WWYD? Chain issues and considering going into rented

[Notonthehighstreet]

I need your wisdom!
We're buying the house of our dreams and possibly our "forever" home. Our buyers are in rented and very keen to get in before the end of July because their DS is due to start school in September and they currently live out of area. The vendor of our house is also very keen to move quickly as her previous buyer pulled out in April so she's been stuck for a while. Our vendor's vendor is buying from a small developer who is the last person in the chain. Now here is the issue: the developer is going bankrupt - or he's already gone bankrupt (it's all very muddy and unclear at the minute). AFAIK, the house that he's trying to sell won't be his if he's bankrupt and it will be up to the Insolvency Practitioner to decide what to do so we're talking long delays presumably?
We're worried that our buyers will pull out if we tell them that we don't really have a clue anymore when we're moving. We are very close to exchanging and had it not been for this issue, we could have certainly moved by July. We are considering going into rented in July (if our vendor or her vendor aren't prepared to do so) so that we don't lose our buyers -we can't possibly face going through all this hassle again. If we do, then what happens if things move quickly all of a sudden and they all want to complete in say September or October? We'd be stuck in rented for 6 months which may upset our vendor or her vendor.
I feel we're in a no win situation here. If we don't go into rented we may lose the house if they want to move before our tenancy is up. On the other hand we may well lose our buyers if we don't.
Any advice please?

it is possible to get short-let tenancies but it involves a lot of trust on both sides.

think the big picture. If you sign up for 6 months rental, and then get the 'forever' house (don't think that way, no such thing), then you will be paying rental and a mortgage. If you start renting in August and complete in October, 3 of your six months are already gone. So you are up for 3 months rental on a property you may not be using.

how much is that, and while none of us like to waste money, is it worth it in the big picture? Only you can answer that.

you could also keep your new landlord abreast of the situation - if you do want to move early and pay his costs, he may let you go in favour of a new tenant who will stay longer. He doesn't have to, of course - but no harm in asking.

In this situation I would push your vendor to go into rented, they have already lost one sale and it is the house they are buying that won't be vacant.

If that is not possible, and you don't mind moving into rented I would look to see if you can get a commitment from the chain above you to pay your costs.

Short term lets around here cost in the region of £1,000 per week and plus we would have storage costs so that's just not an option unfortunately.
I'm not sure that I can find a landlord who's willing to give us a short term let at the same pice as a regular length tenancy

Surely it's the person two rungs above you that needs to go into rented accommodation because while your renting will help your buyer, it won't help the person you're buying from at all.

Is there a university anywhere near you? Houses let out to students are often empty over summer and not all are in 'studenty' condition - some are perfectly nice. I once rented such a flat at a ridiculously low rate for the months of July and August alone because I needed a short term let and the landlord preferred to have someone in it even cheaply because it was better than have it empty. You'd have to vacate at the start of the university term, but hopefully you'd have more clarity about your purchase by then?

I agree it'd be great if the vendor's vendor goes into rented! I'll try to find out more tomorrow but if i cant get any clarity, i think I'll take a risk and exchange on the sale because I just don't want to risk losing our very motivated, chain-free buyer

I have been house-hunting and have viewed about 25 houses. Several of them (4 or 5?) had been vacated by their vendors and were being rented on rolling one month contracts by people in exactly the situation you're worried you may find yourself in. The EAs seem to have arranged this, presumably to protect chains from collapse...

I don't know how common that is, but it might be worth asking... :)