Reply to: "Offers Over"

[TestMangler]

The trouble with the "offers over" is you can't bid for several properties to get the right one you have to wait until your bid has been rejected.

In the UK you can go around look at several houses and put in speculative bids.

It's much better for buyers.

Not all houses in Scotland go to bids. In fact, in my experience, the percentage is quite small.

You can make your bid in person to the seller/agent for acceptance/rejection. Only gets complicated if you get involved in a price war but that would be the same anywhere.

[Batcher]

The trouble with the "offers over" is you can't bid for several properties to get the right one you have to wait until your bid has been rejected.

In the rest of the UK you can go around look at several houses and put in speculative bids.

It's much better for buyers.

FTFY

There's nothing to stop you putting in bids are more than one house as you can withdraw from the others if you win one, even before the closing date for bids. It's not a legal contract until the missives are signed.

[Underscore Pt2]

The trouble with the "offers over" is you can't bid for several properties to get the right one you have to wait until your bid has been rejected.

In the UK you can go around look at several houses and put in speculative bids.

It's much better for buyers.

No you dont. You can bid for as many as you like.

[Underscore Pt2]

I agree that as a seller, you want as much as you can get.

I agree that is the job of the estate agent.

That doesn't mean that it's right, though.

For example, the property that I bid on was valued at £350k. It was on "Offers Over £339k". Why?

Firstly, it makes a bit of a mockery of the valuation. Anyone can make a number up.

There's no way that the Agent said "Put it on at OO £339k and you'll get what it's worth". He would have said "Put it on at OO £339k and you'll get MORE THAN what it's worth" (because, hopefully, some poor soul will be desperate and this system allows us to take advantage of that).

Maybe I just want people to be nice and fair to each other too much.

Its valued at 350k....the seller wants to get as close to 350 (or more). Offers over 339k is the best way to get that amount. Not sure what you dont get here?

[BlasterBates]

The trouble with the "offers over" is you can't bid for several properties to get the right one you have to wait until your bid has been rejected.

In the UK you can go around look at several houses and put in speculative bids.

It's much better for buyers.

[TestMangler]

I agree that as a seller, you want as much as you can get.

I agree that is the job of the estate agent.

That doesn't mean that it's right, though.

For example, the property that I bid on was valued at £350k. It was on "Offers Over £339k". Why?

Firstly, it makes a bit of a mockery of the valuation. Anyone can make a number up.

There's no way that the Agent said "Put it on at OO £339k and you'll get what it's worth". He would have said "Put it on at OO £339k and you'll get MORE THAN what it's worth" (because, hopefully, some poor soul will be desperate and this system allows us to take advantage of that).

Maybe I just want people to be nice and fair to each other too much.

I really don't get this 'desperation' thing I'm afraid.

Is there only one house where you want to buy ?

[JRCT]

That's exactly how many local estates agents near London work. Sealed bids take the one you fancy....

I'm at a loss here as to what your problem is with the Scottish market. This has nothing to do with Scotland and everything to do with how estates agents run auctions to maximise their clients sale price... And as the seller that is what I'm employing them to do...

I agree that as a seller, you want as much as you can get.

I agree that is the job of the estate agent.

That doesn't mean that it's right, though.

For example, the property that I bid on was valued at £350k. It was on "Offers Over £339k". Why?

Firstly, it makes a bit of a mockery of the valuation. Anyone can make a number up.

There's no way that the Agent said "Put it on at OO £339k and you'll get what it's worth". He would have said "Put it on at OO £339k and you'll get MORE THAN what it's worth" (because, hopefully, some poor soul will be desperate and this system allows us to take advantage of that).

Maybe I just want people to be nice and fair to each other too much.

[eek]

There's nothing unfair about that bit.

The unfair bit is when you have 3 people who put in a note of interest and you all have to put in a blind bid to secure. So you might be so desperate that you bid £240k because that's the most money you can get your hands on and you're desperate. The other 2 could have bid £200k.

At least at an open auction, you know what you're bidding against.

That's exactly how many local estates agents near London work. Sealed bids take the one you fancy....

I'm at a loss here as to what your problem is with the Scottish market. This has nothing to do with Scotland and everything to do with how estates agents run auctions to maximise their clients sale price... And as the seller that is what I'm employing them to do...

[TestMangler]

There's nothing unfair about that bit.

The unfair bit is when you have 3 people who put in a note of interest and you all have to put in a blind bid to secure. So you might be so desperate that you bid £240k because that's the most money you can get your hands on and you're desperate. The other 2 could have bid £200k.

At least at an open auction, you know what you're bidding against.

Might just be me, but I'd rather deal with that than the system used in England.

I buy your house, you don't get the one you want so I'm sitting for months or even years on you moving out, then at the last minute you tell me you need 20K more or I'm not getting your house.

Every system has disadvantages. The sealed bids thing is a minor irritation but not 'unfair' as such. Bid what you're happy to pay and move on if you don't get it.

[JRCT]

Fairer how exactly ?

Lets say house is on the market for O/O 195,000.

You look at house and say to vendor, will you accept an offer of £196,000 or £200,000 or £191, 000 or whatever you feel you want to pay. Seller accepts or rejects your offer. What's unfair about that ?

In your pub analogy, you would move on to another pub. you would do the same with houses if you couldn't get to a mutually acceptable position.

There's nothing unfair about that bit.

The unfair bit is when you have 3 people who put in a note of interest and you all have to put in a blind bid to secure. So you might be so desperate that you bid £240k because that's the most money you can get your hands on and you're desperate. The other 2 could have bid £200k.

At least at an open auction, you know what you're bidding against.

[TestMangler]

In some circumstances, yes. I don't have anything against some form of negotiation, haggling or bidding for a house, but an open and transparent system would be better than this, surely?

I know ultimately, it's a game. And you have to pick a number and we can all have anecdotal proof of how it's worked for an indiviual or how it hasn't, but I think from a governmental/ general society trying to do the right thing by the people point of view we should have a fairer system, surely?

Imagine going to the pub for a pint and being charged £8. "But it was only £4.50 yesterday". "Yes, but that guy over there was desperate and he paid way over the odds for his pint, so now the price of all pints in this area, I mean pub, have gone up accordingly. Oh, and that guy couldn't actually afford to keep up repayments on his pint, so he only got to drink half and we had to take it back from him and kick him into the gutter".

I think I'm going to stand in May.

Fairer how exactly ?

Lets say house is on the market for O/O 195,000.

You look at house and say to vendor, will you accept an offer of £196,000 or £200,000 or £191, 000 or whatever you feel you want to pay. Seller accepts or rejects your offer. What's unfair about that ?

In your pub analogy, you would move on to another pub. you would do the same with houses if you couldn't get to a mutually acceptable position.

[JRCT]

Greed?! Lol.
And I suppose that you don't see bidding less than you would theoretically be willing to pay - in order to get it cheaper than you otherwise might - as greedy too?

So many dishonest people in the world

In some circumstances, yes. I don't have anything against some form of negotiation, haggling or bidding for a house, but an open and transparent system would be better than this, surely?

I know ultimately, it's a game. And you have to pick a number and we can all have anecdotal proof of how it's worked for an indiviual or how it hasn't, but I think from a governmental/ general society trying to do the right thing by the people point of view we should have a fairer system, surely?

Imagine going to the pub for a pint and being charged £8. "But it was only £4.50 yesterday". "Yes, but that guy over there was desperate and he paid way over the odds for his pint, so now the price of all pints in this area, I mean pub, have gone up accordingly. Oh, and that guy couldn't actually afford to keep up repayments on his pint, so he only got to drink half and we had to take it back from him and kick him into the gutter".

I think I'm going to stand in May.

[Batcher]

Depends on how risk averse you are :-)

Most of my deals have been, find a house, make an offer, put current house on market immediately and I've never been stuck on bridging finance at any point but I know people who have. You can verbally agree the conclusion date with the vendor before the legal offer is made.

Also, worth bearing in mind that not all 'offers over' sales go to sealed bids. It depends a lot on the seller and the popularity of the house. When I sold my last one I used this 'American style' agent who advertised at a pretty low price and invited offers at viewings. We were looking for offers 15-20% above and ended up getting 40% but that was 2005 at the cusp of the bubble. I just accepted the first offer I was happy with rather than going to bids. As batcher said, most money doesn't always make winning bid. For example, if you were in a hurry, you may accept a bid from a first time buyer rather than someone who wanted a date far in the future to give time to sell.

WTMS.

I've won bids on two houses in the past before putting my own house up for sale. This isn't recommended and your solicitor is duty bound to warn you against it. I live in a small village which is very desirable so I was confident of making the sale both times and both times it sold with the dates matching up so no bridging loan required.

[SpontaneousOrder]

It perpetuates greed from the vendor...

Greed?! Lol.
And I suppose that you don't see bidding less than you would theoretically be willing to pay - in order to get it cheaper than you otherwise might - as greedy too?

So many dishonest people in the world

[TestMangler]

Exactly...you buy what you can afford. Im not aware of many people going into panic mode and bidding miles over the value. If they are more fool them.

Exactly. unless you're a mega-cash buyer, you're not going to go too far above valuation, if at all.