Buyer wants to reduce offer after I've signed and sent contract

m4ry444

Voyager2002 said:

Did all these inspections of your house uncover any problems? Do the buyers have anything like a good reason to reduce their offer? (Something like, we budgeted X for our new home and now find we need to spend y dealing with carpets that are a fire risk, so can only pay X-y.)

Personally, I bought my first house at a time when prices were falling. So (i) when the survey revealed some expensive problems I obtained a corresponding reduction; (ii) the mortgage lender took a long time to decide, at a time when prices all around were going down. So once I finally had a mortgage offer I sought advice as to whether the agreed price was still a reasonable valuation, and since it was I proceeded to buy without further discussion.

In sum: if a surveyor/valuer has told your vendors the price they agreed earlier in the year is now too high then there is scope for renegotiation, taking full account of the advice they have received. Otherwise, anyone who breaks their promise at this stage is unreliable, and you would do better to find another buyer.

When I questioned the estate agent regarding the amount of people visiting, the buyers reasoning was because they want to convert the cellar and/or Extend upwards (it's an old character terrace). I've never been convinced of this as a genuine reason and thought they were justifying the amount of visits. But figured they can spend their money on multiple tradesmen if they want. There's been no mention of issues with surveys until this point which makes me think if there is a problem, they've been sat on them at the point of exchange which leaves a bad taste in the mouth

Ath_Wat

That's why they sent al the tradesmen round, but why are they saying they have reduced the offer?

m4ry444

Ath_Wat said:

That's why they sent al the tradesmen round, but why are they saying they have reduced the offer?

Said they found some costs they were not expecting. But just feels tactical that these have only been mentioned now when they had the majority of people round at least 6 weeks ago 

m4ry444

m4ry444 said:

Ath_Wat said:

That's why they sent al the tradesmen round, but why are they saying they have reduced the offer?

Said they found some costs they were not expecting. But just feels tactical that these have only been mentioned now when they had the majority of people round at least 6 weeks ago 

Yet to hear the formal reasons and reduction offer

GDB2222

How are your sellers going to react to all this? The whole purpose of your selling is to move home, and you've found somewhere chain-free that you like.

If I were your seller, with a house that you say is empty, I'd be giving you a deadline to exchange. The empty house is costing the seller money every month, and they will be appalled if they hear you want to ditch your buyer and go back to the start of the process. If your house can be re-marketed for more money, is there any reason the same doesn't apply to the house you are buying?

I'm quite surprised that, in the 50 or so posts so far, nobody has mentioned this aspect. 

eddddy

These are the kind of challenges that you're paying your estate agent to resolve.

Left to their own devices, the estate agent will probably do 2 things at the same time:

1. Try to persuade you that you should accept a reduced offer
2. Try to persuade the seller that they shouldn't make a reduced offer

The agent will be hoping that one of the two tactics above works, or that you will both compromise.

So if you're not prepared to accept a lower offer, it might be sensible to firmly tell the estate agent at the outset.

Essentially, tell the estate agent that you won't accept a lower offer, so they need communicate that to the buyer; they need to manage the buyer's reaction; and they need to keep the sale on track.

macman

So, if I understand correctly, they now want to reduce their offer, not because their multiple surveys have found any defects in your property, but because they have found that the building works they want to undertake are now going to cost more than they would have done a few months ago (now there's a surprise). And they expect you to finance their shortfall?
FTB's: you've gotta love 'em...
As a previous post says, Arkell vs Pressdram most certainly applies here.

Ath_Wat

m4ry444 said:

m4ry444 said:

Ath_Wat said:

That's why they sent al the tradesmen round, but why are they saying they have reduced the offer?

Said they found some costs they were not expecting. But just feels tactical that these have only been mentioned now when they had the majority of people round at least 6 weeks ago 

Yet to hear the formal reasons and reduction offer

They don't have to give you "formal" reasons.  But if their offer was based on the idea that it would take them £X to bring it to what they wanted and they have now found it would cost £X + Y, the house is in reality worth £Y less to them.  While annoying for you, there is nothing really wrong with this.  The only question is whether someone else will give more than they have offered for it.

Ath_Wat

macman said:

So, if I understand correctly, they now want to reduce their offer, not because their multiple surveys have found any defects in your property, but because they have found that the building works they want to undertake are now going to cost more than they would have done a few months ago (now there's a surprise). And they expect you to finance their shortfall?
FTB's: you've gotta love 'em...
As a previous post says, Arkell vs Pressdram most certainly applies here.

It's not a matter of financing their shortfall - they may well have made a genuine mistake in their estimation of costs and realised they have over offered.  As I say, while annoying, they would be fools to carry on and buy it at the original price if this is the case.

Ath_Wat

eddddy said:

These are the kind of challenges that you're paying your estate agent to resolve.

Left to their own devices, the estate agent will probably do 2 things at the same time:

1. Try to persuade you that you should accept a reduced offer
2. Try to persuade the seller that they shouldn't make a reduced offer

The agent will be hoping that one of the two tactics above works, or that you will both compromise.

Given that, as you say, the seller is paying the estate agent they really shouldn't be doing 1 unless they genuinely believe that the reduced price is not going to be bettered by anyone else.  If an estate agent acts impartially they are not doing their job.  It's not to resolve things and compromise and get a smooth sale - it's to get as good a deal for the seller and as bad a one for the buyer as can be reasonably achieved.