From the house buyers perspective

[dejavuaswell]

If I can save myself £50,000 on a house purchase by being nasty (at least in the view of the prospective vendor) then so be it.

When selling my house I had to accept an offer well below the price the agent had suggested. What choice do I have but to pass the problem down the line to my vendor? Sometimes the price is the only feature that tells two houses apart

I have found some vendors seem to over-estimate the particular virtues of their house while at the same time being blind to any vices. There is a strict limit to how much "lovely views to the rear" can compensate for a tiny back garden or a noisy location or a 20 minute drive to the nearest shop!

I dont get what you mean by "being nasty". If you have made an offer and it has been accepted, it means the vendors have agreed to sell at that price (as you did when you accepted an offer "well below" what you wanted. No-one twisted any arms - what's nasty?

Perhaps the vendors can't afford that kind of drop, and so won't sell at that price. I know when I was once selling a house and the agent was asking for another drop, and that 'it would only be an extra £20 pm on your mortgage', I pointed out that that £20 for all he knew could be the difference between eating and not eating, and that I'd actually prefer to stay where I was rather than eat beans, as I wanted to move, but didn't need to. I didn't drop again (especially pissed off as I was paying his fees) and he stopped nagging.

Certainly try to get the price reduced, but just because you have dropped doesn't mean others are obliged to do so; that's your problem, not theirs.

Why on earth are you making a 'nasty' offer on a house that has, for example, a tiny back garden - if that is not what you are looking for??? Leave it alone and keep on lookin', sister .
There are plenty of people out who loathe gardening and are only too happy with small outside area.
Once you've seen the 'vices' and are not happy to accept thyem, move on.

By "being nasty" are you trying to talk down the price of a house you're looking at by pointing out stuff you don't like? If you are then I would suggest you don't bother. It won't affect the price the vendor is prepared to sell at and will p1ss them off so they are more likely to play hard ball.

If you've had an offer accepted on a house and are now trying to reduce it without good reason then shame on you. Your offer was accepted in good faith and it's pretty sh1tty to try and reduce it when the sale is in progress.

MisterW I think any vendor playing "hard ball" in the current market, at least round here, will be in for a long, long wait to sell. There are, according to the EA's lots of sellers and very few buyers. Offers are made before a survey is made and I can still remember only finding out that a house flooded (no mention in particulars) via a survey and a subsequent phone call to an insurance company.

Rollmops All houses have good and bad points. You tend to go for the one with the best balance between the two. The reason I prefer the EA rather than the vendor to take me round is so I can give feedback on the property without people going all defensive.
I think it is only reasonable to give a reason why I am not going to make an offer on a house. To me saying "I agree the views are lovely but I find the traffic noise too loud" is OK but a recent vendor acted as if I had said their house was a slum.

Sometimes two houses can only been told apart by price so if a vendor wants to sell to me somebody needs to tell them this.

When I was a seller I didn't try hard enough to put myself in the position of a buyer. Buyers look for value for money and sellers whose house is overpriced in relation to similar houses will have a long wait. The issue is they don't think their house is similar - because they over-rate the good points and downplay the weaknesses - and, encouraged by some EA's overprice by tens of thousands of pounds.

Is there any point to this thread?

People will be defensive if you criticise their home, as they live there. When I was selling, I was looking to maximise my profit as much as possible, not worrying about the buyer. It also doesn't help if what you are criticising is something outwith their control, or they can't help (like traffic noise). Constructive criticism is good, comments about traffic aren't, as they can't do anything to mitigate that.

I think the point is for all the sellers there are worrying about their situation there needs to be a buyer to solve the problem.

Some sellers don't put themselves in the shoes of a prospective buyer and so cause themselves some unneccessary stress. Wondering why they are not getting any viewers when their house is overpriced in relation to essentially identical houses would be an example.

Sorry scaryteacher but unless you consider the buyer you will not maximise your profit or even sell your house. Surely being told that traffic noise was a dealbreaker would be very helpful. You would know that it was the location rather than your house that was the issue.

More than once I have told a seller that the Estate Agents particulars were actively misleading (as in untrue) or passively misleading (as in key facts missed out). That must help all concerned?

also, traffic noise bothers some people more than it does others. There are so many factors - how soon the sellers need to sell, how long they can wait to find someone who doesn't mind traffic noise so much but likes one of the other features, how important it is to them to live close to a shop etc. etc.

what does "consider the buyer" mean? There are lots of buyers. If after a while they all appear to be united by the common factor of not wanting to pay as much as you're asking, you drop the price. seems reasonable to me. If you have the time, though, seems worth it to try a higher price just in case it's the dream house of someone who wants to move quickly!

(I meant different types of buyer, obviously - not talking about hordes of buyers!)

'Sorry scaryteacher but unless you consider the buyer you will not maximise your profit or even sell your house.' Managed to sell one at a socking profit, double what was paid 4 years on, and the other for a profit of only 30k which was disappointing, but I wanted the next house as it was our forever house. I could have pulled out though as moving was a want, not a need.

'Surely being told that traffic noise was a dealbreaker would be very helpful. You would know that it was the location rather than your house that was the issue.' No not helpful at all, as it would be something that I could do nothing about as I couldn't pick the house up and move it. It's a bit like the silly comments from people who came to view my house to rent it...it was advertised as having patios and not a garden as I kill plants, and don't like gardening. Cue prospective tenants saying, having been told this,'Oh no garden, no room for the x,y,z then'. Read the bloody description first. Don't comment about things that I cannot change.

Sorry scaryteacher but I still don't understand.

If I really liked a house, with the sole exception of traffic noise which was the dealbreaker, then I think telling the seller the truth would be a good idea. So much better than simply saying I like everything about your house - I'm just not going to buy it!

I agree with dejavu.
As a seller you can't do anything about most of the reasons given ('kitchen too small', 'not enough off-road parking') but it's useful to know what the reason was.

the only thing that's irritating is when the reason is WRONG - I had one prospective buyer say 'none of the beams were original' which was rubbish; just that the house was built at a time when people liked nice neat beams with beading, not rough-hewn cottagey ones! I could have ranted for hours about it ('is she a post-medieval archaeologist? I think not! does she work for English Heritage? no she doesn't!') But fine, if she wanted a house with rougher beams that's up to her