We had our house on the market on this basis. Some who viewed offered a lower price. I would still offer for it, if you like the house There is no guarantee that the Vendor will get offers 'in excess of'. Also the lower offer may be in a better position to proceed'.
In fact all houses on the market at the time were oieo, we put an offer in on one and then negotiated till I eventually walked away. Then found our house, explained that I was in a great position to proceed (cash buyer, no chain, flexible timescale, etc) and luckily we got it. A week later house 1s estate agent rang and said the vendor would accept my final offer but I told them they'd lost the sale.
I really don't understand why people object. Surely it is saving you time if you know the Vendor has a minimum price. There are usually one of two reasons. One is they know they are in a seller's market. The other that they need that amount to complete their own purchase.. We had nine viewings for our house and 3 offered way above above the 'in excess of' price. One person offered 20K below the asking price, then came back with an offer above, that just seemed such a waste of everyone's time.
The house we have just purchased said 'offers over' on the particulars. We offered £10k less and our offer was accepted. The agent was Savills and I tend to have noticed (in our area anyway) that its these 'perceived' higher end agents who do 'offers over', perhaps in order to induce some sort of bidding war. Fortunately our vendors, who received several offers, said they were not entering into sealed bids and they accepted our offer.
Also, I was very annoyed that the property we were buying only said 'under offer' right up until the day that we exchanged, when they switched it to 'sold'. Our house (with a more 'highstreet' agent) immediately switched it to SSTC once we accepted an offer on it. Granted, my conveyancer friend said that technically it is only under offer until day of exchange, but it felt like the EA somehow didn't trust us as buyers right up until we had exchanged, and so kept it 'under offer' all that time. If I saw a house was only 'under offer' I might call up the EA and ask if it was still available. I wonder what they'd have said if anyone had asked, even though we'd spent thousands on conveyancing ?
Sorry - rant over, completing next week so had it up to my neck with the whole process!
We had our house on at oieo. We were hoping to get around 380k and putting it on at oieo 375 meant it came up in more rightmove searches (according to the agent). As it was we saw a house we wanted to offer on and so accepted 375 for ours.
I don’t really understand the point of it.all prices are a guide price anyway. And it’s not thr norm something goes for the exact asking price, sometimes it’s less, sometimes it’s more, I just think it’s pointless.
We've just sold our house with an offers over price and it's worked well for us. The estate agent told us they use this method as it shows up in more Rightmove searches and deters time wasters who would make too low an offer. We accepted an offer that was £14000 over. I wasn't sure of the tactic before but next time we sell I would probably do the same.
Out EA advised us to do this because of rightmove and the way it displays the houses through pricing brackets for example we wanted £165,000 and the bracket was £160k-£170k so doing OIEO £160k put us at the top of that bracket
Because usually you would expect to be able to make an offer of LESS than the asking price which you would assume was the BEST price the estate agent thought they could get not the LEAST! It just makes searching for what you can afford a bit annoying.