Need to sell my house. just lost buyer number 6!

[mrsnec]

This is very long winded. I do apologise, And sorry if I posted in the wrong place.

We bought our house for 92k in 2005. We spent 40k on it. Its been on and off the market for 5 years. It's in an average area of the west midlands. Properties in the same cul de sac have gone for anything between 45 and 100k recently. We want to offload the place as its caused us a lot of stress we accept the losses of what we spent but want to at least recover fees and what we owe on the mortgage so we are trying to sell at 90 It's true market value.

We are covering the mortgage. Just, but we have a new life abroad and live rent free in our in laws second property. Money is tight for us but we wont be homeless.

So, after a few failed sales sales it transpired that lenders were refusing to lend on the place. We knew there had been a subsidence issue in the past but were assured it had been fixed. We also found out that the records hadn't been updated to show there hadn't been any movement since.

We got our own survey done when we lost buyer no 5. We got all the paperwork in order, spent another few thousand putting right everything it unveiled and then remarketed the place. We had viewings straight away and an offer within a week but weve lost this buyer again as a result of a survey.

We rented it for a bit. But our mortgage is interest only and the rental value only just covers it. We also spent thousands in maintainance costs when we had tenants and it's Hard for us to manage from abroad with no friends or family in the area.

The mortgage company know our situation. Both them and the agents are encouraging us to sell for a song and work out a repayment plan to cover the shortfall.that would break my heart it's a beautiful house I've already lodt 50k on.

We have discussed repossession as an option but wed still have to pay a shortfall unless we go bankrupt I think but since we have no ties to the UK that might be on option.

We are wondering if we can do anything legally as perhaps our lender shouldn't. Have leant to us on it if none of the other companies will lend to anyone else on it.

We are trying to obtain the latest buyers survey. He wouldn't even reduce his offer after his survey.

Thanks for reading all, just wondering what you'd do in this situation. Bottom line is want to walk away without spending one more bean, how can I do this?

Your problem is the fact that the house has has subsidence.

There may be no current problems but any potential buyers will either see the uncorrected report stating the subsidence (because you said the records have not been fully updated) or the potential buyers will accept the fact that there is no current subsidence - and still not touch it with a bargepole because they recognise all the problems that could arise in thh future, if the subsidence returns, they may also be anticpating the same sort of problems you are experiencing selling, or arranging assurance or even securing a mortgage.

Put bluntly - Why buy your house that has been 'tainted' by subsidence when there are plenty more untainted ones to choose from?

One way of overcoming that prejudice is to sell well below current market value - but you don't want / cant afford to do so.

Another way is auction where it's up to the buyer to assure themselves they know what they are buying. Once the hammer falls the house is sold so you wouldn't be in the position of buyers continually dropping out because of the survey - but a discount would be required and again you can't consider this.

So, as you are determined to recoup your money you'll need to continue renting it out. If it's an interst only mortgage the rent should definitely cover the mortgage and maintenance costs. You get tax relief on the interest on the mortgage and tax refielf on the maintence costs. You should be able to cover your costs indefinitely - until the house sells or rents fall significantly or you are in a financial position to accept a loss on capital value of the house.

The very worst option would be to walk away. The house will be sold well under market valuse and you would be persued for the shortfall. Your poor credit rating would then cause you serious problems whatever you do and wherever you do it.

Thanks everyone,

I've done a bit of research. The current agent have the house next door up for rent for 595 pcm. Our mortgage is 400. So allowing room for negotiation, fees and the bg insurance there isn't much breathing space but renting is doable if I Can convince my husband.

If I win my court case there may be some money to play with so I'm thinking to rent it whilst that's going on and then I know where I am financially. The preliminary hearing is the 31st January.

If it goes back on the market under value wed have no idea what to put it on for. It's already under value a bit. The agent asked us what we wanted it on for as oposed to what they thought! So it was on at offers over 90! So I'm guessing a new agent would be able to advise us better on marketing strategy.

If we decide to sell again I think its time for a new agent too. I just read the email. There was no indication of which survey the buyer we lost is referring to and they're saying they can't afford to do the work that needs to be done but there is no reference as to what that work might be. I don't think the agent told the buyer what we'd had done.

Can I be cheeky and ask some more advice, would I be blighted with the subsidence thing no matter how much money I threw at the place even if the area was up and coming? So say, for example, I came into 20k, I'd. Be better off using that to fund a negative equity sale than to spend it on the house?

My dm knows my situation and is urging us to sit on the place as its 5 miles from that studio school thats been in the news with a regular bus service on the doorstep I don't know how much that influences value.

I think Wetaugust has just answered your question quite succinctly, yes your house will be a red flag because of the subsidence regardless of what you do now.

mrsnec, you really are under shedloads of stress on all fronts and it doesn't really sound as though selling the house at a loss will relieve any of it.

It's a hard lesson learned that you've massively overspent on this house and it's been a money pit on top of that.
Home owning can be a real nightmare.

Seeing as you've ploughed so much into the house, I'd definitely rent it out.

We're lucky in our area that there's a husband and wife team who work from home doing property rentals and management. Because they work from home they have low overheads and provide their services at a really low cost, but they are accredited and insured properly. They also have all the contacts for reasonable workmen.
Rather than using an Estate Agent for lettings I'd look for someone like them.

Thanks shobby, I guess I Just had to face facts.

Yes enriqe, I don't have much luck with property! I sold the one prior to that far too cheap as I had to get away from nasty neighbours and I even had to pay the other flats debts to the managing agent in order to get rid of that place!

Renting just gives us breathing space and doesn't solve the problem. The other isue is we live rent free now but dh wants us to start paying rent on this place to his parents but we can only afford to do that when we're not paying a mortgage.

But on the off chance I can convince dh to rent for a bit a company like that might be the way forward for now so we're not stressing over tenants.

Just a thought, if the house next door is being rented out, who owns that? Is it a private or a commercial landlord? and have you spoken to them at all about the properties seeing as they're joined?
They might have information that would be of use to you.

I know renting out isn't the ultimate solution but at least it would give you a break from having to maintain an empty property and a succession of offers to buy which don't succeed.

That is a thought but next door is a private landlord we know the family. Lived in the area for years and have no mortgage. It was left to the owner in his mum's will and he wants to keep in the family and likes the rental income as the only son.He told us he has no plans to sell but I do wonder. Great thought though. Appreciate everyone's help on this. Want to make sure we've explored every avenue.

Dh is saying categoricly no to letting. Hes worried more hands on the place will cause more damage. I need to convince him it wont happen if we're dealing with decent people. He wants to see what the agent come back with re the survey. Then tackle the mortgage comany if we can prove its unsaleable. He doesn't even like surveyors going round since one put his foot through the roof felt on the lean to!

Hmm, I understand your DH's reluctance to let and the potential for tenants causing damage, but at the moment the house is just sitting there not earning anything and costing you money!

You may challenge or question any potential buyers survey results all you like, but the bottom line is your property is not going to make itself any more sellable whatever you do with a subsidence history, corrected or not. Lenders will not lend on it when there is a choice of other properties: you might not like or agree with that stance but clearly that is what is happening. I do wonder how your lender supported your purchase of it in the first place though, particularly if the 'corrective' work had been completed before you purchased it: I would take legal advice to see if you can have any comeback against...well, I guess your lender for allowing you to purchase a property that is now unsellable? I'm not sure if it turning out to be a poor investment is grounds for suing them as the risk is to their money as well??!! Or would it be against the original surveyors that did your survey and falsely reassured them...they are notoriously slippery though and put all sorts of provisos in their reports, subsequently are very difficult to sue.

Find a letting company with a good reputation that will actively screen and monitor tenants for you, it will be worth the higher fees and you won't have to worry about the quality of your tenants then, plus at least you could cover the mortgage payment. Good luck whatever you decide to do!

OP no I don't think a conveyancing firm would be better I've just sold two house and one sale fell through the first time because the conveying firm were so hopeless and the second nearly fell through for the same reason. I was just wondering why your solicitor wasn't advising you? One house I recently sold has lease problems and my solicitor advised me what she would have advised if I was the buyer, if that makes sense. Is your solicitor local to your area do they know about the local mines etc therefore able to advise you on what other sellers have done?

We sued our surveyor (many moons ago) and won a large put of court sum, I can only imagine he surveyed the wrong house or got it mixed up with another one. So it is possible but I suspect it would have yo be pretty black and white (ours was so bad his loss adjuster apologised in behalf of the profession). Again can you take legal advise? We had to have the house resurveyed and it was sent with original survey to a barrister specialising in this sort of thing for her opinion as to whether we had a case.

mrsnec I have not read all the comments, but you bought the house in 2005. That's very close to the boom years. I have friends who bought around 2006-07. They are in negative equity, and can't sell the flat, although they have already moved on. They are letting it instead.

The problem is, unlike MrsFlorrick, I don't house prices will just go up and up - particularly not for a complicated house like yours. Mortgage companies are set to have tighter criteria following the new lending rules that are set to come in in April...

First of all I want to thank you all again for such a brilliant response and for you all being so honest and helpful.

Schoolnurse, we used dh's family solicitors in Dorset for the first few that failed then changed to the one the agent recommend locally thinking that would help but it hasn't.So they know the area. They can't understand the sticking point and haven't advised other than get cash buyers and we were told by the agent every buyer was but when the sale falls through we find out they were relying on a mortgage afterall.

We are being open and transparent with all buyers. We're told they've seen our surveys before they offer so their offers are taking the issues into account then its their own surveys that are apparently the problem.

The next step is to consider both grounds you've mentioned. Well done on winning that case against your surveyor by the way. We are going to review all the surveys and see if we have grounds with the lender (Skipton) if that takes ages which it will im just going to keep on a dh about letting it.

Yes snowbells we were rubbish with our timing! The thing is we don't really know what its worth when you consider in the last year houses of the same size in the same cul de sac went from 40k to over 100! We owe 85. On Zoopla its value is 87.5 im not sure how much attention buyers pay to Zoopla?

It sounds like you have 2 issues:

1 - your house has a subsistence issue that is rendering it in sellable

2 - your house is overpriced for its area (you said the house across the road sold for £40k?)

Both of these things means that you will not be able to sell for a profit or to break even - I think you need to make your peace with that now rather than ploughing more money into a lost cause. Sorry

The house that went for 40 was in a bad state of repair and it went for that at auction. Ours is in pristine condition and an identical one went recently for 125 so taking the issue into consideration I don't think us only wanting to cover what we owe is unreasonable unless we can prove the place is unsaleable.

I made that point as I cant believe prices vary so much in the same street. But yes we have agreed not to plough any more money into a lost cause. It's a shame. It's a really lovely house.

Your best chance of come-back is with the surveyor who originally surveyed the house for you (if they gave it a cleanish bill of health). The second best chance is with your solicitor who purchased the house for you (if the surveyor flagged a subsidence issue, but the surveyor didn't make clear to you that there could be mortgage issues and resale issues due to the red flag). You will have no chance of come-back with the mortgage company - all mortgage company surveys clearly state that the survey is for the benefit of the mortgage company, and that purchasers must not rely on it in any way. The disclaimer is water-tight.

Thanks Neeps, we'll look into that. I know at the time we both wanted it to be our forever home but I can't imagine us being stupid enough to buy a place we'd never be able to sell on.

We bought a house which had had a subsidence problem fixed 30 years previously. We had no problem getting a mortgage and our insurance isn't particularly high. I don't think it's necessarily always such a problem although granted, it will frighten off some people

That's the thing All, the buyers all knew, its been fixed too so maybe its something else, or that 10 years without movement and further claims isn't yet enough to prove the problem is fully resolved. Would you have touched that house if it was less than 30 years ago?

mrsnec, I've been thinking about your problem.
I don't know how successful you would be in pursuing your original surveyor and solicitor although of course, it is possible to prove their negligence if that was the case.

I'm not impressed if you keep accepting what you're told are cash offers and later find out that they buyers are needing a mortgage - that's not too clever by your Agent is it.

I would've thought the house would be best sold to a commercial landlord if it's rentable around the £600pcm mark, how realistic is that in your area and for the condition of your house? are they being over ambitious next door or is that a fair price do you think? A fully fledged commercial landlord in it for the long term is less likely to quibble over the issues so long as the property will keep making the right kind of return for them.

Have you googled for more information from other points of view other than yours as the vendor?
I think you could get a lot more knowledge under your belt
www.propertychecklists.co.uk/articles/underpinning-subsidence
www.theguardian.com/money/2010/sep/22/subsidence-house-underpinned
www.home.co.uk/guides/selling/sellingatauction.htm
all might be worth a read especially some of the articles advising people who would be your potential purchasers.

Selling at Auction might be an answer, although you'd need to choose the Auctioneers carefully and not necessarily just go with a local one, maybe there's a specialist firm who deal in difficult to sell places? Although this could mean extra costs and it may not necessarily sell anyway.

I wouldn't normally suggest this but you could also try some of those 'we buy any house' type companies, they say they'll buy regardless of condition or problems. Seeing as they offer well below market value it may seem a complete waste of time, and you'd certainly need to check them out to make sure you approach one that's as reputable as possible, but they would give you an offer to consider and at least you'd have checked out that avenue for yourself. If it's really way too low it might convince your DH that renting out is the better option for now?

The only other thing I can think of is posting on the money saving expert forums, you may get more thoughts there
forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16

Forgive me if it is a daft idea but what about an auction with a reserve price?

Thanks so much for taking that time enriqe.

I am obviously sceptical that we do have a case but I think its worth a try.

Yes I've found that a constant frustration with the agent. On one occasion their proof of finance from a buyer was a council compulsory purchase order with no value or timescale on it! This time it was a letter from the buyers solicitor but we never actually saw it, dh just took the agents word for it. When we first hired this agent, they advertised the place to buy or let and advised us to take whatever came first we got just under 500pcm about 18 months ago. It's crossed my mind the agents behaviour is to try and convince us to let it again as it was a regular income for them. It makes sense what next door are asking, I don't think they will achieve that but not far off. Our house is more modern than that one with a new fitted kitchen and bathroom and we have a garage and a conservatory and they don't and our garden is bigger. Although I don't know how those things affect rental values. I had heard rentals had gone up in the area more than house prices have.

Thanks for all those links. Will take the time to read them all.

Auction just scares me with that one only getting 40 odd despite its state. The we buy any gaff places offered silly money too, way under the market value. Think it was 65, thats amazing isn't it to think you could get a place for that and let it for 600pcm! Will check out the forums too.

Scone, I will run that past my dh, we would have to set the reserve at the minimum we could accept so will have to do some sums, find a decent firm and take it from there, wont rule it out though.

If, when you bought the house, you relied on the survey that the building society arranged then you would be wasting your time trying to sue the surveyor. It's well known that the building-society commissioned survey is for valuation purposes only - i.e. to protect the building society by ensuring the house is actually worth what the society is being asked to lend. You are always advised to seek your own full structural survey as well to protect yourself.

You can put a reserve price on at auction. You can also ask that the buyer pays a % of your sellers fee at auction. If you owe £85K that's what I'd try to get back - however if you are desperate to get shot of it and with your house's particular history of subsidence I would settle for lower than that - say £65K. The problem though is getting the b/s's agreement to sell at a loss so you'd need to have their agreement and an agreed repayment plan for the loss.

You could also try offering it for £85K to a housing association.

Your DH's financial acumen is zero by the way. A house should be a asset and if rented, it would be. Insisting on keeping it empty he has just created a liability that earns him nothing while still costing him maintenance costs.

So I've just found out the buyers survey tore the place apart saying that all the walls and floors are uneven.

Dh wants to put it straight back on the market. We discussed negative equity with Skipton. They have sent us the forms. Dh is looking at them now. The bit that worries me is that they wouldn't give us any ideas of figures you have to have an offer before they work something out so there's no benchmark.

Going to mention the h e idea.

Yes I agree on my dh. Its because of our current situation here he doesn't care he just wants rid. It id hsrd on our relationship too as he keeps accusing me of bullying him into buying it in the first place.

We didn't have a very nice life there though, we both hated our jobs, didn't make any friends and realised it would be an awful area to start a family so when his parents retiresd to the sun and bought another house down the road and set him up in business. He jumped on the first plane and I. Followed when I got fed up with being apart and flying backwards and forwards!

Is there any lateral thinking to be done here? Do you know anyone who would like to buy it as a cash sale to get the rental income? Your in-laws?