UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #82   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 16:36:30 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 12:55:24 +0100, Richard Faulkner
wrote:

In message , Mike Mitchell
writes
On 2 Sep 2004 04:43:13 -0700, (MBQ) wrote:

The vendor is taking advantage of the system to maximise his sale
price.

Exactly so! Cheating, in other words.

MM



So almost everybody is a cheat??


Seems like it!

Given my experience of the housing business, almost every seller wants
to maximise their sale price, and almost every buyer wants to minimise
their purchase price, and both take advantage of the system to do so.


How does that happen that the seller under the English system is
taking advantage? Note that the title of this thread is "Scottish
property system" and that is the one you ought to be concerned about.
Although the English system is far from ideal, at least buers can see
what the prices are up front and can compete fairly. It's stability I
want to see, not gazumping/gazundering as a national pastime because
people think it's a clever thing to do in a dog-eat-dog world.

Forget it. This is just a name that has been applied in the property
market by wishful thinkers who think that it's somehow unnatural.
It isn't. It is simply short term price adjustment in a rapidly
heating or cooling market. Houses are a commodity, and like any
other commodity subject to the natural laws of the market.
That may not suit some people, but it's the way things are.

If you feel uncomfortable with the stock market you don't buy and sell
in it. If you feel uncomfortable with the property market, don't buy
and sell in that. It really isn't difficult.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
  #83   Report Post  
Owain
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| You can make somebody an offer for anything, all they can do
| is refuse, the RRP is after all only a recommendation.
| Yes, but under the Scottish sealed bids system, they refuse
| your offer and, get this, they won't allow you to make another!

It is always possible that the seller rejects all the offers and requests
new offers. But he'd be daft to, as psychologically people who've had one
offer refused are unlikely to be willing to make another one.

| It's the silly season 24/7/365 over the border...

That's why we don't have gazumping, gazundering, chains collapsing, negative
equity, etc etc. We also don't have the abomination of leasehold flats, and
our public land registry predates England's by a few centuries.

Owain


  #84   Report Post  
Mark
 
Posts: n/a
Default

, Mike Mitchell
writes
Fine. That's entirely reasonable. Their view of "close" may differ
to yours of course.


One offer I had was 20 grand below the asking price. That ain't
close!



I think you will have to face up to the fact that if you still
have not sold your house, it is overpriced.
Now with a market starting to fall, you may wish you had accepted that
offer.


  #85   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 16:31:46 +0100, Richard Faulkner
wrote:

In message , Mike Mitchell
writes
Fine. That's entirely reasonable. Their view of "close" may differ to
yours of course.


One offer I had was 20 grand below the asking price. That ain't close!


Was that £20K below the current asking price? Or a previous one?


Current.

Is it possible that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it
might be the "value" in the current market. It's only 10% below your
asking price.


No. They were trying it on. A builder...

MM


  #86   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:46:19 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

It is possible that the house was put on the market for a way inflated
price by the agents in the first place, on the offchance that a bite
will happen. Have you compared with other nearby properties?


Yes. Mine's the cheapest. By far.

MM
  #87   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:47:29 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 16:20:53 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:



it's as if everyone is driving blind
down a foggy motorway in the wrong direction.

I think you are the one trying to swim against the current.


Salmon do it all the the time.


... and look what happens to them in the end when they get there.


Don't they have sex?

MM
  #88   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:05:03 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 16:31:46 +0100, Richard Faulkner
wrote:

In message , Mike Mitchell
writes
Fine. That's entirely reasonable. Their view of "close" may differ to
yours of course.

One offer I had was 20 grand below the asking price. That ain't close!


Was that £20K below the current asking price? Or a previous one?


Current.

Is it possible that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it
might be the "value" in the current market. It's only 10% below your
asking price.


No. They were trying it on. A builder...



The colour of their money is the same - even lawyers, accountants and
bank managers buy houses.

As prices are now starting to fall in some areas, you may find that
this was not that bad an offer.



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
  #89   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:07:03 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:46:19 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

It is possible that the house was put on the market for a way inflated
price by the agents in the first place, on the offchance that a bite
will happen. Have you compared with other nearby properties?


Yes. Mine's the cheapest. By far.

OK..

But are you comparing like for like? Are the others nearby selling?



..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
  #90   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:49:54 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 16:30:45 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 14:46:21 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 14:08:49 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On 2 Sep 2004 04:43:13 -0700, (MBQ) wrote:

The vendor is taking advantage of the system to maximise his sale
price.

Exactly so! Cheating, in other words.

MM


Oh good grief.

Why don't you just give your house away.? Then you'll be able to
sleep with a clear conscience.


Here is the dictionary meaning of cheat, cheating, etc:

1. To deceive by trickery; swindle: cheated customers by overcharging
them for purchases.
2. To deprive by trickery; defraud: cheated them of their land.
3. To mislead; fool: illusions that cheat the eye.

Tell me which bit you don't understand and I'll try to explain it.


I understand all of these perfectly, but no cheating is taking place.
There is nothing wrong with a vendor legally maximising his sale price
by inviting multiple bidders. The deal isn't closed until the
paperwork is signed so how can cheating have happened.?


The situation we were discussing was where a buyer had put in an
offer, which I had accepted, having assured myself *as far as
possible* that the buyer was genuine, and then reneging on the deal in
favour of a higher offer. That is cheating in my book. What is *not*
cheating is when you tell your would-be buyer, i.e. prior to accepting
his offer, that you have had another offer and therefore cannot yet
accept his offer until you have had time to check the genuineness of
both offers. But I assert that once you have committed to one of them,
then you are morally obliged to follow it through. If not, a handshake
is worth nothing today.

MM


  #91   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 19:27:22 +0100, "Owain"
wrote:

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| You can make somebody an offer for anything, all they can do
| is refuse, the RRP is after all only a recommendation.
| Yes, but under the Scottish sealed bids system, they refuse
| your offer and, get this, they won't allow you to make another!

It is always possible that the seller rejects all the offers and requests
new offers. But he'd be daft to, as psychologically people who've had one
offer refused are unlikely to be willing to make another one.

| It's the silly season 24/7/365 over the border...

That's why we don't have gazumping, gazundering, chains collapsing, negative
equity, etc etc. We also don't have the abomination of leasehold flats, and
our public land registry predates England's by a few centuries.


But you do have people paying way over the Offers Over price, i.e. a
stab in the dark, in an attempt to secure the property of their
dreams. There must be an awful lot of disappointed buyers in Scotland!

MM
  #92   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:07:41 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:47:29 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 16:20:53 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:



it's as if everyone is driving blind
down a foggy motorway in the wrong direction.

I think you are the one trying to swim against the current.

Salmon do it all the the time.


... and look what happens to them in the end when they get there.


Don't they have sex?

MM



Not really. The fish preparing to spawn swim up river. The female
lays eggs in depressions she digs in the gravel and the male comes
along and fertilises them. Then the female covers them. That's as
close to sex as it gets.

Then 95% of the spawning fish die and decompose.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
  #93   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:14:25 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:


The situation we were discussing was where a buyer had put in an
offer, which I had accepted, having assured myself *as far as
possible* that the buyer was genuine, and then reneging on the deal in
favour of a higher offer. That is cheating in my book.


Fine, but it's unnecessary to get into that situation in the first
place. A verbal offer is only a verbal offer.


What is *not*
cheating is when you tell your would-be buyer, i.e. prior to accepting
his offer, that you have had another offer and therefore cannot yet
accept his offer until you have had time to check the genuineness of
both offers.


This is the whole point. Acceptance should be at the point of
signature on a contract, not on a handshake in house buying and
selling. There are far too many reasons outside the control of both
parties that could cause the sale to fall through. Then all that
happens is that people get upset, embarassed and call each other
cheats. If you stick to a first to the post arrangement, that is a
far more sensible approach because the rules are crystal clear and
there is a moment in time when other bets are genuinely off.


But I assert that once you have committed to one of them,
then you are morally obliged to follow it through.


The problem is one of applicability. It is not totally within your
control or the buyer to complete the deal until all of the due
processes have been completed. If you are giving a commitment
before that, you are taking a risk on something that you or the buyer
may not be able to fulfill.


If not, a handshake
is worth nothing today.


Of course handshakes are worth something. It is a question of
applicability.

I do business and agree things on handshakes with people all the time,
but only when I know them really well and have an ongoing business
relationship with them. Even then, I make sure that any caveats on
either side are discussed and in the open. From this I can make an
assessment of when and if a piece of business will proceed.
Sometimes a business partner will say that something will happen;
other times that they think it will happen and other times that they
will try to make it happen. I make sure that I have a common
understanding as to what that means, and if the business doesn't
happen we certainly don't lose trust or fall out.

With house buying and selling, one is mainly dealing with complete
strangers who may not have an appreciation of what is involved and are
not good at assessing other strangers who in turn may do unpredictable
things.

To agree things to be in some way "binding" (even morally) under those
circumstances is inappropriate and unnecessary. All that you achieve
is to raise expectations, which can fall by the wayside in a second
through the actions or inactions of others around the periphery.

I am not saying that one shouldn't be straightforward in dealing with
others, but one should use appropriate qualification of buyers and be
cautious about what is agreed and on what basis. A long as everybody
understands the basis of the discussion there is no problem,

It's naive to do otherwise with property transactions.

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
  #94   Report Post  
sid
 
Posts: n/a
Default



But you do have people paying way over the Offers Over price, i.e. a
stab in the dark, in an attempt to secure the property of their
dreams. There must be an awful lot of disappointed buyers in Scotland!

MM



MM must be a troll. Nobody is that thick.

Lets end this posting .







-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
  #95   Report Post  
Richard Faulkner
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In message , sid writes


But you do have people paying way over the Offers Over price, i.e. a
stab in the dark, in an attempt to secure the property of their
dreams. There must be an awful lot of disappointed buyers in Scotland!

MM



MM must be a troll. Nobody is that thick.

Lets end this posting .



I was beginning to think this aswell, persistently taking a contrary
view to any idea presented, even to the point of reading posts in such a
way as to find an opportunity to post a contrary view..

However, he does have a current interest in the property market, so
benefit of the doubt may prevail.

I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed that
every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word at face
value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat naive and, as
more time went by, I actually reached the point where it was difficult
to believe any body until they actually proved themselves to me.


--
Richard Faulkner


  #96   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 03:24:05 +0100, Richard Faulkner
wrote:

In message , sid writes


But you do have people paying way over the Offers Over price, i.e. a
stab in the dark, in an attempt to secure the property of their
dreams. There must be an awful lot of disappointed buyers in Scotland!

MM



MM must be a troll. Nobody is that thick.

Lets end this posting .



I was beginning to think this aswell, persistently taking a contrary
view to any idea presented, even to the point of reading posts in such a
way as to find an opportunity to post a contrary view..

However, he does have a current interest in the property market, so
benefit of the doubt may prevail.

I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed that
every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word at face
value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat naive and, as
more time went by, I actually reached the point where it was difficult
to believe any body until they actually proved themselves to me.



As a matter of interest, Richard, was this because they deliberately
set out to mislead or had rose tinted spectacles about what they and
others could achieve?


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
  #97   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:13:54 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:07:03 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:46:19 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

It is possible that the house was put on the market for a way inflated
price by the agents in the first place, on the offchance that a bite
will happen. Have you compared with other nearby properties?


Yes. Mine's the cheapest. By far.

OK..

But are you comparing like for like? Are the others nearby selling?


No. Nothing is selling!

MM
  #98   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:23:29 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:07:41 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:47:29 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 16:20:53 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:



it's as if everyone is driving blind
down a foggy motorway in the wrong direction.

I think you are the one trying to swim against the current.

Salmon do it all the the time.

... and look what happens to them in the end when they get there.


Don't they have sex?

MM



Not really. The fish preparing to spawn swim up river. The female
lays eggs in depressions she digs in the gravel and the male comes
along and fertilises them. Then the female covers them. That's as
close to sex as it gets.


Anything that close would be fine by me!

Then 95% of the spawning fish die and decompose.


Yes, but what a way to go! Don't tell me you've never envisaged that
Goldie Hawn scene?

MM
  #99   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 03:24:05 +0100, Richard Faulkner
wrote:

In message , sid writes


But you do have people paying way over the Offers Over price, i.e. a
stab in the dark, in an attempt to secure the property of their
dreams. There must be an awful lot of disappointed buyers in Scotland!

MM



MM must be a troll. Nobody is that thick.

Lets end this posting .



I was beginning to think this aswell, persistently taking a contrary
view to any idea presented, even to the point of reading posts in such a
way as to find an opportunity to post a contrary view..

However, he does have a current interest in the property market, so
benefit of the doubt may prevail.

I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed that
every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word at face
value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat naive and, as
more time went by, I actually reached the point where it was difficult
to believe any body until they actually proved themselves to me.


Well, there ya go! We have uncovered the virulent nest of vipers that
are endemic throughout British life, haven't we just! Can't we all
just get along without cheating each other?

MM
  #100   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 00:59:49 +0100, "sid" wrote:



But you do have people paying way over the Offers Over price, i.e. a
stab in the dark, in an attempt to secure the property of their
dreams. There must be an awful lot of disappointed buyers in Scotland!

MM



MM must be a troll. Nobody is that thick.


That's because you can't get your head around what I am saying. People
have always shot the messenger when they didn't like the message!

MM


  #101   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 09:37:26 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:13:54 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:07:03 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:46:19 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

It is possible that the house was put on the market for a way inflated
price by the agents in the first place, on the offchance that a bite
will happen. Have you compared with other nearby properties?

Yes. Mine's the cheapest. By far.

OK..

But are you comparing like for like? Are the others nearby selling?


No. Nothing is selling!

MM



OK. So that tells you that they are all at too high a price, or that
nobody finds the area or properties attractive, or that we are at the
end of the summer and people are not quite yet interested in property.

It depends on how keen you are to move quickly. If you are not, then
seeing what happens during September and deciding at the end of the
month seems sensible. Obviously keep an eye on what other prices are
doing and react accordingly.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
  #102   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 09:42:22 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 03:24:05 +0100, Richard Faulkner
wrote:



I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed that
every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word at face
value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat naive and, as
more time went by, I actually reached the point where it was difficult
to believe any body until they actually proved themselves to me.


Well, there ya go! We have uncovered the virulent nest of vipers that
are endemic throughout British life, haven't we just! Can't we all
just get along without cheating each other?

MM


The trouble is that nobody else thinks that this is cheating. Not
because they are of a reptilian nature, but simply because it isn't
unless you paint yourself into a corner by promising things upon which
you may not be able to deliver.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
  #103   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 09:53:19 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 09:37:26 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:13:54 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:07:03 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:46:19 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

It is possible that the house was put on the market for a way inflated
price by the agents in the first place, on the offchance that a bite
will happen. Have you compared with other nearby properties?

Yes. Mine's the cheapest. By far.

OK..

But are you comparing like for like? Are the others nearby selling?


No. Nothing is selling!

MM



OK. So that tells you that they are all at too high a price, or that
nobody finds the area or properties attractive, or that we are at the
end of the summer and people are not quite yet interested in property.

It depends on how keen you are to move quickly. If you are not, then
seeing what happens during September and deciding at the end of the
month seems sensible. Obviously keep an eye on what other prices are
doing and react accordingly.


I feel that the Govt is to blame for all the panic they have sown in
the market. Remember Mervyn King preaching doom and gloom? And the
interest rate rises have frightened away first-time buyers, the very
ones likely to be interested in my property. It is dire. I hear that
property prices actually fell in August, for the first time in two
years. Oh, well. It'll be the Govt (and the tax payer) who will have
to fund the temporary rehousing of dispossessed families.

MM
  #104   Report Post  
Richard Faulkner
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In message , Andy Hall
writes
I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed that
every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word at face
value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat naive and, as
more time went by, I actually reached the point where it was difficult
to believe any body until they actually proved themselves to me.



As a matter of interest, Richard, was this because they deliberately
set out to mislead or had rose tinted spectacles about what they and
others could achieve?


I could write a book about it, (but cant be bothered g).

Heres a few:

1) Buyer says its a cash purchase. I ask if he's got the cash in the
bank. He says yes.

2 weeks, or 6 months later, (or whatever), after lots of chasing and
being reassured that all is OK, a building society surveyor turns up.

Never had cash in the first place.

This lead me to ask most people who said they had cash to prove it with
a bank statement or building society book or similar. Some showed it
without hassle. Others got really offended. Of those who got really
offended, where we took their word, didnt have the cash.

2) Buyer says he's got a mortgage.

3 weeks later we find that lender wont lend due to some financial
reason.

There was a period where one of my colleagues would come up with a
Buyers or Sellers "Phrase of the Week", one of these was "I've got my
mortgage".

3) Buyer says this is my offer, and I definitely wont negotiate after
survey.

3 weeks later - buyer is back to negotiate several thousand pounds off
due to "normal" things in a survey.

4) Seller says they have decided not to sell their house. 2 months
later, we find out that someone who we introduced has bought it, (In
most of these case, I started legal proceedings, or actually went to
court, and got paid).

5) Seller agrees and signs a sole agency agreement, but doesnt want a
for sale board. 2 weeks later we find that they are on the market with
several estate agents.

6) I lost count of the number of people who decided not to sell or buy,
due to a death in the family. I am sure that this was sometimes true,
but I can recall a few whose father, mother, grandparent, had died 2 or
3 times g

I could go on.....

1), 4), and 5), are definitely misleading. 2) and 3) could be naive, or
could be deliberate attempts to gain the chance to purchase, knowing
full well that they may not be able to.

I would suggest that the parties to almost every house sale/purchase,
are on tenterhooks until exchange of contracts, for fear of the deal not
proceeding, either at all, or at the agreed price. Clearly, there are
many genuine reasons why a deal may not proceed, but there are also many
devious reasons.


--
Richard Faulkner
  #105   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 14:30:52 +0100, Richard Faulkner
wrote:

In message , Andy Hall
writes
I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed that
every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word at face
value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat naive and, as
more time went by, I actually reached the point where it was difficult
to believe any body until they actually proved themselves to me.



As a matter of interest, Richard, was this because they deliberately
set out to mislead or had rose tinted spectacles about what they and
others could achieve?


I could write a book about it, (but cant be bothered g).

Heres a few:

1) Buyer says its a cash purchase. I ask if he's got the cash in the
bank. He says yes.

2 weeks, or 6 months later, (or whatever), after lots of chasing and
being reassured that all is OK, a building society surveyor turns up.

Never had cash in the first place.

This lead me to ask most people who said they had cash to prove it with
a bank statement or building society book or similar. Some showed it
without hassle. Others got really offended. Of those who got really
offended, where we took their word, didnt have the cash.


OK, so fibbers and timewasters. One wonders what they hope to
achieve.


2) Buyer says he's got a mortgage.

3 weeks later we find that lender wont lend due to some financial
reason.

There was a period where one of my colleagues would come up with a
Buyers or Sellers "Phrase of the Week", one of these was "I've got my
mortgage".


The guy is probably naive, or hasn't done his homework..



3) Buyer says this is my offer, and I definitely wont negotiate after
survey.

3 weeks later - buyer is back to negotiate several thousand pounds off
due to "normal" things in a survey.


Buyer is playing a game, or is again naive and in the cooling off
period thinks he has offered too much - the survey is a perfect way to
slippery shoulder the blame.




4) Seller says they have decided not to sell their house. 2 months
later, we find out that someone who we introduced has bought it, (In
most of these case, I started legal proceedings, or actually went to
court, and got paid).


Seller thinks you're stupid. He's again the naive one.



5) Seller agrees and signs a sole agency agreement, but doesnt want a
for sale board. 2 weeks later we find that they are on the market with
several estate agents.


Seller thinks you're stupid. As above.



6) I lost count of the number of people who decided not to sell or buy,
due to a death in the family. I am sure that this was sometimes true,
but I can recall a few whose father, mother, grandparent, had died 2 or
3 times g


This is so silly. You probably wouldn't mind if people just said
that they had changed their mind. Why they feel it necessary to put
the blame (if there indeed was any) on something like this, I don't
know. A form of saving face, I guess.



I could go on.....

1), 4), and 5), are definitely misleading. 2) and 3) could be naive, or
could be deliberate attempts to gain the chance to purchase, knowing
full well that they may not be able to.

I would suggest that the parties to almost every house sale/purchase,
are on tenterhooks until exchange of contracts, for fear of the deal not
proceeding, either at all, or at the agreed price. Clearly, there are
many genuine reasons why a deal may not proceed, but there are also many
devious reasons.


I'm not sure that I understand why people would want to enter into a
prospective purchase knowing that they can't meet the price, unless
they hope that they get some way down the track and can reduce the
price, e.g. on survey, when the vendor is further down the track on
their purchase and doesn't want the sale to fall.

All of which illustrates that whether for genuine, stupid or nefarious
reasons, a sale isn't a sale until exchange of contract and that
setting or perceiving higher expectations is probably unwise.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl


  #106   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 14:30:52 +0100, Richard Faulkner
wrote:

In message , Andy Hall
writes
I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed that
every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word at face
value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat naive and, as
more time went by, I actually reached the point where it was difficult
to believe any body until they actually proved themselves to me.



As a matter of interest, Richard, was this because they deliberately
set out to mislead or had rose tinted spectacles about what they and
others could achieve?


I could write a book about it, (but cant be bothered g).

Heres a few:

1) Buyer says its a cash purchase. I ask if he's got the cash in the
bank. He says yes.

2 weeks, or 6 months later, (or whatever), after lots of chasing and
being reassured that all is OK, a building society surveyor turns up.

Never had cash in the first place.

This lead me to ask most people who said they had cash to prove it with
a bank statement or building society book or similar. Some showed it
without hassle. Others got really offended. Of those who got really
offended, where we took their word, didnt have the cash.

2) Buyer says he's got a mortgage.

3 weeks later we find that lender wont lend due to some financial
reason.

There was a period where one of my colleagues would come up with a
Buyers or Sellers "Phrase of the Week", one of these was "I've got my
mortgage".

3) Buyer says this is my offer, and I definitely wont negotiate after
survey.

3 weeks later - buyer is back to negotiate several thousand pounds off
due to "normal" things in a survey.

4) Seller says they have decided not to sell their house. 2 months
later, we find out that someone who we introduced has bought it, (In
most of these case, I started legal proceedings, or actually went to
court, and got paid).

5) Seller agrees and signs a sole agency agreement, but doesnt want a
for sale board. 2 weeks later we find that they are on the market with
several estate agents.

6) I lost count of the number of people who decided not to sell or buy,
due to a death in the family. I am sure that this was sometimes true,
but I can recall a few whose father, mother, grandparent, had died 2 or
3 times g

I could go on.....

1), 4), and 5), are definitely misleading. 2) and 3) could be naive, or
could be deliberate attempts to gain the chance to purchase, knowing
full well that they may not be able to.

I would suggest that the parties to almost every house sale/purchase,
are on tenterhooks until exchange of contracts, for fear of the deal not
proceeding, either at all, or at the agreed price. Clearly, there are
many genuine reasons why a deal may not proceed, but there are also many
devious reasons.


This sorry saga is hardly surprising in the cheating, lying
environment we call "society" today. Advertisers regularly use spite,
humiliation and malice as the message in their commercials, e.g. why
not steal a few extra chips off your girlfriend's plate? Why not steal
a child's toy to get a paint match? Why not steal a kid's crisps?
They're supposed to be "humorous reflections of life as it is lived",
but they are just sick, sad comments on the society we have created,
the advertisers being the sickest and saddest for exploiting it just
to sell more chips, paint or crisps.

At least I am trying to do my bit, and can only hope that others will,
too. Call me naive, but someone has to make a start on sweeping out
the Augean Stables.

MM
  #107   Report Post  
Owain
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| | It's the silly season 24/7/365 over the border...
| That's why we don't have gazumping, gazundering, chains collapsing,
| negative equity, etc etc. We also don't have the abomination of
| leasehold flats, and our public land registry predates England's
| by a few centuries.
| But you do have people paying way over the Offers Over price, i.e.
| a stab in the dark, in an attempt to secure the property of their
| dreams. There must be an awful lot of disappointed buyers in Scotland!

Pretty much only in Edinburgh, from a demand point of view. Other areas have
problems of affordability (house prices vs wages). Scotland's population
overall is falling.

Owain


  #108   Report Post  
Owain
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Richard Faulkner" wrote
| I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed
| that every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word
| at face value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat
| naive and, as more time went by, I actually reached the point
| where it was difficult to believe any body until they actually
| proved themselves to me.

And by then it was 11 a.m. on your first day in the job and your turn to
make the coffee...

Owain


  #109   Report Post  
Owain
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| At least I am trying to do my bit, and can only hope that others
| will, too. Call me naive, but someone has to make a start on
| sweeping out the Augean Stables.

The only way of sorting out the Augean Stables is to shoot the horses.

Owain


  #110   Report Post  
Andy Hall
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 17:08:11 +0100, "Owain"
wrote:

"Richard Faulkner" wrote
| I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed
| that every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word
| at face value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat
| naive and, as more time went by, I actually reached the point
| where it was difficult to believe any body until they actually
| proved themselves to me.

And by then it was 11 a.m. on your first day in the job and your turn to
make the coffee...

Owain



Very good. Do you write for Dilbert at all?


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl


  #111   Report Post  
Owain
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Andy Hall" wrote
| | I must admit that when I first became an estate agent, I believed
| | that every buyer and seller were honourable, and took their word
| | at face value. As time went by, I learned that this was somewhat
| | naive and, as more time went by, I actually reached the point
| | where it was difficult to believe any body until they actually
| | proved themselves to me.
| And by then it was 11 a.m. on your first day in the job and your
| turn to make the coffee...
| Very good.

Eyethenkewe.

| Do you write for Dilbert at all?

No, can't stand it! I just know too many people too like that.

Owain


  #112   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 4 Sep 2004 17:06:52 +0100, "Owain"
wrote:

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| | It's the silly season 24/7/365 over the border...
| That's why we don't have gazumping, gazundering, chains collapsing,
| negative equity, etc etc. We also don't have the abomination of
| leasehold flats, and our public land registry predates England's
| by a few centuries.
| But you do have people paying way over the Offers Over price, i.e.
| a stab in the dark, in an attempt to secure the property of their
| dreams. There must be an awful lot of disappointed buyers in Scotland!

Pretty much only in Edinburgh, from a demand point of view. Other areas have
problems of affordability (house prices vs wages). Scotland's population
overall is falling.


Don't I know it! They're all coming dahn sarf! Radio 4 nowadays is
wall-to-wall Scottish accents. I mean, I know they are supposed to
sound genuine (the accents), but raw Jim Naughtie at 7:00 am on a
Monday morning hurts my eardrums!

MM
  #113   Report Post  
Owain
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| Scotland's population overall is falling.
| Don't I know it! They're all coming dahn sarf! Radio 4 nowadays
| is wall-to-wall Scottish accents. I mean, I know they are supposed
| to sound genuine (the accents), but raw Jim Naughtie at 7:00 am
| on a Monday morning hurts my eardrums!

You can probably find Radio Clyde on satellite somewhere...

Owain



  #114   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 13:18:46 +0100, "Owain"
wrote:

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| Scotland's population overall is falling.
| Don't I know it! They're all coming dahn sarf! Radio 4 nowadays
| is wall-to-wall Scottish accents. I mean, I know they are supposed
| to sound genuine (the accents), but raw Jim Naughtie at 7:00 am
| on a Monday morning hurts my eardrums!

You can probably find Radio Clyde on satellite somewhere...


Now why on earth would I want to do that?!!

MM
  #115   Report Post  
Owain
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Mitchell" wrote
| | to sound genuine (the accents), but raw Jim Naughtie ...
| You can probably find Radio Clyde on satellite somewhere...
| Now why on earth would I want to do that?!!

Would make Jim Naughtie sound braw not raw.

Owain




  #116   Report Post  
David
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 14:20:43 +0100, "David"
wrote:

You can make somebody an offer for anything, all they can do is refuse,

the
RRP is after all only a recommendation.


Yes, but under the Scottish sealed bids system, they refuse your offer
and, get this, they won't allow you to make another! It's the silly
season 24/7/365 over the border...

MM


But only if there are a number of bidders.

If you are the only bidder then you are free to go back and negotiate, but
then you don; really make a sealed bid anyway.

What does not happen is that the seller cannot play you off against another
buyer. I thought that would appeal to you noble and ethical viewpoint.
There is no cheating or trickery. This appears to be the point that you
either do not wish or cannot understand.

David


  #117   Report Post  
MBQ
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mike Mitchell wrote in message . ..
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:23:29 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 00:07:41 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 17:47:29 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 16:20:53 +0100, Mike Mitchell
wrote:



it's as if everyone is driving blind
down a foggy motorway in the wrong direction.

I think you are the one trying to swim against the current.

Salmon do it all the the time.

... and look what happens to them in the end when they get there.

Don't they have sex?

MM



Not really. The fish preparing to spawn swim up river. The female
lays eggs in depressions she digs in the gravel and the male comes
along and fertilises them. Then the female covers them. That's as
close to sex as it gets.


Anything that close would be fine by me!


Now we're getting to the root of the problem ;-)

MBQ
  #118   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 09:55:27 +0100, "David"
wrote:


"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 14:20:43 +0100, "David"
wrote:

You can make somebody an offer for anything, all they can do is refuse,

the
RRP is after all only a recommendation.


Yes, but under the Scottish sealed bids system, they refuse your offer
and, get this, they won't allow you to make another! It's the silly
season 24/7/365 over the border...

MM


But only if there are a number of bidders.

If you are the only bidder then you are free to go back and negotiate, but
then you don; really make a sealed bid anyway.

What does not happen is that the seller cannot play you off against another
buyer. I thought that would appeal to you noble and ethical viewpoint.
There is no cheating or trickery. This appears to be the point that you
either do not wish or cannot understand.


But it would be much FAIRER if everyone put their cards on the table!
Then I can see what others are prepared to bid and on that basis can
decide whether to outbid them. They in turn can do the same against
me. But in a sealed bid system, buyers will offer well over the price
the vendor is likely to be satisfied with, as that is the only way
they stand a chance of securing the property.

MM
  #119   Report Post  
David
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 09:55:27 +0100, "David"
wrote:


"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 14:20:43 +0100, "David"
wrote:

You can make somebody an offer for anything, all they can do is refuse,

the
RRP is after all only a recommendation.

Yes, but under the Scottish sealed bids system, they refuse your offer
and, get this, they won't allow you to make another! It's the silly
season 24/7/365 over the border...

MM


But only if there are a number of bidders.

If you are the only bidder then you are free to go back and negotiate, but
then you don; really make a sealed bid anyway.

What does not happen is that the seller cannot play you off against
another
buyer. I thought that would appeal to you noble and ethical viewpoint.
There is no cheating or trickery. This appears to be the point that you
either do not wish or cannot understand.


But it would be much FAIRER if everyone put their cards on the table!
Then I can see what others are prepared to bid and on that basis can
decide whether to outbid them. They in turn can do the same against
me.


or more likely the seller or estate agent try and screw some more money out
of you and teh property goes over what its worth, and then you encourage
property inflation.. which is not a good thing.

But in a sealed bid system, buyers will offer well over the price


BUT PEOPLE DO NOT GENERALLY DO THIS (99% of the time). I do not know
who has told you this but no-one I know works this way

the vendor is likely to be satisfied with, as that is the only way
they stand a chance of securing the property.


You would need to be absolutely so fecking stupid to pay way over the
VALUATION. nobody wants to have negative equity immediatley upon purchasing
the property... for some reason you do not comprehend this

If people really did this then the house prices in Scotland would be waaaay
overinflated... this is not the case, because there is no playing parties
off against one another you pay what you think is reasonable, unless you are
just a daft, and have no common sense.

lets see if we can simplify it.

1. no other interested parties.... negotiate with the seller, put in an
offer/ possible reject/new offer /negotiate or whatever is reasonable.

2. 2 or more interested parties. closing date set. Both parties typically
have a VALUATION survey done before hand, or will discuss the matter with
solicitor or look up land registry, or state that offer is subject to survey
in the offer.

Based on the market VALUATION you put in an offer +/- a few hundered quid of
this number. so you pay the market value or something very very close.
Again you may note that house price inflation in Scotland has generally not
been as high as the rest of the UK as the system does not encourage people
to up their offer subject to what eth seller/estate agent think they can
squeeze out of the market.

People very, very, desperate for the property may very, very very
occasionally up the bid above the valuation (happens more often in Edinburgh
perhaps, and more often when someone is moving from England and has 1.
excess capital from there own house sale , 2. do not understand how the
system really works... (as is evidenced from your own viewpoint) and 3. are
taken in by the horror stories of estate egents concerning what xx% over the
asking price the houses are selling for in this area.).

Hmmm maybe thats really not that simple for you.
THink of it this way an OO price is just something to get you to take a look
a the property. You then make your own decision with advice from some one
you can trust what the property is worth. you then pay the market value or
there abouts. Very occasionally some dumb arsehole pays a couple of grand
over the odds, this is the exception rather than the norm.

cheers

David


  #120   Report Post  
Mike Mitchell
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 16:31:09 +0100, "David"
wrote:


"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 09:55:27 +0100, "David"
wrote:


"Mike Mitchell" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 14:20:43 +0100, "David"
wrote:

You can make somebody an offer for anything, all they can do is refuse,
the
RRP is after all only a recommendation.

Yes, but under the Scottish sealed bids system, they refuse your offer
and, get this, they won't allow you to make another! It's the silly
season 24/7/365 over the border...

MM

But only if there are a number of bidders.

If you are the only bidder then you are free to go back and negotiate, but
then you don; really make a sealed bid anyway.

What does not happen is that the seller cannot play you off against
another
buyer. I thought that would appeal to you noble and ethical viewpoint.
There is no cheating or trickery. This appears to be the point that you
either do not wish or cannot understand.


But it would be much FAIRER if everyone put their cards on the table!
Then I can see what others are prepared to bid and on that basis can
decide whether to outbid them. They in turn can do the same against
me.


or more likely the seller or estate agent try and screw some more money out
of you and teh property goes over what its worth, and then you encourage
property inflation.. which is not a good thing.


But inflated prices in an open bid process can only happen if the item
in question is rare. This is not the case for properties as it might
well be, say, for works of art. The fact that open bid auctions happen
by the dozen or hundred every week points to the equity of this
system. Why would open bids for property (in Scotland or anywhere
else) not be just as beneficial to all parties, vendors and buyers?
Isn't a very low OO price just trickery? Why aren't new properties
sold like this?

But in a sealed bid system, buyers will offer well over the price


BUT PEOPLE DO NOT GENERALLY DO THIS (99% of the time). I do not know
who has told you this but no-one I know works this way


Then they don't get the property! One person is lucky enough to pip
them to the post, possibly by a very small amount. However, because of
lack of information (since it's a closed bid system and thus based on
guesswork) the buyer who lost out could be kicking himself because he
failed by such a small margin. So what happens? Well, to make sure of
getting the property, an inflated bid is put in, if that is what one
can afford. It's like asking a footballer to get the ball in the net
while the goal posts are invisible and someone keeps moving them.

the vendor is likely to be satisfied with, as that is the only way
they stand a chance of securing the property.


You would need to be absolutely so fecking stupid to pay way over the
VALUATION. nobody wants to have negative equity immediatley upon purchasing
the property... for some reason you do not comprehend this


What's a valuation at the end of the day? It is one man's opinion. Get
three estate agents into a property in England and you'll probably get
three different valuations, some as much as forty grand higher or
lower. A much better "valuation" would be for the seller to 'fess up
and tell everybody what the actual asking price is as he sees it. It
would avoid a lot of hassle of everyone having to get different
valuations, surveys and so on. Plus, because everything would be out
in the open, no one need feel shafted, which I'm sure is how many do
feel having gone through the mill and lost out a few times.

If people really did this then the house prices in Scotland would be waaaay
overinflated... this is not the case, because there is no playing parties
off against one another you pay what you think is reasonable, unless you are
just a daft, and have no common sense.

lets see if we can simplify it.

1. no other interested parties.... negotiate with the seller, put in an
offer/ possible reject/new offer /negotiate or whatever is reasonable.


I am not concerned with a single buyer, but with the situation where
there is more than one buyer, and possibly several, which is, as I
understand it, when the sealed bids process kicks in. Before I start
investigating a property I have become interested in, I do not know
how many other buyers I am going to be up against, exactly as when I
bid for an antique at an ordinary auction with all bids out in the
open. But in the latter case, at least I can balance my desire for the
object with the amount of readies I'm prepared to cough up, depending
on how I perceive the *competition* to be on the basis of the bids
against me. That is not the case with a far more expensive asset,
one's home.

2. 2 or more interested parties. closing date set. Both parties typically
have a VALUATION survey done before hand, or will discuss the matter with
solicitor or look up land registry, or state that offer is subject to survey
in the offer.


Yes, well, you're putting me off the system straightaway by this
valuation survey! How many such surveys can one finance? A survey
doesn't come cheap. And what is a "valuation" survey if it is
different from a proper, full, or structural survey, or is the buyer
expected to get one of those done as well *after* he has committed to
the sale by virtue of the sealed bids' binding nature? In England,
sure, you get the survey done, but you haven't exchanged contracts by
then.

Based on the market VALUATION you put in an offer +/- a few hundered quid of
this number. so you pay the market value or something very very close.
Again you may note that house price inflation in Scotland has generally not
been as high as the rest of the UK as the system does not encourage people
to up their offer subject to what eth seller/estate agent think they can
squeeze out of the market.


According to the BBC web site Scotland has experienced a 21% annual
rise, whereas similar figures for England a North 25.8%, South East
9.7%, West Midlands 17.3%, Wales 27.6%, therefore Scotland represents
a far higher increase than here in the south. Greater London, the
South West, East Anglia, and East Midlands were all lower than
Scotland's increase, and therefore it seems to me that inflation in
Scotland can fairly be described as roaring ahead.

People very, very, desperate for the property may very, very very
occasionally up the bid above the valuation (happens more often in Edinburgh
perhaps, and more often when someone is moving from England and has 1.
excess capital from there own house sale , 2. do not understand how the
system really works... (as is evidenced from your own viewpoint) and 3. are
taken in by the horror stories of estate egents concerning what xx% over the
asking price the houses are selling for in this area.).


Lots of verys in the above paragraph! Very good!

Hmmm maybe thats really not that simple for you.
THink of it this way an OO price is just something to get you to take a look
a the property. You then make your own decision with advice from some one
you can trust what the property is worth. you then pay the market value or
there abouts. Very occasionally some dumb arsehole pays a couple of grand
over the odds, this is the exception rather than the norm.


I believe that an open bid system would be fairer to all concerned,
would still obtain a good price for the vendor and no one need feel
cheated, as I am sure many do.

MM
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New system nightmare Victoria UK diy 18 December 23rd 03 01:30 PM
CH system has no vent on primary Keith Refson - real email address in signature UK diy 8 August 27th 03 05:28 PM
Just seen another horror story Mike Mitchell UK diy 85 August 12th 03 11:48 PM
Bowl Saving: A Comprehensive Discussion Ray Sandusky Woodturning 8 August 3rd 03 05:05 PM
Central A/C cooling fine but humidity seems high D- Home Repair 6 July 3rd 03 09:40 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:14 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"