AIBU to stick with current buyer rather than sell to tenants?

[Whotosellto]

I’m a landlord who currently selling a house. The tenants gave notice months ago and are due to move out soon. I received an offer on the house at asking price about 6 weeks ago which I’ve accepted. The tenants are now saying they would like to buy the house after the house they were buying fell through. They’re a family with 2 children and another baby on the way. They can’t match the offer already accepted, they’ve offered £10k less. They said they’re desperate. They’ve been ok tenants although they’ve missed rent a few times.

Would you stick with the existing buyer or accept the offer from the existing tenants? Would you feel more obligated to your tenants of a few years or to the buyer we have accepted an offer from already? Obviously the tenants could now refuse to move and cause issues which we need to bear in mind and they’ve offered less but we’ll save some costs by selling to the current tenants,
probably not £10k though.

Im thinking of sticking with the buyer we already have. AIBU?

Some of you have more money than sense.

You should proceed with the higher offer, of course. Who can just write off £10k to be nice?!

Or they aren't telling the truth!

I would sell to tenants because I think that’s the right thing to do

People are very quick to spend other people's money

Exactly, lots of people telling porkies on here I suspect!

If the tenants had not missed rent, had been there for say 8 years plus, then I would sell to them on principle if they were proceedable. I would want to see evidence of this. But there are some caveats if they have missed rent and could have made an offer on the house at the onset (instead of looking elsewhere). Putting a house on the market is always inadvisable while it is tenanted. It smacks of greed and desperation and will put off most buyers (except other landlords). The fact that the buyer is a LL is also a red flag. He will have his financial hat on and may well reduce his offer at a later stage. LLs always want to do things on the cheap.

I dont envy you the choice because there are caveats on both sides.

I'm a landlord.

I don't do anything on the cheap. That's a very sweeping generalisation

Why is it?

They have shown themselves to be unreliable already as they’ve missed rent payments to your disadvantage. They don’t sound reliable. There’s no guarantee they’ll get a mortgage or complete on time/ when you need them to.

Additionally you’re already committed to / you’ve done a deal or nearly with someone else. It seems dishonourable to me to pull out or muck them about.

Sell to the landlord. The sale will go through and it’ll be more money. We sold to one and we were all done in 5 weeks.

Your tenants sound flakey. They sound the type who give them an inch and they’ll take a mile.

Stick with your current buyers.

You'd be happy to lose that 10k? How would you make it up?

Sorry i meant to quote the person you were replying to

£10k is alot if money. I’d sell to the current buyer. Your tenants could have offered earlier, but didn’t , plus they have missed rents.

If I came up to you and asked you to gift me £10k. Would you do that, because that’s effectively what you’d be doing if you accepted tenants offer.

Thanks everyone. The arguments for and against that have been talked about here are exactly the ones that have been going around my own head. I’m going to stick with the buyer I already have.

Do you have a plan if the tenants don't leave though? I'm not suggesting they will be wilfully difficult, but in many areas of the country it is really hard to find a rental. I don't just mean one that's in budget, just one that is available that isn't snapped up by someone else. We're in a fairly average town and there are multiple people applying for every property at first viewings - my friends just agreed to take a property before it was advertised and without even viewing it as they had missed out on so many and had a deadline to go.
If it's a landlord buying it they might be open to buying it tenanted but it's not guaranteed, especially if they had in mind doing it up and renting it for a higher price.

I was going to say stick with the original buyer but as it's a landlords planning to rent it out anyway I think I'd go with your tenant. If you are sure they are in a position to actually but it at the agreed price

I’m considering selling our sole rental when the current tenants give notice. Personally I’d love to sell to existing tenants, and would be happy to sell for a bit less. It would cut out the estate agent’s fee for a start.

As the landlord if they would like the tenants to remain, and perhaps see if you can offer them some continuity whilst they find somewhere else? It might be the landlord is happy to have tenants for a few months to ease the transition.

I would stuck with original buyer unless:

No progress had been made in these 6 weeks, presumably you're almost ready to exchange?

Buyer is not proceedable

Buyer is in a chain

Buyer hasn't provided proof of funds

Oh edited, didn't read properly!

I’m another one who would prioritise selling to a family over a landlord. In my case it would be a single person or couple seeing as I live in a small flat.

Under the new rent laws this would never happen there would be nothing to stop the tenants refusing to move. Landlord could not evict them after a few months

I would go with the buyer you already have. You can sell with the tenants in, which as a landlord is buying, may suit the buyer anyway.

You need to check the position with your current buyer. Are they happy to keep your tenant? If so, are they a cash buyer or does their mortgage require vacant possession?

When does the tenants notice that they’ve given you run out? You could try to convince them to move out when this expires, otherwise you’re in for a 4 month wait when you give them notice to leave. Is your buyer happy to wait.