Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

timfoster

New Members
  • Posts

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About timfoster

  • Rank
    Newbie
    Newbie
  1. Not sure I agree. Firstly, having a house repossessed doesn't necessarily mean that he's gone bankrupt. His company was wound up, but he hasn't been declared bankrupt. The EA isn't the issue either. I know which disposal company are acting for Lloyds TSB and so I've put my offers directly, in writing, to them. The EA have no leverage here. They're dealing with a company who do this for a living. If they acted for a homeowner I'd agree, being matey with the EA could help with them influencing the vendor, but I don't think the same scenario applies here. In fact, when we first offered via the EA we had to chase them to even get a response. They know they have no influence and so they don't try. I suspect the EA is quite angry that we've gone direct to the disposal agent to be honest. I'm not too concerned though. Some people may consider it rude and unprofessional to cur them out of the negotiation. Bottom line though, this is my money and it's my time spent negotiating over the price. Why would I waste my time talking to a party that have no influence? It just becomes Chinese whispers. Dealing with the agent, in any deal, means that you're at the whim of the agent's opinion. If he thinks the offer is worth progressing he'll put the effort in, if he doesn't he won't. I can press my point better than an agent every single time, so when they're a neutral party, why bother with them? And this is against a backdrop of agents illegally not putting low offers forward, and claiming that there are other fictitious offers on the table. Agents are often the first to shout foul when they get upended in the box. They're not too concerned about a sneaky elbow in the face if the ref isn't looking though. Those without sin etc...
  2. Thanks for all the replies. I'm no getting it cheaper. That's the problem. As it stands, I'm not getting it at all. I did. I think it's worth less than this. It needs an awful lot of work (circa £50k) to bring it up to a good standard. Any increase over what I value it at eats into my margin when I have done the work. Buying it at £400k is better than buying it at £450k. When the work is complete it may be worth in the region of £500k, so if I end up paying £450, I make £50k less than I would have done if the disposal company accepted our offer. I agree, and the estate agent has said the same thing. However, we are interested in the house, which is why we've been trying to buy it for the last 3 months. Conversely, I get the impression that the disposal company/estate agents are messing me about. It's obviously in their interest to sell for as much as possible. When we made the initial offer we were the only people interested. We said at the time that the offer was only on the table for a finite period. I know nobody else is offering on it (I accept that could change), and so we tried to stress to the EA that taking our offer now would be best for everyone. As they didn't, it's hardly fair to say that they can change their mind, and we can't. I get the impression that they think another buyer will come in and that they may then spark a bidding war. It's a gamble on their part. As they could have had the higher price previously and missed out because they made a bad call, logic would dictate that they don't make the same mistake twice. To me, that seems straightforward. I know from experience that these repos follow a pattern most of the time. They list the property for a while and then gradually reduce it until it reaches the point where buyers are interested. I offered them an opportunity at a specific price. They didn't take that offer. They subsequently reduced the price, and so the older price is irrelevant now. Offers are based on the current asking price, not what they listed it for when it wasn't selling. I've had this discussion with EAs before. They will always say "well it was £500k before so now that the price is £450k you're already getting a £50k discount". It's nonsense. At £500k nobody was interested enough to make an offer so there is no £50k discount. There is a more realistic asking price. Even then though, it's not necessarily the actual value. That is determined by what somebody will pay on the day. Tomorrow, there may be two buyers and so the price they're willing to pay may go up. With one buyer, the price is what that one buyer wants to pay. My real question though, is what redress does the previous owner have? Whilst I'm negotiating and (hopefully) buying his old house, his debt is increasing. Whilst I want as much of a bargain as possible, I do still think that the bank etc should actually do what they are instructed to do by the law, i.e. obtain the best price, and sell it when a viable offer is on the table. My higher offer is no longer on the table so obtaining that price isn't an option now. If they do the same again, knowing full well that this offer will not be on the table indefinitely, I can't see how they can avoid the accusation. Disposal companies are the ambulance chasers of the property market. They don't like their methods being questioned, I suspect because the majority of the public don't even know they exist and they'd like to keep it that way. There would be public outrage if they understood that these people are making millions out of a pointless market that shouldn't even exist. The bank should list the property with the estate agent themselves with an instruction to reject below a certain price, refer below another, and accept above that. This is after all the only thing that the disposal company does. It just means that yet another company generates a non-existence market to force a commission where there doesn't need to be one.
  3. I hope someone can point me in the right direct with this. We are looking to buy a repo. We've been negotiating with the EA for about 2 months, with offers being rejected and increased etc. Throughout this, the disposal agents have continually reduced the price, to the point where we're now £10k short of the asking price. We had offered £2.5k more than this but they turned that offer down. When they realised we were the only people interested they came back to us again and said they'd take our offer. By this time though, the offer was no longer on the table. The disposal agent reduced the price again, and we made a new offer, but lower than our previous one to reflect the current list price. They have again turned the offer down. We're now at the point where they have said they'll advertise for two week at the current price in the newspaper before thy consider our current offer. We have made it clear that in two weeks time, that offer will no longer be on the table. As we are the only interested party, it seems clear that they'll reduce the price again when they get no further offers. Obviously when they do, any new offer we make will be lower than our current offer to reflect the new asking price. Now, my questions are these: Since they have rejected the higher offer, and then decided to accept it after the offer had been withdrawn. They have now rejected our current offer, but will more than likely try to get it back on the table when no further offers are forthcoming in the next two weeks. Does this show that they are not obtaining best value for the property (as they are legally obliged to do) since they have already moved the price down by at least £5000? Can I bring a case against them, based on this evidence, or does it have to be the person who had it repossessed? I did my research beforehand and so have already been in contact with the previous owner The disposal company refuse to even speak to me, claiming that all offers must go through the EA. I know in this case, the initial introduction was by the EA, but hypothetically, if I knew the previous owner prior to the repo, and contacted the disposal company directly with an offer, can they force the offer to come through the EA and thus increasing the fees associated with the transaction (agents typically charge 2.5%, so this fee would not be added to the debt of the original owner if the offer was made direct to the disposal company)? That, to me, seems like they are again not acting to obtain the best price for the property. Any advice would be appreciated
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.