for example one condition could be you can only exchange after you sold your current property, obviously you should spell that out and the vendor would like to know BEFORE "accepting" your offer. 
Sure you can drop that afterwards, but just means you putting yourself at risk that a crucial aspect for your ability to complete is left out when agreeing with the vendor.

TheJP

Schwarzwald said:

TheJP said:

Schwarzwald said:

Slithery said:

Schwarzwald said:

Plus I attached conditions to my offer, e.g. offer is only valid for 72 hours, acceptance of offer must result in property being taken off the market, offer is made on the basis that the property is in good and sound conditions, without any material or structural issues, I am being granted access at least [x] times between offer acceptance and exchange, etc.

If I was selling that would put you near the bottom of my list, it makes it sound like you'd be an annoying buyer.

Interesting to hear, I obviously wld argue that it makes my offer well thought through and just lays out the conditions upfront, so rather professional than annoying.

Nothing is more annoying than somebody who keeps changing the terms of a deal.

There is no deal at this stage! You lay out the terms after you have an offer accepted and also be prepared that not all your terms will be welcomed/met. Your over thinking this part of the process. 

Sorry this doesnt make sense IMO. Sure everything is non-binding, but to say you offer a price, get it agreed and then ADD conditions is like saying you buy a washing machine and afterwards they tell you it doesnt come with any warranty. I might just turn around and return it. 

The offer has more aspects than just a number ... for example one condition could be you can only exchange after you sold your current property, obviously you should spell that out and the vendor would like to know BEFORE "accepting" your offer. 
Sure you can drop that afterwards, but just means you putting yourself at risk that a crucial aspect for your ability to complete is left out when agreeing with the vendor.

Your washing machine analogy makes even less sense. Its like you going into the shop and demanding that the washing machine is delivered within 72 hours and that the shop must maintain the washing machine annually before you pay for it. 

All of what you list is part of the conveyancing process AFTER your offer is accepted, at this stage there are too many unknowns about the chain etc. No seller in their right mind would agree to  conditions at offer stage. Nothing is binding until exchange of contracts so stating that exchange is conditional is pointless as it always is. I.e. when everyone is ready.

london21

Sellers market at present.

Having conditions etc would just nake you undesirable as a buyer. 

Schwarzwald

user1977 said:

Schwarzwald said:

Laying out the conditions upfront is market standard 

You seem to be getting a unanimous response to the contrary! What happens in other asset classes (or indeed in this asset class in different jurisdictions) is irrelevant.

yes and that is actually helpful to know. I am not taking it personal. But given one is rarely on the receiving end of offers, it is quite interesting to hear that others do indeed not add conditions.

Does that mean I change my approach?
Not necessarily, so far i had 3/4 offers accepted, so it cant be received that negative, and having spelled out these conditions upfront, was helpful for me when later reverting back, e.g. one property had damp and another had JKW, so I felt it was easier to justify a request for price reduction.

Does it guarantee anything, sure not.

Thanks for replies anyway. 

Schwarzwald

london21 said:

Sellers market at present.

Having conditions etc would just nake you undesirable as a buyer. 

agree, but my question was a general one, I didnt say "in this market". Obv adding conditions in this market is not making you more attractive as a buyer

user1977

Schwarzwald said:

user1977 said:

Schwarzwald said:

Laying out the conditions upfront is market standard 

You seem to be getting a unanimous response to the contrary! What happens in other asset classes (or indeed in this asset class in different jurisdictions) is irrelevant.

having spelled out these conditions upfront, was helpful for me when later reverting back, e.g. one property had damp and another had JKW, so I felt it was easier to justify a request for price reduction.

It wouldn't really have made any difference. Only a completely potty vendor would have demanded that you keep to the same price irrespective of (surprise) damp or JKW.

Schwarzwald

TheJP said:

Schwarzwald said:

TheJP said:

Schwarzwald said:

Slithery said:

Schwarzwald said:

Plus I attached conditions to my offer, e.g. offer is only valid for 72 hours, acceptance of offer must result in property being taken off the market, offer is made on the basis that the property is in good and sound conditions, without any material or structural issues, I am being granted access at least [x] times between offer acceptance and exchange, etc.

If I was selling that would put you near the bottom of my list, it makes it sound like you'd be an annoying buyer.

Interesting to hear, I obviously wld argue that it makes my offer well thought through and just lays out the conditions upfront, so rather professional than annoying.

Nothing is more annoying than somebody who keeps changing the terms of a deal.

There is no deal at this stage! You lay out the terms after you have an offer accepted and also be prepared that not all your terms will be welcomed/met. Your over thinking this part of the process. 

Sorry this doesnt make sense IMO. Sure everything is non-binding, but to say you offer a price, get it agreed and then ADD conditions is like saying you buy a washing machine and afterwards they tell you it doesnt come with any warranty. I might just turn around and return it. 

The offer has more aspects than just a number ... for example one condition could be you can only exchange after you sold your current property, obviously you should spell that out and the vendor would like to know BEFORE "accepting" your offer. 
Sure you can drop that afterwards, but just means you putting yourself at risk that a crucial aspect for your ability to complete is left out when agreeing with the vendor.

Your washing machine analogy makes even less sense. Its like you going into the shop and demanding that the washing machine is delivered within 72 hours and that the shop must maintain the washing machine annually before you pay for it. 

[...]

It's called Terms & Conditions. I would indeed like to know if the washing machine comes with annual service or not. That's why I would ask and clarify. 

I haven't sold a property yet, but I indeed would ask the mandated EA that I dont want to simply know the price of the offer, I would like to know the dependency on financing/mortgage, when they can move, etc.

Probably might also make me an akward seller, but I dont mind being akward, I do mind wasting time and money on an "agreed property", on which the terms of the potential transaction are actually far less agreed as I like, therefore would try to clarify as much as possible upfront to avoid re-negotiating later.

But fair enough if this is not what people to in general.

TheJP

Schwarzwald said:

TheJP said:

Schwarzwald said:

TheJP said:

Schwarzwald said:

Slithery said:

Schwarzwald said:

Plus I attached conditions to my offer, e.g. offer is only valid for 72 hours, acceptance of offer must result in property being taken off the market, offer is made on the basis that the property is in good and sound conditions, without any material or structural issues, I am being granted access at least [x] times between offer acceptance and exchange, etc.

If I was selling that would put you near the bottom of my list, it makes it sound like you'd be an annoying buyer.

Interesting to hear, I obviously wld argue that it makes my offer well thought through and just lays out the conditions upfront, so rather professional than annoying.

Nothing is more annoying than somebody who keeps changing the terms of a deal.

There is no deal at this stage! You lay out the terms after you have an offer accepted and also be prepared that not all your terms will be welcomed/met. Your over thinking this part of the process. 

Sorry this doesnt make sense IMO. Sure everything is non-binding, but to say you offer a price, get it agreed and then ADD conditions is like saying you buy a washing machine and afterwards they tell you it doesnt come with any warranty. I might just turn around and return it. 

The offer has more aspects than just a number ... for example one condition could be you can only exchange after you sold your current property, obviously you should spell that out and the vendor would like to know BEFORE "accepting" your offer. 
Sure you can drop that afterwards, but just means you putting yourself at risk that a crucial aspect for your ability to complete is left out when agreeing with the vendor.

Your washing machine analogy makes even less sense. Its like you going into the shop and demanding that the washing machine is delivered within 72 hours and that the shop must maintain the washing machine annually before you pay for it. 

[...]

It's called Terms & Conditions. I would indeed like to know if the washing machine comes with annual service or not. That's why I would ask and clarify. 

I haven't sold a property yet, but I indeed would ask the mandated EA that I dont want to simply know the price of the offer, I would like to know the dependency on financing/mortgage, when they can move, etc.

Probably might also make me an akward seller, but I dont mind being akward, I do mind wasting time and money on an "agreed property", on which the terms of the potential transaction are actually far less agreed as I like, therefore would try to clarify as much as possible upfront to avoid re-negotiating later.

But fair enough if this is not what people to in general.

Your moving further away from your OP, of course its reasonable to find out from the EA what position the vendors are in i.e. are they splitting up or have they found their onward purchase. All of which is a simple conversation with the EA, a lot of what you stated were clear demands. You add in T&Cs when you have an agreement to buy, you aren't at that stage yet. You are asking if they would be willing to sell to you at price £x. 

Schwarzwald

user1977 said:

Schwarzwald said:

user1977 said:

Schwarzwald said:

Laying out the conditions upfront is market standard 

You seem to be getting a unanimous response to the contrary! What happens in other asset classes (or indeed in this asset class in different jurisdictions) is irrelevant.

having spelled out these conditions upfront, was helpful for me when later reverting back, e.g. one property had damp and another had JKW, so I felt it was easier to justify a request for price reduction.

It wouldn't really have made any difference. Only a completely potty vendor would have demanded that you keep to the same price irrespective of (surprise) damp or JKW.

Lots of dodgy and greedy vendors in real estate, I would prefer to know as early as possible that I am dealing with a potty vendor so make it clear that I will reduce the price if they are hiding an issue. Might not accept my offer for that reason, so time and money saved.

Any way, consensus seems to be it is not market standard, at least I learned that. Thanks everyone

TheJP

Schwarzwald said:

user1977 said:

Schwarzwald said:

user1977 said:

Schwarzwald said:

Laying out the conditions upfront is market standard 

You seem to be getting a unanimous response to the contrary! What happens in other asset classes (or indeed in this asset class in different jurisdictions) is irrelevant.

having spelled out these conditions upfront, was helpful for me when later reverting back, e.g. one property had damp and another had JKW, so I felt it was easier to justify a request for price reduction.

It wouldn't really have made any difference. Only a completely potty vendor would have demanded that you keep to the same price irrespective of (surprise) damp or JKW.

Lots of dodgy and greedy vendors in real estate, I would prefer to know as early as possible that I am dealing with a potty vendor so make it clear that I will reduce the price if they are hiding an issue. Might not accept my offer for that reason, so time and money saved.

Any way, consensus seems to be it is not market standard, at least I learned that. Thanks everyone

What if the surveyor finds something (vendor may or may not have known about it) but still values the house at what you are offering? There are potty vendors out just as there are potty buyers...