Feeling bullied, should we pull out?

[DobbieFreeElf]

I’ve come here to get some opinions from people removed from the situation.

We had an offer accepted on a house in September, the house fits our, very specific, needs and although we would like to improve it over the years (new kitchen, bathrooms, maybe extension) we would be planning this to be a home for 20 years.

The house is an adjoining paddock, a couple of acres, which is ideal as I have always had horses (prior to kids) and when the little people are bigger I would like to get another.

We were all set to exchange on the Monday before Xmas when our solicitor calls to say that the sellers want to impose an Overage clause (also called uplift/ clawback) on the land. In essence this means that if planning permission is granted on the land we must pay a percentage of the increase in value to the sellers. We felt completely blindsided as we had never even heard of this before that date.

Aside from potentially building a couple of stables in the future we have absolutely no plans to develop the land. (Why would we, we love the house because it is rural).

I can’t decide if we should cut our losses and walk away now.

Now the seller is threatening to put the house back on the market next Monday. We feel backed into a corner and bullied.

Initially we were dead set against the overage (especially as it was dropped on us at the 11th hour) but having had time to look around at what else is on the market (nothing that meets our needs), thinking about the 15k extra we will have to pay on another property (as it’s doubtful there would be a house we would complete on before the SD holiday ends), the £2k+ we’ve already spent on conveyancing, searches, surveys, inspections etc. and many other factors we had decided that we would be open to the overage (as long as we negotiate terms that we are ok with)

Are we stupid, should we walk away, is this fate giving a massive warning sign...

Call it what you will but revising the terms in a way that is significant at the 11th is shit. What did you decide OP?

I’m glad you’ve gone back to the cheeky buggers. Perhaps as a Tagline to your next email add ‘our vendors ‘remembering’ they wanted this significant and unusual clause at such a late stage is concerning. Let us be clear that if they ‘remember’ any further significant clauses to add to the contracts any counter offers we have made since this overage clause was introduced are rendered void, whether related or not.

I think you said it's in the Midlands? Good luck to them with tier 4 viewings if they want to mess you around...

@Newyearnewrule

We may have different views on what bullying means. They changed their minds because they feel they are shortchanging themselves and revised the terms. What is wrong with that? If I feel I was significantly underselling my property after coming by new information then I would try to correct the situation. Why shouldn’t I? These are big transactions in people’s lives for both sellers and buyers.

In England until contracts are signed both sellers and buyers are free to change their minds. How can exercising that right be bullying?

I can see it is a terrible situation to be in but bullying?

Are you the Sellers ? 🤔

Are you the Sellers ? 🤔

Might be, as excusing such poor preparation - at best, or deceitful - at worst, conduct appears to be what your doing there.

I have seen this on Homes under the Hammer. Pure greed!

Sorry I am not the sellers. Are only responses that agree with the OP allowed? I did not realise that is how it works here.

It is a rotten thing but the sellers are acting in their best interest and OP should act in her best interest. No one is bullying anyone because both parties retain the right to change their minds until the contracts are signed. In the OP’s position I would be prepared to walk away. It’s the sellers property to do whatever they want with it. Is that not so? The law in England does not tie anyone in until contracts are signed. It causes terrible problems.

Don’t do it. Give them a deadline to complete without it and if they don’t, walk away. Too risky.

It’s the sellers property to do whatever they want with it. Is that not so? Gazumping, gazumdering, and what these vendors are doing is all legal, but none of them are ethical, or considered good conduct. You were defending their behaviour as if were an acceptable way to conduct the transaction, it’s not. Hence the comment.

I am not defending their behaviour. I said it is horrendous but it is not bullying. No one had to buy or sell to anyone. Is that not so? I cannot bullying a person simply by choosing not to buy or sell to them or to change my mind about how much I will sell something for or pay for it.

Just walk away if it does not work for you. As disappointing as it may be it is still just a business transaction and you cannot enter a battle or allow yourself to feel bullied because the other person is not doing what you want them to do with their property or money.

The original poster should be prepared to walk away. The seller doesn’t need to sell as she said which means the seller is in a strong position and it is still a sellers market. Sellers are being greedy but it is their property to be greedy about.

Just walk away.

@Newyearnewrule

I am not defending their behaviour. I said it is horrendous but it is not bullying. No one had to buy or sell to anyone. Is that not so? I cannot bullying a person simply by choosing not to buy or sell to them or to change my mind about how much I will sell something for or pay for it.

Just walk away if it does not work for you. As disappointing as it may be it is still just a business transaction and you cannot enter a battle or allow yourself to feel bullied because the other person is not doing what you want them to do with their property or money.

The original poster should be prepared to walk away. The seller doesn’t need to sell as she said which means the seller is in a strong position and it is still a sellers market. Sellers are being greedy but it is their property to be greedy about.

Just walk away.

Unpleasantly greedy then rather than bullies?

Have you heard anything back OP? I thinkyou have been more than fair with your counter offer btw......hopefully they wont mess you about any further but if they do just walk. Its not worth dealing with dickheads.

It’s very very common to have overage clauses on land. I’ve never sold agricultural land that doesn’t have an overage clause on...

It’s the introduction of this in the final throws of the transaction that is underhand, then adding pressure is distasteful. At a point when the purchaser is mentally and monetarily invested, it’s done to apply pressure and exert force. This may not constitute bullying according to the dictionary, but the OP said she FEELS bullied, and that is surely hers to decide.

I haven't read the full thread but there was a similar clause on land that I purchased (admittedly not dropped on me at the last minute) adjacent to a house I owned. If I obtained permission to develop the land for housing, I had to split any increase in the value of the land with the company I was buying from 50/50. As the land was only intended for stables and grazing, it was not a problem and did not cause any issues when I sold the house and land some years later - the house and land had gone up in value but as this was not linked to the development of housing, nothing was owed to the original vendor. In contrast, there is a property near me that is proving difficult to sell because of the nature of the restrictive covenants attached to the property but I think you are talking about something completely different.

Hi everyone,

Sorry I’ve taken a while to reply, we’ve been packing our home into boxes, whilst also looking after a small baby and crazy 4 year old, it’s not been easy. Especially as we’re packing and not knowing where we will be moving to or for how long! Talk about stress!

The sellers came back and have said they will not budge on 40 years. They have agreed to limit it to residential and commercial planning.

We haven’t responded although we have told the estate agent that we need to take legal advice (because to this point we’ve been going it alone whilst the solicitors have a lovely holiday 🙄) the sellers had said that if we hadn’t agreed by Monday it is being reposted (at £65k more 🙄) and to be honest if they do then that will be us drawing a line under it.

We just need time to regroup, think, have the full legal implications explained to us.

On one hand, although we will be sharing the spoils, this could potentially be a good investment for the future.

Or it could tie us to a house and a piece of land that we can then not sell or develop as we wish to in the future.

I can’t help but feel that this is a massive red flag being waved in our faces and we really will be better to walk away...

Neither my head or my heart has given me a resounding answer 🤦🏻‍♀️

You need to take an unbiased view from someone. You are too close to it.

They sound awful, it would put me off personally.

Putting it up for 65k more that's mad!
It doesn't sound like they want to sell it at all.

I read the thread earlier but was waiting for your update to post :) I think you've done the right thing by saying you're waiting for legal advice. Personally I really don't buy that they just "forgot" about this until this stage, they've had a long time and a lot of opportunity to remember and unless others come back saying this is common, 40 years seems like a particularly long term. Makes me wonder if they know something about the longer term plans for the area that you don't.

It's not quite the same but we had ab offer accepted on what we thought was our dream home earlier in the year. Later the sellers announced they'd been continuing to allow viewings and subsequently decided to sell to someone else who offered the same amount that we did but was a cash buyer as they were desperate for a quick sale due to relocating. At the time we were really upset, but lo and behold two months later we got a call from the agent saying that sale had fallen through and they wanted to know by 5pm that day whether we wanted to go ahead and buy it. I explained my husband was at work so could we have until the next morning. This was agreed but an hour later the house appeared on Rightmove again and at a higher price. When the agent called again I politely said we didn't trust them or the sellers anymore. That was 6 months ago and it's still on the market. Personally we're grateful we listened to our inner voice telling us this wasn't the right house to proceed with and if you come to the same conclusion I'd bet long term when you find another house with reasonable sellers you might feel the same. Really sorry you're going through this though, it's so stressful!

Bit shit to do that then not give you time to properly consider it. The 40 years is also I assume going to prevent you putting a similar clause in place if you sell before then?

I think it's quite clear they're trying to pile on the pressure but I do think it's important to remember that buying property is a business transaction and to try not to get too emotionally invested. Easier said than done obviously but if you try to take an objective view and rise above the bullshit then you'll feel much better. Either it's a good deal for you or it's not, if it is then do it, if not then walk away.

£65k more with a 40 year overage?

No one is going to pay that. Idiots. I'm sorry, they sound like stupid greedy people.

I'd walk away - you cannot negotiate with people like this.

Tbh I think it depends on your financial circumstances.

You say you'd like to keep the house for 20 years and have no plans to develop the land in that time.

Would the house sell without the land? I appreciate it has value to you if you may wish to have horses in the future but this isn't the case for most people.

If the house is sellable without the land I'd go ahead with the purchase on the basis that you're buying the land as a very long term investment.

Even if you sell the house, keep the land and rent it out until the 40 years have passed. You'd benefit from the rental income in the meantime.

This way you get the home you want and mentally you've already thwarted their greed in putting this condition on at the last minute.

In truth there's nothing wrong with what they are asking for, but the timing/lack of transparency was poor form.

If the house is otherwise perfect I'd make my peace with the issue this way.

You potentially might want to gift the land to your children at some point and let them reap the benefits after 40 years.

How much is the additional 200%?

Think of it in that way, what is the total cost with the 200% and would you be willing to have paid that much at the start?

If you love the house and paddock and have no intention of building on it then buy it. Though try to get them to pay the 1k solicitors fees.

If the house is so far from a village it’s unlikely it would get pp for housing. Even if it did, you would still have 60% of the sale price/profit.

I think you’d be able to sell it ok because there will be others who either don’t want to build, realise it’s unlikely pp would ever be granted, or be happy if it ever was granted they’d get something?