Property purchase - seller wont accept offer as 'not clean'?

[52andblue]

A friend is trying to buy a property.
Arranged a mortgage in principle.
Put in a verbal offer, was told would be acceptable.
Put in a written offer via a lawyer.
Sellers have just advised will not accept it as it is 'not clean, ie subject to a mortgage offer'. Eh?
It is a modest wee flat so how the heck do they think they will sell it?
If it is cash buyers only, why not say so?
Am i missing something here?
How to arrange the mortgage formally without an accepted offer?
How do they accept the offer without a mortgage all tied up?

Thank you everyone for helping with the HR (I think it was not 'being hidden' at all but my friend wasn't very organised about reading it!)

They seem to have been advised by their lawyer that if they go ahead with the 'subject to loan' part deleted then they could be liable for costs if they cant get a mortgage as they dont have cash upfront for £40K I don't know if this is the lawyer being very over cautious (but I guess that is better than being sloppy!).
The sellers also want 'subject to a satisfactory HR' taken out of a the standard offer. Friend has viewed it and says 'not too bad'. The subsidence is 'only' Cat 1 and not unusual for building of c1880 and the roof issue is the ceiling of the kitchen which has come down after a leak in the bathroom apparently. But yes, prob one to avoid.

I think he is too nervous to go ahead now and risk being tied in with no mortgage funds ?

Thank you all very much for your input, it's really helpful.

They seem to have been advised by their lawyer that if they go ahead with the 'subject to loan' part deleted then they could be liable for costs if they cant get a mortgage as they dont have cash upfront for £40K I don't know if this is the lawyer being very over cautious

If he pulls out for any reason after missives are concluded then yes he will be liable for any costs incurred by the vendors. That’s not just legal costs, it could be any price difference between his offer and another lower one they accept later from someone else, for example. Plus things like insurance and council tax.

This is absolutely standard and not being over cautious.

All that deletion of standard clauses is what he's paying his solicitor for. Solicitor will advise what is reasonable.

I hope your friend has had second thoughts as from the sound of things it’s not the right property for him.

I think its the grey area in the run up to conclusion of missives he is unclear about. He seems to think if he puts in an offer with no clauses now then he is 100% committed. Lawyer is 'leaving it to him to decide'.
Obvs correct re how much risk he is prepared to take but I think he is not sure how MUCH risk / what the steps are between no clause offer and watertight conclusion of missives. (as you may tell, nor am I)!

I think if they made a (formal, written) offer with absolutely no conditions (which would be weird) and it was unconditionally accepted then that would effectively be missives concluded?

Normally the missive process is basically a back and fourth with various terms being ironed out until both sides "agree". So when we received the offer on our house it contained certain "conditions". We replied with a conditional acceptance, subject to "conditions" and back and forth it went until everything was worked through. That included things like evidencing building warrants, satisfactory survey, agreeing entry date and so on

Even if the mortgage clause wasn't there, there should be other things that would need to be negotiated. Their lawyer should be giving them much better advice but my understanding was that these days until missives conclude then you can walk away

That said the property sounds a nightmare