I don't agree. Due to the disparity between "real people's time" and "legal people's time" if this were a right nothing would ever be nailed down in a contract due to, IME, the excessive time-scales associated with getting contracts drafted, agreed, signed, witnessed, exchanged, etc.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 54,372
There is no suggestion in the earlier post that the seller was delaying the sale. However, if the seller was messing the buyer around, then that would be grounds for pulling out of the purchase.
Just on that : there is a difference in time scale but a few examples might help:
1. Contracts can only be drawn up by the Vendors solicitor if the Title Deeds are available. It can happen that the solicitor is the last to know a client is selling a property. If the Deeds are with a lender as security, it will take 3-4 weeks to take up the Deeds hence no contracts can be drawn up.
2. Purchasers will only sign contracts when they have funds lined up - that is getting harder and harder to organise.
3. Vendors need to have somewhere to go - they must give vacant possession and obviously that means moving out. Amazingly, not all vendors really grasp that! And its only when you explain the process: contracts, legal paperwork, completion , money and vacant possession that the full horror hits them!
The market is still full of tyre kickers. People who have no real idea whether they can borrow at all but know enough to sound confident so that their "offer" may well be accepted.
By and large the time issues are around clients not grasping where they fit in in the overall scheme of things. And each client has his/her own peculiar needy bits - why its different for them and why exceptions/allowances should be made for them. But not other people, obviously.
Solicitors could close a transaction in under a week if the vendors had somewhere to go and could clear the house and give vacant possession and the purchasers had their money in hand.
mf
This happened to me last year. Promptly told the purchaser that if he wasn't going to stick to the original agreed price he could forget about the whole transaction (polite version!) Within 2 weeks the purchaser was back to me with the original agreed price and I eventually closed.
In a previous sale (in the mad days) I was told by the EA that he had received a higher offer than what we had already sale agreed on. We, however, stuck with the original agreed price as a point of principle. While the OP wont be endangering his deposit, I would echo Brendan's views as my response. Also, do not offer and start the whole selling process if you do not intend to see it through – it’s a big decision and if you're unsure leave it alone for both parties sake.
If only we had the Scottish system where (I may be open to correction on this) the original offer, once fully accepted, is binding.
In a previous sale (in the mad days) I was told by the EA that he had received a higher offer than what we had already sale agreed on. We, however, stuck with the original agreed price as a point of principle. While the OP wont be endangering his deposit, I would echo Brendan's views as my response. Also, do not offer and start the whole selling process if you do not intend to see it through – it’s a big decision and if you're unsure leave it alone for both parties sake.
If only we had the Scottish system where (I may be open to correction on this) the original offer, once fully accepted, is binding.