Viewing not possible unless your own house is under offer?

[NotonMyHighSt]

Is this the case always?

One of my adult DCs is moving (house about to go on the market within days.)

They want to view various properties but agents are saying on, unless theirs is under offer.

Is this how it is now?

Years ago, we always viewed/ offered/ then sold ours (on the basis that it was taking longer to find ourselves new home than sell an existing one.)

I full get that viewings take time and vendors don't want time wasters but....

What exactly do people think is the benefit of accepting an offer from someone who isn’t oroceedable? So, from someone who hasn’t yet marketed their own house, or who hasn’t got mortgage finance in place and might not get a mortgage?

So, you can say you’ve got an offer…..but what next? Do you want this purely so you can now view yourself? But then the same issues exist. What is goi g to happen next? You have to wait for the person whose offer you accepted to market and get a buyer. It could be next week or many months. What about the person without a mortgage offer in principle? You now need to wait for them to apply, and it could be several weeks and then they are turned down.

So in that time you’ve accepted a non-proceedable person, you have waited and waited and missed out on people who will have had a buyer and finance in place. What exactly was the benefit of that?

It seems totally logical to me that only those who are proceedable can view. Others are essentially time wasters, at least in the short term. Why let them view if you won’t accept an offer? And surely no-one wants to accept an offer from someone who can’t proceed….because by doing so you miss out on genuine proceedable buyers.

This isn’t new. People seem to think it is, but the reality is that loads of people simply don’t know how house buying works and the chronological stages. They don’t do their research before deciding to move about the process, and then feel cross they can’t just randomly decide to view lots of houses or even make random offers, when often their house isn’t even ready to market and they have no idea if they will get a mortgage.

As I said before, you have to plan and prepare. First you get your property ready to sell and market it. You wait however long it takes to get an offer. Yes of course you can look on Rightmkve and join agents lists whilst doing that. You apply for mortgage finance. Once those things are sorted, then you start viewing and offering.

Viewings are done so offers can be made. If you aren’t in a position to offer, you shouldn’t be viewing…because it is time wasting. Why would you expect anyone to accept an offer if you can’t proceed…and miss out on those who can proceed? I think people lack self awareness and self knowledge about the reality of their position and the impact on those they wish to buy from…they fail to consider the impact up and down chains of people offering without being proceedable and purely consider that they would like to look at houses and make offers. It is a total lack of awareness of the bigger picture and how buying and selling is all interconnected.

WombatChocolate

I remember in the early 90s a couple viewing my parents house. They hadn't sold their's but really, really wanted my parents house. But my parents needed to sell to buy the next house, had several offers and didn't want to wait for them to sell their house which could have taken months who knows.

@WombatChocolate what’s now happening is almost the opposite which is just as much of an issue if not more. People are accepting offers from ‘proceedable’ buyers then can’t find a property themselves so they become ‘unproceedable’! At this point in time there are more buyers than sellers so it actually makes sense to allow the buyers to buy. Most houses are as good as sold before they’re even on the market.

A mortgage in principle means nothing really either. Until you’ve done an actual mortgage application you’re not a proceedable buyer anyway.

How often do things fall through? All the time. So even people who are proceedable at the time they offer still have a huge chance of things going wrong before they get to the stage of turning the key in the door.

Somebody with an offer on their house is in my book no more proceedable that someone who seriously wants your house and is prepared to put their house on the market to get it . Anecdotelly there are people making simultaneous offers on several properties, some of those will be let down so not actually proceedable, we have just viewed a property , very experienced agent said they would regard someone serious about the house as just as viable as someone in a long chain.

Interestingly he also said they were getting the first trickle of people who relocated in the pandemic and are now having second thoughts and want to go nearer to London .

Nothing is ever certain in house buying. Things fall through at all stages.

But some things make it more likely. The length of time from offer to exchange is a key factor….the longer it all drags on, the more break downs.

I would expect the EA to ask for evidence that a buyer has got an offer on their own and to see evidence of funds (deposit and any mortgage in principle) before formally accepting an offer and issuing the memorandum of sale.

Yes, of course, things can still go wrong. However, it shouldn’t be the scenario that so many find themselves in 3 or 4 or 6 weeks or Ben longer later, if it turning out that the buyer doesn’t have an offer in their own and hasn’t even put their own on market, or they have zero chance of getting the finance. Too often people accept offers from people who have no intention of moving…they have a hobby of house viewing and making offers and then pulling out. Or they accept offers from people who haven’t been verified by the EA and there is no way they will ever be able to exchange in the house because they will never be able to borrow enough etc etc.

There is no certainty. But there is also going into or avoiding situations which are highly unlikely to proceed.

You could say that it’s unethical to accept an offer from someone if you have no reasonable expectation of being able to move out in the next 6 months. Why accept an offer if you haven’t got anything to buy and you are not contemplating renting. So many people stuck because their vendors won’t/can’t move.

This is why our system is so ridiculous.

@Lupee

You have the option to go into rented until you find somewhere. But you cannot be waiting for someone else to get their house on the market, do viewings, get an offer they like etc. That holds the entire chain up.

Have you seen the rental market lately? Definitely not that easy to go into rented at all

I have never known any different and it makes perfect sense. Why would aanyone accept an offer from someone who had not even sold their property?

I would say it depends on EA. Our EA doesn't discriminate between ppl who have and haven't sold, he let's everyone view. But we weren't allowed to view a house we wanted because we haven't sold at the time. So put ours on market, sold, booked viewing which they cancelled as accepted an offer already.

Then it took us 6 months of stringing our poor buyers along to find something else. Both situations are rubbish IMO.

Later down the line our buyers pulled out and we found new ones fairly quick who according to EA were perfect, huge deposit and mortgage is principle. We got to exchange 4 months only to find out they couldn't get a mortgage because of overseas funds so had to start all over again. In the meantime we may have turned down ppl who would have completed quicker than these so called 'perfect' buyers. Hoping 3rd time lucky and we got to move in next couple of weeks.

It's all a double edged sword and you can get screwed either way.

I would not accept an offer unless buyer was proceedable. Yes it's not binding (it should be), but they have more chance if it going through than someone not even on the market!
I would consider going in to rental to make myself a cash buyer rather than the stress of a chain (and would try and view only chain free properties having been burnt twice this summer).
The system here is truly awful and needs an overhaul: make offers binding (there can be contingencies like bad survey), set out time limits for getting finances/surveys done, streamline search process.

We sold our London house and bought up north in 2017. We could view properties before we were on the market but we couldn't offer on anything until we'd sold subject to contract. The estate agent didn't let anyone view our house unless they were ready to proceed and he'd had sight of their financial position.

I think most EA's prefer to have buyers who have sold their properties. I think that 'proceedability' is a hazy concept since chains break all the time and all this requirement does is increase the likelihood of a sale while also skewing the market.

Just looking at this forum where the members have complained there are not enough houses on sale and the supply has dried up. EAs may be killing the market that earns them their hefty commission by insiting on this preconsiditon. The supply is limited in a great part precisely because potential sellers are put off by not adequate buying options. If potential sellers were allowed to view without a precondition of being proceedable, it is more likely to impact the market with higher supply. Ofcourse we will always have few people who would end up wasting others' time being professional house viewers and not having intention to move, still a large part of the viewers will put their own houses on the market if they were allowed to view. End of the day it is chicken or egg problem.

Absolutely agree @Cybercynic! We are actually in the situation right now where our seller can’t find a property to move on to and we are likely to lose our buyer if we can’t move soon. I really don’t see how that’s any different to the opposite scenario of a buyer not being able to find a buyer for their house!

I think it will depend on the kind of house it is, and a good estate agent should be able to think beyond a blanket rule. When we sold our house a couple of years ago we had far more viewers than we really wanted - it was the sort of house first-time buyers buy, and so we got loads of them looking, and it was also a bit cheap for the area, but for a reason, so we got lots of people coming to look excited about the price but then deciding that actually they couldn't live with the reason (crap parking). It wasn't the sort of house that was going to inspire anyone to put their house on the market and we were inundated with viewers, the last thing we wanted was people viewing who weren't in a position to proceed. If my parents' house was on the market, though, the pool of buyers would be small and a bit niche and it is plausible that someone might want that house specifically enough to sell their own, so it would make less sense to insist that viewers had to have had an offer on their own.

We had this when we bought 8 years ago. One estate agent wouldn't let us view even though our house was on the market and we had lots of interest. So we viewed and offered elsewhere. He did ring back after a few weeks when his strategy wasn't working and tell us we could now view but we'd already offered on the house we bought.

I can see you'd want to discourage time wasters. But we did end up selling first and then the EAs were chasing us to find something to buy!!

It depends on the estate agent.

We know when we move from our current home in future it will only be because we see a property that meets the needs for our next stage in life. I'd not be willing to sell out family home and uproot everyone on the off chance we see something appropriate.

I’m afraid as others have already posted, it’s standard in this current and very brutal market. EAs won’t entertain you unless you’re STC around here.
Some people get around it by saying they’re cash buyers and don’t need to sell. A few slipped through the net like that when we sold in the summer.
Now in rented waiting for our forever house, and finding that a lot of properties aren’t even making it onto the market.

Its insane I agree.

Whoever thought first time buyers should start a chain rather than finish it was lacking a few brain cells.

Where is their less stock? Top or Botton
Where is the client likely to make less compromises? Top or Bottom
And thus who is going to take longer to find a home? Obviously the top of the chain.

I honestly cannot think of any logical reason why its this way around.

@LolaSmiles

It depends on the estate agent.

We know when we move from our current home in future it will only be because we see a property that meets the needs for our next stage in life. I'd not be willing to sell out family home and uproot everyone on the off chance we see something appropriate.

Exactly .

And this is one reason why there is a shortage of good family homes on the market.

The thing is, there needs to be a basic 'system' for chains to progress.

At the moment, it's that buyers are proceedable....they have their own buyer and finance in principle, then offer when that offer is accepted, those people can then go and view and do the same. If some people are working like that, it doesn't work if people at the top will only market their house after they have had an offer accepted.

If he system was that no-one marketed until they had an offer accepted on their own, and everyone did this, hen that would be the reverse system and could possibly work......but it isn't the system. It cannot work if neither side of the chain can proceed.

There is a bigger picture and usually no one sale is Independent, but dependent on others. To me, it is perfectly reasonable that buyers must have finance in principle in place and a buyer if they need one. The fact people don't like it, or for some reason can't get their heads round it, doesn't make it wrong.

For some people with very special properties, EAs might be a bit more flexible. And of course, some people are selling and not buying....so they haven't got to go further anyway. And some people are cash buyers too.

But for the standard sort of buyers, who need mortgage finance and who need to sell in order to buy another property, being proceedable i. Terms of having finance set up and also a buyer, makes total sense to the process moving forward. By nature house buying and selling is slow, frustrating, and there are lots of things that can break down before exchange. There would be even more break-downs and delays if there were zero 'norms' and people allowed viewings from anyone and accepted offers from anyone.....far more would collapse because the buyer couldn't get finance or didn't actually I tend to market their property, or did but couldn't get a buyer. Although it can feel annoying, it really is in the best interests of chains proceeding that buyers are proceedable.

I don't think it's a big ask to be honest. People have to get their house ready to sell and market it (if they won't do this, will they ever actually do it or do they want to move) and if they offer without a buyer, most cannot move forward as they wont have the cash to move. It really is logical, if a bit annoying.

As I said before, people just need to think ahead. They have to prepare their property and market it. Once they have done that and oft an offer, they can view and make offers and things can start moving. If by some chance they don't find somewhere to buy, well that's just one of those things and one of the causes of chain collapse. All the causes of chain collapse cannot be removed.

It's been like that for decades.

No it hasn't - or at least, not across the country, I can't speak for every EA in every part of the country, but for many areas this is definitely new. Started in COVID as they didn't want lots of people in other peoples houses, then carried on when the world went into a spin with the stamp duty holiday, and then (where I live at least) the market is still in a state of having far more potential buyers than properties available at the moment so have kept it in place.

WombatChocolate the OP was asking about being able to view a house, not have an offer accepted. Yes, it has always been the case you are unlikely to have an offer accepted until you have sold (or if you can demonstrate you have the funds from somewhere), but generally you have been allowed to view.
Up to the vendor of course, but generally the more people that view, the more likely you are to sell quickly / for a decent price. I know it is a pain (I last sold with a baby, a pre-schooler and a 6 yr old), but it is just what you put up with to get potential buyers through the door.

It's been like that for decades.

I cant comment on whether it is or not because I only sold and bought simultaneously for the first time this year; but to me it was an insane way of doing things.

What I can say is that buyers/ sellers can encourage agents not to do this.

I specifically chose my EA because he was the only one to allow me to view houses before having sold. I thought if he treats me like this and makes me feel comfortable and welcome, then he will treat my buyers like this too.

It worked well, he was bloody excellent and he really went the extra mile. He easily got 15% more on my property by allowing prospective buyers than only proceedable FTB. 50 viewings over the course of a week.

We sold to an older couple who were downsizing to live near their daughter.

But I shant complain either, because when he came to view our new house out of interest. He said well bloody good thing the chain EAs sold this. They only allowed 7 proceedable buyers on one day of viewings who all called with 24 hours of listing.

He said if he had listed it it would have gone for 50-100k more than we paid.

So whilst its stupid and I think it needs to be changed; we did do really quite well out of it.