House sale fell apart

Flugelhorn

Sunsaru said:

Maybe they had the money but didn't want people to know where it came from coz... erm... 'tings innit??

But if it is just a line on a bank / building society then it doesn't indicate where it comes from, I have never had to prove any more than that...actually I tell a lie, a solicitor asked us once in 2002 - we said "drug dealing and gun running" and she said "fine" and wrote down "savings" 

user1977

Flugelhorn said:

Sunsaru said:

Maybe they had the money but didn't want people to know where it came from coz... erm... 'tings innit??

But if it is just a line on a bank / building society then it doesn't indicate where it comes from

They might not go far enough back to check its source, but they will/should at least check that it is your money (which is generally persuasive if it's been in your account for months, rather than dropped into it a few days earlier by whoever you're laundering cash for).

breaking_free

Here's another story of "Buyers not being upfront about funds", to reassure you that it happens a lot!

Mother in law's onward purchase only completed on the 3rd attempt. The 2nd chain fell through when the parents of the young lady selling to mother in law's sellers refused to hand over the gifted deposit they'd promised for the onward purchase. Why? Because a gold-digging boyfriend, who hadn't contributed any money, refused to let the house be bought in the young lady's name only. He was insisting that it be in both their names, but the parents wisely dug their heels in and the chain collapsed the day before exchange/completion. This state of affairs only came out in the final days before everything was due to happen. 

Very hard on mother in law and the people she was buying off, but I have nothing but respect for those parents. 

angelasocks

Thanks everyone for comments

Solicitor rang today fortunately I get all my fees back as none of the searches had started.  Won't get my survey money back though obviously.

The EA did confirm that they had verified proof of funds from the buyer a day or so after the offer. I asked solicitor about this she said solicitor checks were more in depth than the EA proof of funds checks.  Honestly I don't know if the EA is at fault.  

I've put my property on hold and off the market for now till I figure out what I want to do.

"Very hard on mother in law and the people she was buying off, but I have nothing but respect for those parents. " Yep agree good on them. 

" It woud be interesting to put a spotlight on those two and ask them exactly what they think they are doing...wouldnt that be good? "  Would be good but unlikely.   

Youth_leader:  My cats have done more for me than I have them, made so many friends and they were instrumental in my starting a small side hustle photography business.  

Thanks again all

BV88

breaking_free said:

Why? Because a gold-digging boyfriend, who hadn't contributed any money, refused to let the house be bought in the young lady's name only. He was insisting that it be in both their names, but the parents wisely dug their heels in and the chain collapsed the day before exchange/completion. This state of affairs only came out in the final days before everything was due to happen. 

Very hard on mother in law and the people she was buying off, but I have nothing but respect for those parents. 

Not sure why that would collapse the sale? The parents and the daughter could have just carried on with the purchase irrespective of the boyfriend's wishes. Unless of course any mortgage also required his income and he was expected to pay part of the mortgage. Would you sign up for liability to pay a mortgage but not be named on the deeds?

Flugelhorn

I doubt the mortgage company would have accepted a mortgage including his name if he wasn't on the deeds

BungalowBel

We bought a property for cash.  Money that we had in the bank, ready and waiting, proceeds of an inheritance (which we had to prove to the solicitor). 

That's a cash buyer.  Not someone who needs a mortgage, or has to sell before they will have the funds.

MobileSaver

BungalowBel said:

Money that we had in the bank, ready and waiting, proceeds of an inheritance (which we had to prove to the solicitor). That's a cash buyer.  Not someone who needs a mortgage, or has to sell before they will have the funds.

+1

If you have to sell a property first then you're just a cash buyer wannabe until the property actually sells.

breaking_free

BV88 said:

breaking_free said:

Why? Because a gold-digging boyfriend, who hadn't contributed any money, refused to let the house be bought in the young lady's name only. He was insisting that it be in both their names, but the parents wisely dug their heels in and the chain collapsed the day before exchange/completion. This state of affairs only came out in the final days before everything was due to happen. 

Very hard on mother in law and the people she was buying off, but I have nothing but respect for those parents. 

Not sure why that would collapse the sale? The parents and the daughter could have just carried on with the purchase irrespective of the boyfriend's wishes. Unless of course any mortgage also required his income and he was expected to pay part of the mortgage. Would you sign up for liability to pay a mortgage but not be named on the deeds?

If my partner bought a house and I wasn't fronting any money I wouldn't expect him to put me on the deeds; if we broke up I could then make a claim as part owner, despite paying nuffink. Quids in for me and hard cheese for him.

Remember, this couple were selling "their" house to pay for onward purchase so he should have had some equity; presumably he didn't and presumably it was solely owned by the daughter. 

The daughter might have been blinded by love but her parents certainly weren't!