Should I increase the price of my property...

lookstraightahead

Op - keep us updated. It's an interesting discussion and a wealth of opinion is good even if you don't agree with me 😬.

Badger14011401

 Thanks @lookstraight ahead. I do actually think you’ve raised some great points.

and thank you @bladebaby. That is very sound advice 👍

brewthebear

That is a lot of money to lose It’s still a buyers market worth taking the punt. You’ll always think otherwise what you could have done with all that extra money 

Ramouth

Please do let us know how it all turns out OP.  This has been a very interesting thread seeing for how diverse peoples views and feelings are on this subject.  Good luck 🤞 

TheJP

GDB2222 said:

TheJP said:

JReacher1 said:

tooldle said:

JReacher1 said:

lookstraightahead said:

GDB2222 said:

simon_or said:

I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I don't blame the OP for thinking this way. This is a function of the way the English house buying system is set up. An 'offer' or its 'acceptance' has no meaning at all. Anyone can become an EA and spout any nonsense re valuations that they wish.

The way things work, the housing market is a dog eat dog environment and not a world of unicorns and rainbows where people are willing to gift tens of thousands of pounds (whether perceived or real) to a stranger without being legally bound to do so. Blame the system and property culture we have in England, it's human nature for people to adapt their behaviour to it.

I totally agree. All the people here saying to 'do the honourable thing', would they do that if it were their £50k? 

What £50k? They could end up losing their onward property and not getting the £50k. Or not even selling. But they will get to keep their BBQ I suppose. 

They sold it in three days. Very hard to see why they would struggle to sell it a second time. 

Not sold, but has been under offer since October ‘21. There was a similar thread not so long ago, where a vendor having been under offer for months decided to ask the ‘buyer’ for a significant chunk of extra money citing the rising market. The vendor in that case, just like this case, was the cause of the delay. Initially the buyer accepting the increased cost. Several days later they thought better of it and pulled out. IIRC the buyer updated some time later to say the property was still on the market at its ‘new’ price, without interest. Here is the link in case the OP is interested. https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6333463/seller-increases-asking-price-after-10-months-when-they-have-caused-the-delay-in-exchange/p1

Yes I remember this thread and thought at the time that the seller was right to increase the price. It’s ridiculous to think you can buy a house at a price agreed ten months ago. 

Not if the seller is the reason it has taken 10 months. Jack Reacher would do the right thing, you not so much...

Unless you have given away £50k, are you in a position to lecture us about what you think is the ‘right thing'? 

So by your rhetoric all sellers should draw out the sale to increase the value of the property? The seller in the case went with their buyers because they agreed to a longer completion date due to the onward sale now the seller wants to increase the price when if it was a normal sale the buyers would have completed long before this.

Again would you as a seller using your own rhetoric reduce the house by 50% should the market collapse in the 10 months. I very much doubt it.

TheJP

JReacher1 said:

TheJP said:

JReacher1 said:

tooldle said:

JReacher1 said:

lookstraightahead said:

GDB2222 said:

simon_or said:

I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I don't blame the OP for thinking this way. This is a function of the way the English house buying system is set up. An 'offer' or its 'acceptance' has no meaning at all. Anyone can become an EA and spout any nonsense re valuations that they wish.

The way things work, the housing market is a dog eat dog environment and not a world of unicorns and rainbows where people are willing to gift tens of thousands of pounds (whether perceived or real) to a stranger without being legally bound to do so. Blame the system and property culture we have in England, it's human nature for people to adapt their behaviour to it.

I totally agree. All the people here saying to 'do the honourable thing', would they do that if it were their £50k? 

What £50k? They could end up losing their onward property and not getting the £50k. Or not even selling. But they will get to keep their BBQ I suppose. 

They sold it in three days. Very hard to see why they would struggle to sell it a second time. 

Not sold, but has been under offer since October ‘21. There was a similar thread not so long ago, where a vendor having been under offer for months decided to ask the ‘buyer’ for a significant chunk of extra money citing the rising market. The vendor in that case, just like this case, was the cause of the delay. Initially the buyer accepting the increased cost. Several days later they thought better of it and pulled out. IIRC the buyer updated some time later to say the property was still on the market at its ‘new’ price, without interest. Here is the link in case the OP is interested. https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6333463/seller-increases-asking-price-after-10-months-when-they-have-caused-the-delay-in-exchange/p1

Yes I remember this thread and thought at the time that the seller was right to increase the price. It’s ridiculous to think you can buy a house at a price agreed ten months ago. 

Not if the seller is the reason it has taken 10 months. Jack Reacher would do the right thing, you not so much...

It’s very weird how many people seem to treat buying and selling a house as some sort of honourable transaction which is a test of someone’s moral fibre.  There should be no emotion involved at all in the transaction and it’s weird you seem to agree the OP should ignore a potential £75k increase in the value of their asset. 

If the buyer had dragged it out for 10 months then yes i would probably state that the house is now worth more but the seller needed a buyer that could wait 10 months so its a bit Cra**y that they now want to change the price. If this was a normal sale the house would have been long completed by now.

TheJP

GDB2222 said:

TheJP said:

JReacher1 said:

tooldle said:

JReacher1 said:

lookstraightahead said:

GDB2222 said:

simon_or said:

I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I don't blame the OP for thinking this way. This is a function of the way the English house buying system is set up. An 'offer' or its 'acceptance' has no meaning at all. Anyone can become an EA and spout any nonsense re valuations that they wish.

The way things work, the housing market is a dog eat dog environment and not a world of unicorns and rainbows where people are willing to gift tens of thousands of pounds (whether perceived or real) to a stranger without being legally bound to do so. Blame the system and property culture we have in England, it's human nature for people to adapt their behaviour to it.

I totally agree. All the people here saying to 'do the honourable thing', would they do that if it were their £50k? 

What £50k? They could end up losing their onward property and not getting the £50k. Or not even selling. But they will get to keep their BBQ I suppose. 

They sold it in three days. Very hard to see why they would struggle to sell it a second time. 

Not sold, but has been under offer since October ‘21. There was a similar thread not so long ago, where a vendor having been under offer for months decided to ask the ‘buyer’ for a significant chunk of extra money citing the rising market. The vendor in that case, just like this case, was the cause of the delay. Initially the buyer accepting the increased cost. Several days later they thought better of it and pulled out. IIRC the buyer updated some time later to say the property was still on the market at its ‘new’ price, without interest. Here is the link in case the OP is interested. https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6333463/seller-increases-asking-price-after-10-months-when-they-have-caused-the-delay-in-exchange/p1

Yes I remember this thread and thought at the time that the seller was right to increase the price. It’s ridiculous to think you can buy a house at a price agreed ten months ago. 

Not if the seller is the reason it has taken 10 months. Jack Reacher would do the right thing, you not so much...

Unless you have given away £50k, are you in a position to lecture us about what you think is the ‘right thing'? 

The buyer isn't giving anything away. Where have they got the magic £50k figure, zoopla? 

GDB2222

TheJP said:

GDB2222 said:

TheJP said:

JReacher1 said:

tooldle said:

JReacher1 said:

lookstraightahead said:

GDB2222 said:

simon_or said:

I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I don't blame the OP for thinking this way. This is a function of the way the English house buying system is set up. An 'offer' or its 'acceptance' has no meaning at all. Anyone can become an EA and spout any nonsense re valuations that they wish.

The way things work, the housing market is a dog eat dog environment and not a world of unicorns and rainbows where people are willing to gift tens of thousands of pounds (whether perceived or real) to a stranger without being legally bound to do so. Blame the system and property culture we have in England, it's human nature for people to adapt their behaviour to it.

I totally agree. All the people here saying to 'do the honourable thing', would they do that if it were their £50k? 

What £50k? They could end up losing their onward property and not getting the £50k. Or not even selling. But they will get to keep their BBQ I suppose. 

They sold it in three days. Very hard to see why they would struggle to sell it a second time. 

Not sold, but has been under offer since October ‘21. There was a similar thread not so long ago, where a vendor having been under offer for months decided to ask the ‘buyer’ for a significant chunk of extra money citing the rising market. The vendor in that case, just like this case, was the cause of the delay. Initially the buyer accepting the increased cost. Several days later they thought better of it and pulled out. IIRC the buyer updated some time later to say the property was still on the market at its ‘new’ price, without interest. Here is the link in case the OP is interested. https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6333463/seller-increases-asking-price-after-10-months-when-they-have-caused-the-delay-in-exchange/p1

Yes I remember this thread and thought at the time that the seller was right to increase the price. It’s ridiculous to think you can buy a house at a price agreed ten months ago. 

Not if the seller is the reason it has taken 10 months. Jack Reacher would do the right thing, you not so much...

Unless you have given away £50k, are you in a position to lecture us about what you think is the ‘right thing'? 

So by your rhetoric all sellers should draw out the sale to increase the value of the property? The seller in the case went with their buyers because they agreed to a longer completion date due to the onward sale now the seller wants to increase the price when if it was a normal sale the buyers would have completed long before this.

Again would you as a seller using your own rhetoric reduce the house by 50% should the market collapse in the 10 months. I very much doubt it.

If prices dropped 50%, I would either have to accept a drop in my negotiated price or not sell. My buyers would simply say that they could not get a mortgage at the old price.

Just confirm how many people you have given £50k to?

TonyTeacake

Badger14011401 said:

A collective thanks for the replies and opinions everyone (not so much on a few frankly, offensive ones), it’s blown up far more than I expected. 

The reason I posted originally was because I was hoping for ‘objective' views as I was torn on ethics vs economic sense and like most of the more business minded views here, because of the amount of the new valuation, the economic side made way more sense. 

There have been a real mix and some people can clearly articulate exactly the views I was hoping for. Others are tbh, quite naive and can only see this as subjective without naming names. If you can put yourself in my shoes and say that you wouldn’t consider this in my situation you’re either crazy wealthy or just…crazy. But I guess I was a little naive to post this on an open forum and expect anything less.

Just to clear up some inaccuracies mentioned by some members here: 

The house has been independently valued at £50k - £75k more. 50k being the minimum value. I live in a popular village where houses rarely come to market. Any that have sold, sell quickly and recent sales nearby are easily in-line with the new valuation. Fact. The question here isn’t 'is it actually worth £50k more?', it’s how much above £50k would it achieve? It would sell and it would sell quickly. This isn’t me bragging, it’s just the truth. I would rather not lose the sale and I rather not upset the applecart but if I was the buyer I’d be ringing my hands right now. 

The buyer has waiting but I definitely wouldn’t class it patiently. And without getting into detail, it also suited their situation to wait too. For the record, they waited 3 months for us to find a new property, we’re now three months into conveyance. They still haven’t completed some paperwork their end and now they have demanded additional items. Yes @bladebaby, ‘demanded' is the correct term, and fairly aggressively from what the EA reported. Which is why the situation has arisen. And yes, the items are substantial enough to care about, mean a lot to us and would cost a lot to replace. 2nd handhand or not, they’re valuable, high quality items that I would only consider selling at the price it would cost to replace, if at all. They were never part of the sale.

If house prices had dropped in the same period by £50k+ I would expect and accept another negotiation because I’d know that if I had to go back on the market I’d have to drop the price anyway and it would remove any doubt of finding another buyer and also the inconvenience of going through conveyance again. This goes both ways. You can blame the English house buying system all you want but sorry people, this is how the world works. You pay what something is worth, if you get it for less, pat yourself on the back, you where either lucky or a great negotiator. Take your personal feelings away from the equation, it’s a transaction between two parties that (usually) do not know each other, let alone owe any favours to one another. I’m not angry that the buyer has reopened negotiations, it’s a open negotiation up until completion. I know this all too well.

I don’t know the buyer, I’ve never met them, I wouldn’t even know if I passed them on the street so why on earth would I gift them £50k+? I wouldn't gift £50k+ to my closest friends. Fair enough, it’s not £50k+ until it has landed in my account but that’s a mute argument tbh, because if we went to market it would reach at least that amount. Sorry if you can’t accept that but unless there’s a market crash tomorrow, it’s fact. 

I genuinely think that my suggestion of offering the buyer a much lower increase was a fair compromise and probably the one I'll take. We would gain slightly more and they would still get the house, one that’s still worth far more that it’s market value. The question is whether the buyer would react like some of the posters on here and not see the bigger picture here. and b) can afford to raise.

As @sunsaru mentioned, the buyer might just be trying their luck. But why isn’t it ok if it’s the other way around? If I was a buyer and someone said to me, look, the house has increased in value dramatically, we can’t let it go for the same price BUT we’re not going to charge anywhere near full true value. Once I’d gone for a looong walk, I’d see reason and go for it. 

The only valid counter arguments here, which are exactly my own concerns, are if the chain collapses. Our buyer drops out and my sellers aren’t willing to wait. My thoughts here are that, we can sell quicker than my sellers can re-market and get a new buyer, then they have to a new conveyance process. But I guess this is my risk to weigh up. 

I was looking for others' views on “If this was you and your buyer was asking for more near completion and you found out that your property was now worth £50k (minimum) as an consequence would you take the most economically sensical option of renegotiating and if that falls through, go to market? Or the ethical option and gift the owner a house worth a lot more than they paid? I wasn’t looking for views on ‘If you were the buyer and your seller increased the price of the house near negotiation would you tell them to swivel?’ 🙄. 

@baldebaby, thanks for your interesting views on this, I’ll take onboard your ‘business’ approach on this (and quickly forget it) but it would be best if you just let the grown ups discuss this one. 

I guess we've probably exhausted all views and everything single angle here so a big thank you to (mostly) everyone. 

Why don't you upset the applecart, and remarket it for an extra 75k.
Let's say you get an extra 50k. So while the sale with yet another new buyer drags on you get a call from the seller's EA saying the house you are buying, the seller wants another 100k to reflect the new market value.

Just imagine how this would you make you feel. You would then be a victim of your own greed. You just can't have your cake and eat it.

strawb_shortcake

Could the buyers actually afford another £50-75k? With other threads talking about interest rises, and banks becoming stricter on lending that extra money may be impossible for them to stretch too. 

If you remarket the property what's the housing market and economy going to look like in 3-6 months time? Could you find yourself back at square 1 if prices drop back down. Or are you going to be thinking my house has gone up another £25k I need to remarket again?