Is it unreasonable to askto re view a property? Total views would be 4 times

[Freddiefox]

Hi all,

My house survey has come back with a few bits and bobs some Id like to see for myself and see if I can fix myself or whether it would be too advanced.

I’ve viewed the house twice already,

Once a proper look around, and a 2nd time to look at the garden.

I would like to have a look at the window ledges and a few other things that have come up in the survey and I’d like to look.

It’s currently rented, I’d also like to have look at it again before exchange to make sure it’s been left in a decent state.

So in total that would be 4 times which seems a bit much. Aibu

So, if the OP pulls out because they cannot get access to view the house again, the seller continues to try to sell the property, and therefore would presumably have more viewers.

What's the difference with 4 different viewers, and 1 viewer, viewing 4 times?

Nothing wrong with, even though it might be annoying for the person living there. I'm always amazed that we in general buy houses after one or two quick views, yet would spend more time on deciding which car or appliances to buy!

The contract provides that the property must be in the same state as it was at the point of exchange which is why your solicitor, quite rightly, will have advised you to view prior to exchange.

This is covered by paragraph 3.2 of the standards conditions of sale, “Physical State”. The standard conditions are incorporated into every property sale in England and Wales except where expressly excluded and varied within the special conditions.

Just to be clear the “date of the contract” is the date of exchange.

Law society template here:-
www.lawsociety.org.uk/support-services/documents/standard-conditions-of-sale-5th-edition/

I’ve never known the above note re physical state not included in the report on title (and I’ve seen and written hundreds).

So yes, you are absolutely right to view before exchange, especially given the property is tenanted.

What's the difference with 4 different viewers, and 1 viewer, viewing 4 times?

No difference but the tenant doesn't have to allow those viewings either.

No difference but the tenant doesn't have to allow those viewings either.
If a tenant is refusing to allow viewings, surely the only other option is to get them out faster to allow potential buyers to view. They'd be shooting themselves in the foot by being awkward.

They'd have to be given the legal notice period regardless and if the landlord decided to evict them before selling then they've got an empty property that's not making them any money and could be on the market a long while.

You can ask but tenants may say no. The viewing after they leave I can't see any issue with.

Tenants cannot be forced to allow viewings whatever tenancy agreement says and landlord cannot get them out earlier than their legally agreed notice period. It also wouldn't be worth the legal costs for the seller even if the tenants were being awkward

As a tenant I would refuse two more viewings.

Couldn't you look at the windowsills at the viewing before completion?

Completely agree you should view it again. Once you’ve bought it you can’t just keep the receipt and take it back. It’s a massive life changing purchase.

Of course you're not unreasonable. I often go in to view/try on a dress a few times before I buy it, so you need to do whatever you need to to feel confident in your HUGE purchase!

I do take the point of 'Its the biggest purchase you'll ever make. However by now you should either want the property or not.

However by now you should either want the property or not.

The whole point of the survey is to confirm your decision or to give you reasons to try to renegotiate the contract if needed.

And even if you do want the property, nothing wrong in insuring you are buying exactly what you viewed x weeks or months ago.

I think you also should be able to view as many times as you want. Not sure why you're asking here. Your agent told you that. Just make an appointment via agent

The thing is as the buyer, it is only 2 more viewings for you.

However, the people who are renting have already had to facilitate viewings, while the house was up for sale, by who knows how many people plus yourself.

I am a tenant and I would refuse any further viewings tbh.

People can say "you should be allowed to view as many times as you like" however the people actually living in the house are not going to benefit in anyway with this house sale. They are having to move when they might not have wanted to. Have had to go through possibly getting a deposit together, finding a suitable property in the area, going through letting agent referencing etc. They owe you nothing and are not invested in this the way a seller would be in facilitating the purchase going through.

Were the first viewings prior to making an offer? We saw the house we’re living in now twice before making an offer. We then saw it twice more (took ages for everything to go through) to take measurements, etc. No problems, but then it was just one owner-occupier who was desperate to move on at that point.

*They are under obligation via 'reasonable viewing clause' which will be included in any decent tenancy agreement.

"I don't see the relevance in this as surely its clear they have been reasonable in allowing viewings. People are only saying the can refuse precisely because they have already accommodated viewings from prospective buyers and twice so far from the OP."*

"Reasonable" in the instance of a potential house sale is as many viewings as as the purchaser may require before buying.
The relevance isn't is the number of times viewing is 'allowed', but the number of viewings before the purchaser feels comfortable in stumping up the cash.
As pp says above, it's a house, not a handbag. It's therefore reasonable to view as many times as the purchaser wishes to before shelling out hundreds of thousands of pounds.

It's fine
You'll only be going inside twice while the tenants are in situ - fine (as long as they agree)
The last visit is after they have gone.

I was not suggesting an illegal eviction. Rental income won't be of much benefit to the vendor if they can't show the house in order to sell it. The longer it sits on the market the less likely it is to get the current asking price because the market value is currently dropping. Op don't complete until you are sure you are getting vacant possession.

Four times???? No, that’s over the top and unreasonable

Why is it OTT? I've dithered about new shoes for longer than I've looked at new houses. It's hundreds of thousands of pounds the OP is potentially spending,it's perfectly reasonable to check something the survey has flagged up. It's not like she's a time waster,she's had a survey.

Op don't complete until you are sure you are getting vacant possession.

Especially if there is any possibility they've applied for new housing with the council or a housing association rather than another private let as the advice for applying via the homelessness route is to stay put in the property until evicted via court order.

Op don't complete until you are sure you are getting vacant possession.

You mean EXCHANGE
that's when everything becomes legally binding.

Solicitors don’t allow exchange on a previously tenanted property without vacant possession.

If I were the vendor I'd be irritated and would think your heart wasn't in it.