Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • nichekos
    • By nichekos 22nd Dec 17, 7:58 PM
    • 11Posts
    • 10Thanks
    nichekos
    Seller Wants Access For 6 Months After Completion
    • #1
    • 22nd Dec 17, 7:58 PM
    Seller Wants Access For 6 Months After Completion 22nd Dec 17 at 7:58 PM
    Hi everyone,

    First time buyer and first time poster here.

    I am in the process of purchasing from a "corporate seller" - and - despite some of the horror stories I've read about reposessions, it has been reasonably rapid and smooth process, so far.

    I received a copy of the contract today and one item in particular raised an eyebrow (and no amount of Googling/forum searching has shed any light).

    The clause states that the "The buyer shall permit the seller to enter the property for a period of 6 months after completion".

    Has anyone heard of this before - is this at all normal, or shall I ask my solicitor to ensure this is questioned and removed? For what possible reasons might this clause be included?

    Any thoughts and advice would be greatly appreciated.

    Thank you to anyone who reads/replies
Page 2
    • getmore4less
    • By getmore4less 24th Dec 17, 5:26 AM
    • 32,192 Posts
    • 19,351 Thanks
    getmore4less
    Probably worth having a really good look through for other non standard clauses.
    • nichekos
    • By nichekos 24th Dec 17, 8:39 AM
    • 11 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    nichekos
    I had this on my repo house for 12 months. I questioned it and it was to do with if the previous owner queried the price etc they could request it to be looked into where the bank (who repossessed) would inspect and value the house to ensure everything was done fair.
    Originally posted by dickibobboy
    Interesting - so what would have happened had there been a dispute following inspection? I would hope it would be an issue solely for the previous owner and repossessing bank to resolve between themselves (and wouldn't involve you and your property)?
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 24th Dec 17, 9:18 AM
    • 37,308 Posts
    • 157,166 Thanks
    silvercar
    Interesting - so what would have happened had there been a dispute following inspection? I would hope it would be an issue solely for the previous owner and repossessing bank to resolve between themselves (and wouldn't involve you and your property)?
    Originally posted by nichekos
    Correct. It wouldn't be an issue for the subsequent purchaser unless they could be proved they were involved in an under value sale. eg they were connected to the repossessing bank, estate agent or even the repossessed and used this connection in an underhand way.
    • Silvertabby
    • By Silvertabby 24th Dec 17, 9:44 AM
    • 2,865 Posts
    • 4,091 Thanks
    Silvertabby
    !!!8220; Interesting - so what would have happened had there been a dispute following inspection? I would hope it would be an issue solely for the previous owner and repossessing bank to resolve between themselves (and wouldn't involve you and your property)?
    Originally posted by nichekos !!!8221;
    Correct. It wouldn't be an issue for the subsequent purchaser unless they could be proved they were involved in an under value sale. eg they were connected to the repossessing bank, estate agent or even the repossessed and used this connection in an underhand way. Posted by silvercar
    That still doesn't make sense - what if the new owners have gutted the place and/or fitted new a bathroom and kitchen? The value of the house 6 months down the line will obviously be more than the value as at the time of sale.
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 24th Dec 17, 9:49 AM
    • 7,843 Posts
    • 8,024 Thanks
    davidmcn
    That still doesn't make sense - what if the new owners have gutted the place and/or fitted new a bathroom and kitchen? The value of the house 6 months down the line will obviously be more than the value as at the time of sale.
    Originally posted by Silvertabby
    Then they'll make adjustments for the recent works. Surveyors are familiar with how to do retrospective valuations.

    Though (having sold plenty of repos in the past) I wouldn't say it's a standard clause, and it's unhelpfully vague if all they mean is "once in a blue moon we might want you to allow a valuer in for a quick look around".
    Last edited by davidmcn; 24-12-2017 at 10:10 AM.
    • AnotherJoe
    • By AnotherJoe 27th Dec 17, 10:02 PM
    • 9,605 Posts
    • 10,683 Thanks
    AnotherJoe
    Then they'll make adjustments for the recent works. Surveyors are familiar with how to do retrospective valuations.

    Though (having sold plenty of repos in the past) I wouldn't say it's a standard clause, and it's unhelpfully vague if all they mean is "once in a blue moon we might want you to allow a valuer in for a quick look around".
    Originally posted by davidmcn
    Itís still hard to understand how that works. As said letís say old kitchen and bathroom have been removed, possibly replaced, possibly not. How is the valuer meant to know what state the previous ones were in ? What if the new owners have added or removed living space ? Turned one bedroom into two, or two into one?

    Surely anything that needs doing can be done from plans and reference to similar properties, looking at the property when itís been changed radically can be of no help.

    If the sellers are insistent on this, Iíd want the clause much more prescriptive about who was allowed, for how long, eg one visit by an accredited valuer for no more than one hour, or something like that.
    • davidmcn
    • By davidmcn 27th Dec 17, 10:17 PM
    • 7,843 Posts
    • 8,024 Thanks
    davidmcn
    Itís still hard to understand how that works. As said letís say old kitchen and bathroom have been removed, possibly replaced, possibly not. How is the valuer meant to know what state the previous ones were in ? What if the new owners have added or removed living space ? Turned one bedroom into two, or two into one?
    Originally posted by AnotherJoe
    Presumably most of this could be checked from the marketing information or other pics taken by the lender's agents when they took possession.

    I've only encountered such a request for access once, not sure how rare they are - as you say, you can argue much of this from desktop (or drive-by) valuations with a fair degree of accuracy.
    • nichekos
    • By nichekos 6th Jan 18, 9:11 AM
    • 11 Posts
    • 10 Thanks
    nichekos
    For anyone who has a similar issue in the future and is interested in the outcome of this - here's what my conveyancer said:

    This is usual in repossession properties. The lender in possession is under an obligation to secure the very best price they can for the property. If this is questioned by the original owner following completion for example, they may need to reinspect/revalue.

    It's non-negotiable as far as the seller is concerned, so whilst I'm still not entirely happy about it, I'm not going to pull out of the sale. I have asked for an additional sentence to be added - e.g. to state any dispute which may arise following an inspection is entirely between the previous owner and mortgage provider and nothing to do with me.
    • silvercar
    • By silvercar 6th Jan 18, 11:15 AM
    • 37,308 Posts
    • 157,166 Thanks
    silvercar
    For anyone who has a similar issue in the future and is interested in the outcome of this - here's what my conveyancer said:

    This is usual in repossession properties. The lender in possession is under an obligation to secure the very best price they can for the property. If this is questioned by the original owner following completion for example, they may need to reinspect/revalue.

    It's non-negotiable as far as the seller is concerned, so whilst I'm still not entirely happy about it, I'm not going to pull out of the sale. I have asked for an additional sentence to be added - e.g. to state any dispute which may arise following an inspection is entirely between the previous owner and mortgage provider and nothing to do with me.
    Originally posted by nichekos
    Thanks for reporting back.

    Great to hear you are going ahead. I'm confident this will be one of those things that may look worrying on paper but will pan out fine.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,096Posts Today

7,055Users online

Martin's Twitter