Is this allowed? AIBU?

[IMB711]

We made a private offer on a property after bumping into the sellers and were told by the sellers that this would be accepted. Once the sellers agents got involved, the agents offered the use of their broker which we politely declined as we already have an AIP.

The agents asked to see our AIP which we sent over, only to be told that after discussing with the sellers they have asked for our offer to be financially qualified by their brokers before conveyancing can start. We declined again and have offered to also show proof of deposit in addition to the AIP but have been told the financial qualification is a condition to the sale.

Is this allowed or am I being unreasonable to still object? Surely the AIP and proof of funds should be enough?

So here is the deal. Some agents try to reassure sellers that they will check a buyer’s affordability by “financially qualifying” them. The buyers think that’s all they are doing. Looking at your affordability.

What it actually means is they’re going to get their mortgage broker, from whom they get a bonus for referrals, to spend an age on the phone with you, going through your finances and then they will try to appoint themselves as your mortgage broker. Along the way, of course, they will actually check that you can afford the house that you intend to buy. That’s the “financially qualifying” part. That’s the bit they promised to the seller.

This doesn’t mean that you have to get a mortgage through their broker. It means you have to go through the motions to get what you want

Let them do their qualifying thing then politely decline to use their mortgage broker’s offer to get you the mortgage they then recommend for you.

If the EA insist you get a mortgage through their broker, that’s the point in which it becomes illegal, and you can feel free to put a note through the seller’s door saying “I already had a mortgage in place but they are trying to force me to use theirs, AFTER financially qualifying me, which is illegal.”

The seller won’t have a clue what’s going on by the way, because most sellers will read a contract (which they ARE legally bound to) saying “financially qualify” and just assume the EA is gonna engage a credit referencing agency. So the bit about the seller asking them is bending the truth: the seller has asked them by means of signing a contract, without fully understanding what those two specific words mean.

This is becoming increasingly common by the way. If you point blank refuse you may keep coming up against it with other houses. Just play ball then say no once they try to start flogging you stuff.

If this is indeed a Private sales then I am not sure why the Agents are involved at all.
If you are in touch with the seller tell them that you will happily show THEM anything they need to see (within reason) but The Agent can get lost

We almost bought through friends last year and the EA they had round to value the house insisted that they were entitled to act on their behalf because they had valued their house. That is literally all they had done.

Some people are really naive.

Anyway. They sold their services at a reduced rate claiming they would make sure the paperwork was done and the chain didn’t collapse.

We did not buy that house; their involvement in fact spurred us on to thought processes we wouldn’t have had if the sale had been kept direct between four friends, and we pulled out (not just because of them).

Thanks everyone, so annoying that I have to provide personal details to someone I have no intention of using. Am I able to refuse to be "financially qualified" with their broker and request another process? Or does this completely leave me out the process?

We had preferred not to go through the agents given we had agreed the price but the sellers said they were mandated to keep the property with the agents for the next year or so, so we figured it's them paying the agency fees anyway and didn't affect our offer price...

This is a private sale so that means no agent involvement. This is as clear as mud.

How did you find out the house was for sale?

No, you have to do it. Remember all you are doing is listening to their BS, going through finances and when they get to the stage where they say “we recommend this 5 year nationwide mortgage, would you like us to arrange it for you?” you say “no thanks.”

So I have only ever heard of a seller being locked in with an agent for a year once before: when the agent has failed to sell the house via Modern Method of Auction, but has managed to convince the seller that they will get a rapid sale and has locked them into a 12 month contract. The lawyers for these folks are BRUTAL. Read the one star reviews of iamsold on Trustpilot and all will become clear.

However if they ARE stuck with this agent for a year (which I am now inclined to believe), it may also give you no leverage to say no to arranging a mortgage through their broker. Because if you go back to the seller and say “I am not having this, I want to go with my own broker” they won’t be able to do anything about it, cos they are legally locked into a contract with them for a year. And to the agent, they won’t care if it’s illegal. They will financially ruin people before they have any shits to give.

A few people have bumped threads on here over the last year to complain about them, and it is desperately sad.

The agents don't have to be involved at all unless they 'introduced' the property to you, surely? If you didn't become aware of it as a result of anything they did, I think you can tell them to get lost and the seller won't be liable for their fee.