Informed by the estate agent that they were cash buyers was untrue

Tiglet2

JohnCox25 said:

We think it maybe the buyers solicitor that has the issue, and not the buyers lender.

OP, before responding in full to your latest post, I would reiterate that the buyer's solicitor, also acts for the buyer's lender.  The lender itself relies on this solicitor, to advise them of any legal issues.  The fact is, while the lender may give the impression that they don't have a problem, they are not legal experts, so they rely on the advice of the solicitor (the buyer's solicitor).  If the buyer's solicitor advises the lender not to go ahead, the lender will not go ahead.

Rob5342

Estate agents lie about everything, all they want is a sale. Don't trust anything they say until it's been verified by a solicitor.

gettingtheresometime

I put an offer in on a property and, although I have a property to sell, had the physical cash in the bank to have bought it without the need to sell my current property or a mortgage.

The EA wanted proof that this was the case.

I subsequently found out that the sellers had instructed the EA that they would only entertain offers from FTB or people who had already sold their property.

Okydoky25

Annoying but not a lot you can do. 

We were advised our buyers were not in a chain. True but turned out they were turning their residential property into a Let property whilst also taking out equity to mortgage the house they were buying from us which in the end caused serious delays. Would have been quicker in a chain. Live and learn. 

trakky14

NameUnavailable said:

I worked as an estate agent for a while. The two most common things I heard and learnt to ignore were buyers who said they were 'cash' buyers, and vendors who said there wouldn't be a chain as they will move into rented accommodation.

We would ask 'cash' buyers for evidence of funds, but they would later say that the money was tied up with another project and so they needed a mortgage or the sale of another property to go through.

The vendors NEVER went into rented, NEVER!

To the OP - your options are to press on with the buyer or drop them and remarket, and hope that your next 'cash' buyer really is a 'cash' buyer. Or go to auction.

This is so true, we are currently selling our house to so called 'cash buyers with a very small mortgage on top'...well the small mortgage has been an absolute nightmare, the lender's solicitor has sent on additional enquiries which we answered over 3 weeks ago, all ready to exchange etc...and we are still waiting for a response. So our onward purchase and sale are in jeopardy all because of the so called small mortgage which was basically sold to us by the EA as nothing major...

I take everything they say now with a pinch of salt. 

JohnCox25

Tiglet2 said:

JohnCox25 said:

We think it maybe the buyers solicitor that has the issue, and not the buyers lender.

OP, before responding in full to your latest post, I would reiterate that the buyer's solicitor, also acts for the buyer's lender.  The lender itself relies on this solicitor, to advise them of any legal issues.  The fact is, while the lender may give the impression that they don't have a problem, they are not legal experts, so they rely on the advice of the solicitor (the buyer's solicitor).  If the buyer's solicitor advises the lender not to go ahead, the lender will not go ahead.

Thank you. Okay I understand.

I had it in my mind that the lender had their own solicitors. Seperate from the buyers solicitors. So really the buyers solicitors are mainly representing the lenders interest., and the buyers are secondary?

user1977

JohnCox25 said:

Tiglet2 said:

JohnCox25 said:

We think it maybe the buyers solicitor that has the issue, and not the buyers lender.

OP, before responding in full to your latest post, I would reiterate that the buyer's solicitor, also acts for the buyer's lender.  The lender itself relies on this solicitor, to advise them of any legal issues.  The fact is, while the lender may give the impression that they don't have a problem, they are not legal experts, so they rely on the advice of the solicitor (the buyer's solicitor).  If the buyer's solicitor advises the lender not to go ahead, the lender will not go ahead.

I had it in my mind that the lender had their own solicitors. Seperate from the buyers solicitors. 

That is sometimes the case, though only in a minority of cases - was it in your mind because somebody had said that's happening here?

Tiglet2

The lender would instruct their own solicitor if the buyer's solicitor was not on their "panel".  Otherwise the instructed solicitor acts for both parties.

trakky14

Tiglet2 said:

The lender would instruct their own solicitor if the buyer's solicitor was not on their "panel".  Otherwise the instructed solicitor acts for both parties.

Yes this has happened to us, our buyers have their own solicitors and their lender also has a solicitor...we've had to respond to both sets of enquiries its really frustrating as we can't exchange until the lenders solicitors are satisfied...we've been waiting 3 weeks for them to say if they are or not! Nothing in 3 weeks...its beyond infuriating!!