Highest bidder, purchase offer refused

housebuyer143

BikingBud said:

housebuyer143 said:

pieroabcd said:

Hi,
it's already the second time that I'm the highest bidder but my offer is refused. In both cases I've offered significantly more than the asking price.

The first time the seller chose a cash buyer. Time wise the difference is 2-3 weeks at most, as both the EA and the mortgage broker guaranteed me that the chances of not getting a mortgage in my situation for that price range are close to 0%. The deposit is 20-25%.
Even the cash buyer would have to go through the survey and the conveyancing times, so it doesn't really make a huge difference to the seller.

The second time the seller hasn't even provided a reason. He never answered any of my messages on Purplebricks.

So, what do sellers want nowadays? The money is no more enough? A sworn allegiance to keep the house exactly as is for the next 20000 years?

Sorry for the rant, but it's become extremely stressful.
Is there anything that puts the sellers off? Something to avoid at all times?

Having just lost my house sale because a buyer couldn't get a mortgage when he had a 50% deposit, I tend to side with the seller and would also pick the cash buyer in that situation.
Just remember it's nothing personal, the seller is just doing what is right for them. They may contact you in 3 months if the sale falls through giving you the chance to buy again.

So buyer couldn't get a mortgage seems an affordability issue, perhaps not enough disposable cover the monthly costs! One would expect that if they claim a 50% deposit and are in work then they have done their figures and understand what their reach is. 

Offer again!

If there was an opportunity to buy again the OP would already be in possession of the house and could not buy from themselves!

I was merely saying no one is "guaranteed' a mortgage regardless of how obvious it seems you will get it. 
That is why people prefer cash buyers. I have nothing against FTBs as my new buyer is one. 

lookstraightahead

It seems really strange that vendors 'choose' a buyer that is of a certain status other than their buying position. I suppose the only exception is someone who doesn't want to have a house turned into a hmo / takeaway etc, but choosing a 'family over a 'FTB' over a 'retired vet' etc is just ridiculous. I wonder if they do the same when there's only one offer on the table?

I think it's ego - possibly thinking their house is worth more than a FTB could possibly afford. Vendors are so nosey at the moment. Hopefully they won't be able to choose soon.

Noneforit999

lookstraightahead said:

It seems really strange that vendors 'choose' a buyer that is of a certain status other than their buying position. I suppose the only exception is someone who doesn't want to have a house turned into a hmo / takeaway etc, but choosing a 'family over a 'FTB' over a 'retired vet' etc is just ridiculous. I wonder if they do the same when there's only one offer on the table?

I think it's ego - possibly thinking their house is worth more than a FTB could possibly afford. Vendors are so nosey at the moment. Hopefully they won't be able to choose soon.

People often have an emotional attachment to their houses I guess.

We didn't care who bought ours, as long as it went through without a drama. 

Lets face it, a cash buyer is going to be a preference for most vendors assuming their offer is not below the minimum they want. Their is no risk of a down valuation and no risk of them not getting a mortgage offer, because they don't need one. I guess they could get a valuation via a homebuyers survey and then reduce their offer but that is the same risk as someone needing a mortgage anyway.

It really depends on the vendors circumstances so whether they are in a chain, how much equity they want/need for an onwards purchase etc. If the vendors has loads of equity, they might take a £10k down valuation on the chin and reduce the price, especially if they are well into the conveyancing process but if they have little equity and need that £10k, they might opt to re list.

I couldn't care less what sort of person/family/couple/investor buys my house but I will pick the buyer based on whatever fits my circumstances at the time. In a market where people are paying over odds for houses, accepting a high offer from a FTB with a 10% deposit is significantly more of a risk than picking a cash buyer who has offered less. 

pieroabcd

As for the emotional attachment, either you sell the house and lose the ownership or you keep house and lose the money. There's really no other way, I'm afraid .

Still on this subject, I found quite irritating what the 1st EA told me on behalf of the seller. He said "you know, it's not only a matter of money. This family have  been living in the house since the 1920s! They really appreciate your higher offer but they preferred the cash buyer because the transaction will be much quicker" . I replied "well, you realise that 2 statements are really clashing with each other, don't you? they are basically saying in the same sentence that it's NOT a matter of money and that it IS a matter of money ".

comeandgo

pieroabcd said:

As for the emotional attachment, either you sell the house and lose the ownership or you keep house and lose the money. There's really no other way, I'm afraid .

Still on this subject, I found quite irritating what the 1st EA told me on behalf of the seller. He said "you know, it's not only a matter of money. This family have  been living in the house since the 1920s! They really appreciate your higher offer but they preferred the cash buyer because the transaction will be much quicker" . I replied "well, you realise that 2 statements are really clashing with each other, don't you? they are basically saying in the same sentence that it's NOT a matter of money and that it IS a matter of money ".

Is English your first language?  The EA told you it’s not ONLY a matter of money, so that means money is a consideration but so was speed to them.

housebuyer143

comeandgo said:

pieroabcd said:

As for the emotional attachment, either you sell the house and lose the ownership or you keep house and lose the money. There's really no other way, I'm afraid .

Still on this subject, I found quite irritating what the 1st EA told me on behalf of the seller. He said "you know, it's not only a matter of money. This family have  been living in the house since the 1920s! They really appreciate your higher offer but they preferred the cash buyer because the transaction will be much quicker" . I replied "well, you realise that 2 statements are really clashing with each other, don't you? they are basically saying in the same sentence that it's NOT a matter of money and that it IS a matter of money ".

Is English your first language?  The EA told you it’s not ONLY a matter of money, so that means money is a consideration but so was speed to them.

Ha ha I thought the same thing. Clearly it wasn't only money as they chose the cash buyer for speed...

pinkteapot

Describe yourself as a "chain-free buyer", not a "first-time buyer". It's still correct. When we were buying from rented, having previously sold our house and relocated, being a chain-free buyer was a big point in our favour we found. 

Anecdotally, I and people I know have had more problems with FTBs than experienced buyers, so as bad as it sounds I'd probably discriminate too if I had a choice of buyer. 

pieroabcd

comeandgo said:

pieroabcd said:

As for the emotional attachment, either you sell the house and lose the ownership or you keep house and lose the money. There's really no other way, I'm afraid .

Still on this subject, I found quite irritating what the 1st EA told me on behalf of the seller. He said "you know, it's not only a matter of money. This family have  been living in the house since the 1920s! They really appreciate your higher offer but they preferred the cash buyer because the transaction will be much quicker" . I replied "well, you realise that 2 statements are really clashing with each other, don't you? they are basically saying in the same sentence that it's NOT a matter of money and that it IS a matter of money ".

Is English your first language?  The EA told you it’s not ONLY a matter of money, so that means money is a consideration but so was speed to them.

No, it's not, but then why the reference to "this family have been living in this house since the 1920s"? What's the purpose?
To me a reference to a century of ownership sounded like a sign of emotional bond that they couldn't resolve to break (that in turn sounded inconsequential with  their rush for the quickest sale).