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

Ath_Wat

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

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.

I wasn't suggesting they should. But equally, the vendor is under no obligation to reduce. There is no right or wrong here, either party can walk away. Or they can compromise. Only the OP can decide what to do.
You could equally well say that the OP would be a fool to reduce the price that it was presumably valued and marketed at. There is no suggestion that the house is not worth the price previously agreed.

Well no, because almost everybody reduces the price it was marketed at.  That's just a starting point for negotiation.

The OP would only be a fool to reduce the price below what they reasonably expect they could get from somebody else.

The negotiations concluded, or should have, when the buyer's first offer was accepted by the vendor.
The buyer has miscalculated and wants the vendor to compensate him for this.
He can certainly ask, but he shouldn't get.
The offer was accepted in May, and now, in late August .they want to renegotiate.

"Compensate" is entirely the wrong word.  

The deal is not finalised and the buyer has realised they made a mistake. They don't want to continue with the current deal, but think it is worth saying they would with a different one. It happens. Presumably they are perfectly prepared for the deal to be called off.   

NameUnavailable

m4ry444 said:

Hello

I've been waiting for my buyer to gazunder me for several weeks now after being suspicious of the amount of surveys/tradesmen she's had round since May and the were our highest of many offers.

They messaged me Friday saying she was going to be contacting my estate agent and putting in a reduced offer, but I've already signed and emailed/posted my contract to my solicitor earlier this week.

Does this have any legal implications yet if they're going to ask for money off? I'm guessing they won't have signed their contract yet if planning on asking for a reduction.

Thank you!

You need to wait and see what exactly they're expecting. You say they offered the most so maybe they've reflected on that and think they have over offered given the issues they've found (you need to find out about those too of course).

If their request if fair (i.e. you're still getting the amount you would have accepted from another buyer) then is it really worth throwing your toys out of the pram and possibly losing the place you're intending to buy?

With mortgage rates much higher as well as the massive increase in cost of living are you confident you would still get the same offers again?

TheJP

Ath_Wat said:

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.

There is something wrong with this. Future aspirations do not dictate todays market value. Its like buying a car then going back and asking for a reduction because fuel prices have risen. Typical passive aggressive approach i want the house the way i want it but i want you to pay the costs.

Ath_Wat

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

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.

There is something wrong with this. Future aspirations do not dictate todays market value. Its like buying a car then going back and asking for a reduction because fuel prices have risen. Typical passive aggressive approach i want the house the way i want it but i want you to pay the costs.

They may not determine the market value, but they determine the value to an individual.  Some houses I would pay more than market value for, some I wouldn't take for less.  That is entirely my choice as a buyer.

macman

Ath_Wat said:

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

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.

I wasn't suggesting they should. But equally, the vendor is under no obligation to reduce. There is no right or wrong here, either party can walk away. Or they can compromise. Only the OP can decide what to do.
You could equally well say that the OP would be a fool to reduce the price that it was presumably valued and marketed at. There is no suggestion that the house is not worth the price previously agreed.

Well no, because almost everybody reduces the price it was marketed at.  That's just a starting point for negotiation.

The OP would only be a fool to reduce the price below what they reasonably expect they could get from somebody else.

The negotiations concluded, or should have, when the buyer's first offer was accepted by the vendor.
The buyer has miscalculated and wants the vendor to compensate him for this.
He can certainly ask, but he shouldn't get.
The offer was accepted in May, and now, in late August .they want to renegotiate.

"Compensate" is entirely the wrong word.  

The deal is not finalised and the buyer has realised they made a mistake. They don't want to continue with the current deal, but think it is worth saying they would with a different one. It happens. Presumably they are perfectly prepared for the deal to be called off.   

I'd be quite happy to substitute 'pay' if that makes you happier? 
Given they have so far paid for 10 inspections, they appear to have invested a great deal in this property, so I doubt they'll walk away. After all these surveys, they haven't reported a single alleged defect that would devalue the property.
There is only one way to find out though.

GDB2222

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

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.

I wasn't suggesting they should. But equally, the vendor is under no obligation to reduce. There is no right or wrong here, either party can walk away. Or they can compromise. Only the OP can decide what to do.
You could equally well say that the OP would be a fool to reduce the price that it was presumably valued and marketed at. There is no suggestion that the house is not worth the price previously agreed.

Well no, because almost everybody reduces the price it was marketed at.  That's just a starting point for negotiation.

The OP would only be a fool to reduce the price below what they reasonably expect they could get from somebody else.

The negotiations concluded, or should have, when the buyer's first offer was accepted by the vendor.
The buyer has miscalculated and wants the vendor to compensate him for this.
He can certainly ask, but he shouldn't get.
The offer was accepted in May, and now, in late August .they want to renegotiate.

"Compensate" is entirely the wrong word.  

The deal is not finalised and the buyer has realised they made a mistake. They don't want to continue with the current deal, but think it is worth saying they would with a different one. It happens. Presumably they are perfectly prepared for the deal to be called off.   

I'd be quite happy to substitute 'pay' if that makes you happier? 
Given they have so far paid for 10 inspections, they appear to have invested a great deal in this property, so I doubt they'll walk away. After all these surveys, they haven't reported a single alleged defect that would devalue the property.
There is only one way to find out though.

After spending all that money and effort, they probably won’t be asking for a tiny reduction, unfortunately.

BikingBud

TheJP said:

Ath_Wat said:

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.

There is something wrong with this. Future aspirations do not dictate todays market value. Its like buying a car then going back and asking for a reduction because fuel prices have risen. Typical passive aggressive approach i want the house the way i want it but i want you to pay the costs.

OT but that's what seems to be happening with diesel cars!

We set acceptable standards for behaviour across society, those prompted and supported expectations are not limited to one sector of consumerism.

macman

GDB2222 said:

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

macman said:

Ath_Wat said:

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.

I wasn't suggesting they should. But equally, the vendor is under no obligation to reduce. There is no right or wrong here, either party can walk away. Or they can compromise. Only the OP can decide what to do.
You could equally well say that the OP would be a fool to reduce the price that it was presumably valued and marketed at. There is no suggestion that the house is not worth the price previously agreed.

Well no, because almost everybody reduces the price it was marketed at.  That's just a starting point for negotiation.

The OP would only be a fool to reduce the price below what they reasonably expect they could get from somebody else.

The negotiations concluded, or should have, when the buyer's first offer was accepted by the vendor.
The buyer has miscalculated and wants the vendor to compensate him for this.
He can certainly ask, but he shouldn't get.
The offer was accepted in May, and now, in late August .they want to renegotiate.

"Compensate" is entirely the wrong word.  

The deal is not finalised and the buyer has realised they made a mistake. They don't want to continue with the current deal, but think it is worth saying they would with a different one. It happens. Presumably they are perfectly prepared for the deal to be called off.   

I'd be quite happy to substitute 'pay' if that makes you happier? 
Given they have so far paid for 10 inspections, they appear to have invested a great deal in this property, so I doubt they'll walk away. After all these surveys, they haven't reported a single alleged defect that would devalue the property.
There is only one way to find out though.

After spending all that money and effort, they probably won’t be asking for a tiny reduction, unfortunately.

Equally, after spending all that time and money, they won't want the vendor to tell them where to stick their reduced offer, either.

m4ry444

So had feedback. They reckon there is £23k worth of repairs.


I'll give them the joists in the cellar have rot which need repairing to have their mortgage released. 

Other points are the chimney pointing, roof replacing and new electrics. However this is an 150 house so I'd imagine they should have taken this into account when they offered? I did when i bought it 5 years ago!

Also something about changing a supply lead pipe but the Plummer they had out told me this didn't need changing - I think they just want I changed. 

lisyloo

How much are they expecting you to cover? The full £23k?
i would understand them wanting a reduction, but expecting you to cover everything so they get a new roof and electrics is not reasonable.
a common starting point might be 50/50

can you tell us how much they’ve dropped their offer?
how does the new offer compare with the others and EAs/your view of market value now you have full visibility of defects? 

Dont throw your your toys out the Parm, take time reflect and try to be objective
you don’t need to answer emails immediately
are they serious?
are they being reasonable?
is the new offer ok given the defects?
is there room for negotiation? (They probably haven’t given you their bottom line).