Seller declining viewings

[Unreal]

Byker28i said:

Unreal said:

I can try and find out percentages but my guess would be that less than 5% of purchasers are cash purchasers who are retaining their existing property.

Probably slightly higher in areas popular with second home buyers if you believe the welsh govt

That's true. To be honest, I was thinking about people buying their main home, with the OP's situation in mind. By definition, second home owners retain their existing property and that's not a market I'm familiar with.

[AB]

Unreal said:

I haven't known a single vendor of a higher value house who hasn't been 'picky' about who may view. My word would be selective but we probably mean the same thing.

We do mean the same thing.

In my example, it's a good job the vendor wasn't being selective as they'd have missed out on a quick, easy sale.

[Mr_J]

_-XXXX-_ said:

To flip it, how about the viewer who isn't on the market(yet) will only consider selling if they like your possibly ideal property?! They are actually avoiding wasting other people's time by not marketing their property...yet....

We were in this exact position a couple of years ago. We found our dream house 250 miles away from where we lived at the time. We hadn't even considered moving but the agent (Purple Bricks) wouldn't even entertain a viewing unless we put our house on the market. I tried to reason with the agent but he was having none of it.

We moved on with our lives.

A few months later the price dropped and we tried again. Second time around, the owner accepted the viewing. We explained our position and they were incredibly accommodating and agreed to keep us updated if they had interest from other potential buyers. A month or so later we decided to put an offer in, it was accepted in principle but the agent wouldn't actually stop marketing (not that their marketing actually worked) the property until we had had an offer accepted on our home.

Purple Bricks... Nightmare... It took them a year to sell the house. You get what you pay for but that's a separate thread.

[Sheepshanks]

Mr_J said:

Purple Bricks... Nightmare... It took them a year to sell the house. You get what you pay for but that's a separate thread.

Appreciate your seller was PB but when I see their name I always assume the owner isn't serious about selling.

[brickwall]

Clearly depends on the market, but around here it’s pretty normal for viewings to be for “proceedable” buyers only.

At the very least that means if you need to sell then your house is on the market, but most vendors won’t entertain an offer unless you’re either under offer yourself or chain-free (and if you wouldn’t entertain an offer from that person, what’s the point in letting them view).

[DonkeyApple]

Sheepshanks said:

It seemed to be pretty common, perhaps even standard, as the post-Covid bubble raged, it's a bit odd now though, particularly as they need to sell.

.

They could just be utterly intolerant like myself?

Selling a house can be like selling an old BMW in that if you aren't careful you can find yourself interacting with total vegetables that suck you of your life force and make you question your liberal outlook.

During my recent sale I put a restriction on Londoners on a weekend. Just simply banned them. Even during the week the EA was instructed to establish that they were potentially viable. The reason being is that there is a whole bunch of total weirdos who book viewings of properties as part of their day trip into the countryside for lunch. Some will even be so scummy as to actually try and photograph themselves in these properties for their social media feed.

There is this whole white collar, high income chav underclass that roam the country looking to feed off others and walking around someone's home before a spot of fine dining is seen by these super scrotes as perfectly acceptable behaviour.

I suspect that every property type in every area has its own group of FTWs that it attracts and a differing set of criteria to try and keep them away.

I wonder if some couples see walking around someone's house as no different to walking round a Dunelm but without the risk of the partner putting them further in the red?

In my experience it's the same with nice or interesting cars. They're magnets for freeloading douchebags. And old ex premium cars seem to just attract dribbling weirdos in designer trousers but unable to string a coherent sentence together.

[Turtle Shed]

We told our agent that anyone was welcome to view our house, but that we would only entertain offers from those who were demonstrably proceedable buyers. i.e - People who either did not have a house to sell, or had agreed an offer on the place they were selling.

We asked them to make sure that viewers were well aware of that when they requested a viewing.

[bennno]

On reflection the best advice on this thread was that the EA properly qualify buyers and if any obviously non proceedable buyers (eg not on market) that they get a viewing but scheduled back to back with a proceedable buyer to save the faff of prepping the house for viewings.

The other way this works is if you go on market and have a 2-3 week pause before any viewings, then a specific Saturday that the agent plans in viewings for and blocks themselves out to support.

It’s my view if you are paying an estate agent you get them to do all the viewings, in which case they tend to qualify interest and viewings far more rigorously.

[Countdown]

Turtle Shed said:

We told our agent that anyone was welcome to view our house, but that we would only entertain offers from those who were demonstrably proceedable buyers. i.e - People who either did not have a house to sell, or had agreed an offer on the place they were selling.

We asked them to make sure that viewers were well aware of that when they requested a viewing.

AIUI you can accept an offer but still carry on marketing it. Nothing is binding until exchange.

[Louis Balfour]

Countdown said:

Turtle Shed said:

We told our agent that anyone was welcome to view our house, but that we would only entertain offers from those who were demonstrably proceedable buyers. i.e - People who either did not have a house to sell, or had agreed an offer on the place they were selling.

We asked them to make sure that viewers were well aware of that when they requested a viewing.

AIUI you can accept an offer but still carry on marketing it. Nothing is binding until exchange.

Yes you can, and mortgagees in possession (repo properties) do pretty much this. The problem is, though, that so little commitment from the seller can put off buyers, for obvious reasons, unless there is a compelling reason to play that game.

[Quags]

It's frustrating how many people think they are automatically entitled to view someone's house because it's on the market (not suggesting the OP is).

You have to apply to have a look, it is the vendors decision and the agent should be acting on that.

Covid did help in the fact that most vendors now will only accept people who are at least on the market. The amount of people who get the arse because they can't view as they've not even had their own house appraised and they are "looking to see what they can get for the money in the area" is mad. We're all guests in someone's house, it's up to them who is allowed in and who isn't.

Oh and for bypassing an agent after already speaking to them, good luck with that, the vendor will still have to pay the agent a fee. You discovered the house via their marketing which makes them instrumental in the sale.

Purplepricks demise is imminent, Strike (another heavily leveraged online agent) are considering purchasing the tatty remains of a failing business that has seen £300m+ of investment yet a share price drop from £5.80 to 9p. Good riddance to them.

[Chamon_Lee]

Andeh1 said:

If your serious, get your house on the market within the next couple of weeks (entirely doable) and re-request. 4

I find this notion rather stupid.

I currently have my own home and the only way I would even dream of bothering to sell the place is if I had one lined up.

I would view a house and at the earliest after viewing and putting an offer in I would start the process of getting mine on.

[Countdown]

Louis Balfour said:

Yes you can, and mortgagees in possession (repo properties) do pretty much this. The problem is, though, that so little commitment from the seller can put off buyers, for obvious reasons, unless there is a compelling reason to play that game.

But if you take your house off the market you're relying on lots of things

The buyers getting a mortgage
The buyers managing to sell their own property
The buyers using the survey to chisel more money off
The buyers solicitor taking his time with the conveyancing
The buyers not changing their mind.
The buyers being timewasters

If the buyers have made an offer then your house is clearly their preferred option. if they're serious they will get a move on and it will be irrelevant that you have still got the house on the market because they are first in line. However, leaving it on the market means that they know you have others lined up if they dont get a move on.

[Chamon_Lee]

Louis Balfour said:

rah1888 said:

Louis Balfour said:

Slow.Patrol said:

Louis Balfour said:

Basically yes.

We really need to look at the property market and how to make it more liquid again.

I'm not sure we do.

We have had decades of Governments using the housing market to boost the economy, by interfering with various aspects. We need to return to houses being homes and not an investment.

That's a different conversation.

Currently, buying and selling homes is more hassle than I remember it ever being. And I've been doing it since the 1980s. It needs to be made easier.

This isn't applicable for the entire country, but a big part of the cause of the housing market being so illiquid is the stamp duty. Relatively modest houses are attracting stamp duty bills of £50k/£60k, meaning people are staying in their current homes for longer, resulting in a lack of stock and causing prices to remain high.

It's a fair point. The SDLT is one of the reasons we won't move imminently.

I would like to know why was this downright robbery of a tax even brought in? What idiot brought it in?
I would understand at anything over 1-2m but its shocking it exists below those levels

[Louis Balfour]

Chamon_Lee said:

Louis Balfour said:

rah1888 said:

Louis Balfour said:

Slow.Patrol said:

Louis Balfour said:

Basically yes.

We really need to look at the property market and how to make it more liquid again.

I'm not sure we do.

We have had decades of Governments using the housing market to boost the economy, by interfering with various aspects. We need to return to houses being homes and not an investment.

That's a different conversation.

Currently, buying and selling homes is more hassle than I remember it ever being. And I've been doing it since the 1980s. It needs to be made easier.

This isn't applicable for the entire country, but a big part of the cause of the housing market being so illiquid is the stamp duty. Relatively modest houses are attracting stamp duty bills of £50k/£60k, meaning people are staying in their current homes for longer, resulting in a lack of stock and causing prices to remain high.

It's a fair point. The SDLT is one of the reasons we won't move imminently.

I would like to know why was this downright robbery of a tax even brought in? What idiot brought it in?
I would understand at anything over 1-2m but its shocking it exists below those levels

It’s because the government always banked on people adding the SDLT to the mortgage and paying it off over time. That isn’t so easy to do anymore, with the sums involved and tight lending criteria.

[Countdown]

Chamon_Lee said:

I would like to know why was this downright robbery of a tax even brought in? What idiot brought it in?
I would understand at anything over 1-2m but its shocking it exists below those levels

Because the Government wants more people paying tax, not fewer. Otherwise you have a larger tax burden on a smaller number of people.

[Quags]

Chamon_Lee said:

I find this notion rather stupid.

I currently have my own home and the only way I would even dream of bothering to sell the place is if I had one lined up.

I would view a house and at the earliest after viewing and putting an offer in I would start the process of getting mine on.

And a high chance of missing out on the house you want. I see it daily.

[brickwall]

Quags said:

Chamon_Lee said:

I find this notion rather stupid.

I currently have my own home and the only way I would even dream of bothering to sell the place is if I had one lined up.

I would view a house and at the earliest after viewing and putting an offer in I would start the process of getting mine on.

And a high chance of missing out on the house you want. I see it daily.

Exactly. Either you will miss out on the house, or at the very least you’ll end up paying more for it.

Many vendors will just tell you to go away and come back when you’re in a position to actually proceed with a purchase.

Some may be inclined to entertain your offer if it’s materially above what a more proceedable buyer is offering.

[bennno]

Chamon_Lee said:

I find this notion rather stupid.

I currently have my own home and the only way I would even dream of bothering to sell the place is if I had one lined up.

I would view a house and at the earliest after viewing and putting an offer in I would start the process of getting mine on.

Which in itself is a rather stupid notion, why would anybody vague;y consider your offer if you aren’t on the market, let alone under offer, or with any clarity of chain or funding position?

[Louis Balfour]

Countdown said:

Louis Balfour said:

Yes you can, and mortgagees in possession (repo properties) do pretty much this. The problem is, though, that so little commitment from the seller can put off buyers, for obvious reasons, unless there is a compelling reason to play that game.

But if you take your house off the market you're relying on lots of things

The buyers getting a mortgage
The buyers managing to sell their own property
The buyers using the survey to chisel more money off
The buyers solicitor taking his time with the conveyancing
The buyers not changing their mind.
The buyers being timewasters

If the buyers have made an offer then your house is clearly their preferred option. if they're serious they will get a move on and it will be irrelevant that you have still got the house on the market because they are first in line. However, leaving it on the market means that they know you have others lined up if they dont get a move on.

It's a fine balance and there is no single answer. Which is where a good agent earns their money.

Ceasing viewings to allow a period of exclusivity can be a powerful tool to ensure a good price and also the performance of the buyer. If they mess about, it can go back to being openly marketed.

If you're selling a property that will need work, you might only offer a short period of exclusivity, or none at all, whilst a survey is arranged. No offer is accepted until the survey is back and the buyer is happy.

Unfortunately, the English private treaty system is fraught with risks and always has been. But I think at the moment it is worse than at most previous times.