Offer on house, any advise

[Hijinks75]

Had house on market for 6 months , no interest, recently changed agent, some views but no offers, have now been approached by someone we know who says they would like to buy the property but not go through estate agent, price they offered is pretty close to asking price, what should we do, have we a legal obligation to go through the agent?

It depends if you are still in contract with your agent and what type of contract you have signed - if it is 'sole agent' or 'multi agency'.
If I were you, I'd give notice to the agency asap and then start the proceedings for sale with your friend. Then you know you are clear

I’m not in the UK so could be different here, but for us it would depend on the contract with the agent.

For example, if I was selling my house, there would usually be a contract stating that the agent has a set number of days (90, 180) which could be renewed if the house didn’t sell in that time frame.

Also some people have a clause for a situation like yours, that if they have someone interested, then they can sell without agent, but that would be usually if they had someone interested before they got an agent.

It really all depends on what you’ve signed with the agent.

Read the contract you signed, it may be even when you're out of contract you have to pay commission within a set time frame.

It normally depends on whether the EA has their name and address because they contacted the EA in the past about your house.

If it's someone completely new to the EA then they can't claim the commission. But it does mean you will be trying to get to Completion without the help of an EA doing the background checks on them and dealing with the Buyers on your behalf throughout the process.

If you accept their offer you will need to inform the EA so they will tell you at that point whether or not they feel you have a reason to still have to pay their commission. Depending on how much the EA commission is, it may be simpler just to ask them to make their offer through the EA.

But the buyer wouldn't have to pay the EA anything -what would be the advantage of bypassing to the buyer - seems odd!

The buyer is just hoping you’ll accept the lower offer because you are saving on fees

Its likely they knew your house was on the market due to it being advertised so surely you owe the EA

The answer lies in your contract with the EA, OP. Read it carefully. The EA will become aware of the sale and may pursue you for any fee that is owed. Given that you are currently under contract my guess is that the agent is owed a fee.

The potential buyer probably knows this. I am no fan of EAs as a class (although we have a great family friend in the profession) but I would not want to be negotiating unsupported with someone who showed these ethics.

Thanks for all the advice, I’m also unsure why they wouldn’t use the ea as it costs them nothing to do so, we do know them quite well and I doubt they are trying anything on, as to knowing the house was for sale via agent, it’s not difficult to miss as they live close by and will have seen the sign and I’m fairly sure we told them, alongside other neighbours that we were going to sell before we put it on the market

Further to the original post, the buyer has made an offer to us direct, for the asking price, but still says they don’t want to go through the estate agent, we have actually told the ea and they acknowledge that they haven’t so.d the house but have advised that we pass the buyers details to them for all the background checks etc, our solicitor also feels this is appropriate, the ea will charge a significantly reduced fee and we are fine with that as they would the deal with any issues, the buyer is still a little reluctant to do that but I cannot understand why, anyone have any ideas or had a similar situation

How frustrating. As you say, there is no cost to the buyer so why do they care? One’s first thought, sadly, is that they sre afraid the EA background checks will turn something up.

I would be following my solicitor’s advice on this.

Adding an EA into the mix when they specifically didn't want to deal with an EA just adds a layer of complication that some people would just rather do without.

They could hate EAs based on past experiences. They could feel the EA is going to slow down the process by trying to talk you into various services that you're loathe to pay for. They could be afraid the EA will keep marketing it off Rightmove to get a higher price (and therefore full commission), even though you've accepted their offer.

There are all sorts of reasons NOT to trust EAs, so I wouldn't necessarily jump to the conclusion that it's because their finances don't add up.

There are all sorts of reasons NOT to trust EAs, so I wouldn't necessarily jump to the conclusion that it's because their finances don't add up

Likewise, there are plenty of reasons not to trust a potential buyer who says: "I'll pay your asking price, but don't go through the agent."

As has been highlighted, makes no logical sense for the buyer to try and remove agent involvement, unless there were perhaps trying to conceal something.

As has been highlighted, makes no logical sense for the buyer to try and remove agent involvement, unless there were perhaps trying to conceal something.

We had an offer accepted on a house we were buying this year, from friends. Then they said they were going to get the EA involved who had valued the house (the EA managed to talk them into being their agent on the basis that they had valued the house, and therefore were duty bound to give them some money, which was BS, but our friends would not be told that this agent had no rights).

It pissed me right off. I don't want an EA involvement in a direct transaction, slowing things down and complicating them.

That was our only reason.

Turns out, we didn't buy the house; now it's been sitting on the market with the very same agent for three months with no changes, not going anywhere anyway.

They are NOT a good agent and I didn't want them in the mix.

I appreciate not everyone's motives will be the same.

Honestly can't see why it matters. You have no more protection going through the agent than you would otherwise. Yes they'll do some due diligence checks (proof of funds etc), but that won't stop you getting burned if, for example, your buyer chooses to pull out of the sale right before exchange, or vastly reduce their offer. If you already know them and are out of contract with the agent, then personally I'd have let them deal with you directly. Both parties would still have a solicitor representing them regardless.

It pissed me right off. I don't want an EA involvement in a direct transaction, slowing things down and complicating them

They are NOT a good agent and I didn't want them in the mix.

Maybe a bad agent slows things down and complicates them, and more fool your friends for choosing such a bad agent, but a good one can help manage the process far more effectively, and sometimes a little distance between friends in a large financial transaction can be no bad thing.

Our EAs suggestion for continued involvement was as Mildura said, to act as a buffer if anything goes amiss, we’d already included their fees in any potential sale so that’s not a deal breaker for us, I have spoken to our buyer and they have no issue goi g through the agent so hopefully all good