To tell gazunderer to do one?

[Mustnotbeleftblank]

Selling a probate property, due to exchange and complete today. Agreed price was £20k less than asking/previous purchase price and included all furniture. Ours was the show home apartment, and another was put on the market which is empty, much smaller and in a less favourable, dark and dingy aspect at £20k lower than our agreed price 🙄 this flat is with an EA who persistently undervalues these properties which is why I did not use them.

Received a call from our Estate Agents yesterday. Buyer still wants our apartment but now wants to pay the same as the cheaper, crappier one or he'll withdraw and buy the other apartment. I am properly pissed, but offer £10k off to get it past the line.

Buyer is firm, £20k less or he'll walk.

I think the buyer is trying their luck, the other property was marketed in March. I've seen the buyer at the building whilst clearing out the property, I know they've been to look at the other flat long before this week and I suspected that he would try something like this at the last minute. I am also confident it's our flat he wants, just at the crap flat's price.

I've made them wait for my response, and having slept on it I am of the mind to hold firm on the £10k drop, requiring immediate exchange to stop him dicking about, or deal's off. If he walks, I will still have the property to remarket as well as all the furniture the buyer wanted included in the sale which will cover fees to date, and he'll have taken the competing property off the market.

AIBU to not reduce further and wish them luck with the other property if they withdraw, or do I suck up losing £20k?

Selling a property in England sucks.

That’s how I would play it , just say exchange and get on with it or you will just rent it out .

Well how would you feel if you agreed to buy a house for £200k and just before completion the market collapsed and it was worth £100k. Would you buy it because it was morally correct?

No, the negotiation happened when the price was agreed, just before exchange is not the time for negotiation.

The law seems to think otherwise

Just because something is not against the law, that doesn't mean that the law endorses or encourages it.

Lots of things are not actually illegal but most people would agree that they are very poor, dishonest, shameful behaviour. It's not illegal for your husband to have an affair with your (supposed) best friend behind your back, but not many people would claim that the law encourages him to do so, nor that he isn't doing anything wrong.

I'm asking if you were a buyer not a seller. Would you still be happy to pay an extra 20-30k for the same property and pay the extra mortgage per month ? I'm not referring to OPs property as she states its better but just in general

It's not the same though, so this is a pointless argument. The OP says the other flat is much smaller and the aspect isn't as nice, so they can't be compared like for like.

Well how would you feel if you agreed to buy a house for £200k and just before completion the market collapsed and it was worth £100k. Would you buy it because it was morally correct?

If the market collapsed that much in such a short space of time, I'd expect most people would decide to pull out completely and wait it out to see what happens, to avoid negative equity.

The fact would be that you are reacting to drastic unforeseen circumstances; whereas the people who do this kind of thing know right from the beginning, before they make a (false) offer that this is their deceitful plan.

But it is cheaper and if price matters then the buyer might think that is a good deal. The buyers mother might not need somewhere bigger, the aspect might be a matter of opinion. At the end of the day they don't have to buy and the seller doesn't have to sell until contracts are exchanged.

It's not because some posters are saying all buyers attempting to renegotiate are CFers even if the market changes. The sellers aren't responsible for the buyers mortgage are they?

I answered that in the next post. I only make sensible offers that do not overstretch myself and once I'm there I stop looking. What if you offer on the next house and prices drop again. Then your mortgage offer expires and property stock massively reduces. I bought my first house in 2011, houses were cheap but there was naff all to choose from.

How did you get on OP? I think you're definitely doing the right thing holding firm.

I have bought and sold since the 1980’s I have never known property to halve in value, so rather silly example. But fits in well with your username.

I bought mine in 2016, for 1k more than it sold for in 2007. The market is going to be a rough ride. 😕

The “law” neither encourages nor discourages affair. What an odd analogy.

the law neither encourages nor discourages renegotiation prior to exchange

The other flat in the OP is worse and unfurnished.

Also it came on the market 2 months ago. So even if it was the same as OP's flat, the buyer has had quite a long time to reduce his offer. Waiting until the day of the exchange and completion is done to pressure people into feeling forced to agree.

Then the buyer can buy the cheaper, smaller one.

So question mumsnet if a house came on the market priced 20-30k cheaper than you had already agreed to buy. It was similar spec and size would you carry on with your purchase out of moral obligation or decide fuck that I'm not paying extra mortgage for the same house?

If that genuinely happened - with a pretty much identical house - I think it would be reasonable to pull out completely before exchanging contracts - telling your vendors the reason and seeing if they freely choose to react, rather than staying in the process with them but putting them over a barrel.

I always smell a big rat when people stress to you how they could supposedly get something better and/or cheaper than what you are selling from somebody else.... but for some bizarre reason, they still want to buy yours from you. If seller/supplier/shop A has something at a better price than seller/supplier/shop B, what on earth would be the point in wasting everybody's time and trying to get B to match it, rather than just declining B's offer and buying it straight from A?

I don't think people are saying ALL buyers attempting to negotiate are CF, just the ones who demand a 20k price drop on the day they are due to exchange and complete.

There are definitely some CF out there who should be told to forget it, although I do think people forget a property sale is a business transaction.
I have had to ask for a price reduction quite late on because further quotes on work to be done has shown an expensive problem that may also damage the neighbours property. The seller has reacted emotionally, calling me disgusting, refusing to negotiate and implying I'm underhand. I'm really not - I'm actually struggling to get buildings insurance because of this liability and I am very much prepared to be fair and meet her half way and find ways around it - but cannot just go ahead in order to be 'nice and not upset anyone'. If it comes to it, I'll have to lose the £2000 I've already spent on the process, and that sucks, but it's not a game.
Never get involved in a negotiation that you are not prepared to walk away from.

The “law” neither encourages nor discourages affair. What an odd analogy.

the law neither encourages nor discourages renegotiation prior to exchange

Yes, this is the exact point that I was making - I'm glad we agree.

Neither is illegal, but this does not stop them from being widely considered dishonourable.

Just to clarify - this is not on the day of exchange!

How does that relate to the OP's scenario?

Lost your manners today?

I bought my first house in 1973, peak of a boom, people were selling within hours of a house being marketed and going for double the asking price. We bought a wreck, it was all we could afford, had it rewired, new windows, new kitchen and bathroom, decorated all through. A year later due to circumstances we had to move and we sold it for £1,800 more than we paid for it. Remember it was 70s prices so if we added up what we spent on it (we never did as it would have been upsetting) I reckon it was about half what we'd spent on it and the market moved really fast when it fell.

Just wondered at what point all the "it's morally wrong" would change to "we'd be fools to pay that."

Don’t even drop the 10k, they could well hold you to ransom on exchange day for the other 10k. If yours is better I would hold.

Youre the seller and you’re in charge.

It's more like brinkmanship than negotiation.