Hi, I am new to this news group, so please help a noob.

After looking through many house listings in my area I finally found a
place I really want to get. The asking price of the house was set at
204.900, and I wanted to place a bid at around 188.000. The market in
my area is not HOT.. for example, the house I want to buy has been on
the market for 3 months so far, so I am taking for granted that not
many people wish to buy the place at the asking price. Considering
that the house is in nice shape, located in a nice area, and at 2000sq
is a average sized home. Theres not much listing of houses at around
200,000 and not many at 2000sq. Anyhow back to my story. My real
state agent told me that the best method to obtain the house is to bid
close to my maxium bid.. or whatever maxium i wish to place on the
house. so I bidded at 192.000. I was counter offered at 202.00, I
counter offered then at 195.000. I was then advised that the house was
already placed and advertised for a open house the following weekend.
I was told by my real state agent that my offer would be accepted at
195.000 if no other offers were accepted during the open house. I
found this kind of odd, however I bit my tounge and waited. Now the
week has gone by and I am pressing my agent to get the deal going. (
BTW, both sellers and my agent work for the same real state company ).
however I was told by my agent that he couldnt contact the sellers
agent and that he as placed a few calls and paged as well without a
return call. At this point I was pretty ****ed off, so I called the
sellers agent directly myself. Guess what... not even 2 minutes went
by before my AGENT called me back to tell me the good news..... he
finally contacted the sellers agent and that my offer would be "
looked at" during this weekend.


Since my original offer dealine expired, I had to sign another set of
paper offering the same amount of money for the same house with an
expiration date of a day. Well just before my offer expired.. guess
what? I was told that the owners of the place are looking at my offer
( however by the time my secondary offer has expired as well ) I then
told my agent.. I am sick and tired of this mind game. if they are not
going to accept my final offer to tell me so.. dont dick me around
making me wait, and wait.. and never be told a final answer!


What really ****es me off in a way is the following.

am I correct to say that if they accepted my offer VERBALLY during the
original deal, are they ethically or legally force to go through the
deal?

do I have any legal ground to raise some hell on this?

Am I right to say the whole thing sounds very suspicious? not able to
contact the owner agent for 2 days.. making my offer wait and wait..
never really be told a final answer? Simple ys or no should be
sufficient. I am not even getting a counter offer, i am simply being
told its being looked at! both offers have now expired!

I emailed my agent this morning outlining my plans.

I told him that i was getting tired of looking at houses..and that i
wanted the house i placed a bid for. however i am not increasing my
offer as it was originally accepted. I also asked him if he though i
had legal grounds to talk to the management ( real state office )
regarding this fiasco!. reason i mentioned the latter to him is to
let him know that i have become suspicious of the dealings and that I
may want to raise some of my concerns.. so if anything illegal is
going on during my transaction to stop it , and make either the deal
go through or at the very least tell me whats going on.


BTW. I am located in Briish Columbia Canada.

CID wrote:
am I correct to say that if they accepted my offer VERBALLY during the
original deal, are they ethically or legally force to go through the
deal?

do I have any legal ground to raise some hell on this?

Don't know about BC, but here in Florida an offer to purchase (and a
commitment to sell) aren't valid until presented in writing. Since all
parties to the transaction understand that it isn't a legal or ethical
issue.

Am I right to say the whole thing sounds very suspicious? not able to
contact the owner agent for 2 days.. making my offer wait and wait..

It sounds like the buyer may be psyching you out. They are under no
obligation to accept or reject your offer within the timeframe you
specify.

I told him that i was getting tired of looking at houses..and that i
wanted the house i placed a bid for. however i am not increasing my
offer as it was originally accepted. I also asked him if he though i
had legal grounds to talk to the management ( real state office )
regarding this fiasco!.

I think you're wasting your time, and that of your agent. You can
submit another written offer (at a higher, or lower price than your
previous offer) and see what happens. If the buyer wants to respond to
it (via a written acceptance or a counter-offer) then you are back in
negotiations. Otherwise, you are at a dead end.

Hope this helps.

I told him that i was getting tired of looking at houses..and that i
wanted the house i placed a bid for. however i am not increasing my
offer as it was originally accepted. I also asked him if he though i
had legal grounds to talk to the management ( real state office )
regarding this fiasco!. reason i mentioned the latter to him is to
let him know that i have become suspicious of the dealings and that I
may want to raise some of my concerns.. so if anything illegal is
going on during my transaction to stop it , and make either the deal
go through or at the very least tell me whats going on.


BTW. I am located in Briish Columbia Canada.


Sounds like they are playing 'mind games'. Make a new written offer for
the 188000. If they don't accept it, walk away from that house.

In article , " CID wrote:
Hi, I am new to this news group, so please help a noob.

After looking through many house listings in my area I finally found a
place I really want to get. The asking price of the house was set at
204.900, and I wanted to place a bid at around 188.000. The market in
my area is not HOT.. for example, the house I want to buy has been on
the market for 3 months so far, so I am taking for granted that not
many people wish to buy the place at the asking price.

That would be a correct assumption. If it hasn't sold in three months, the
asking price is too high. Too high for the location, too high for the
condition, whatever, doesn't matter.

[snip]

am I correct to say that if they accepted my offer VERBALLY during the
original deal, are they ethically or legally force to go through the
deal?

Probably not. Generally speaking, real estate sale/purchase agreements need to
be in writing to be valid.

do I have any legal ground to raise some hell on this?

Probably not.

Am I right to say the whole thing sounds very suspicious? not able to
contact the owner agent for 2 days.. making my offer wait and wait..
never really be told a final answer? Simple ys or no should be
sufficient. I am not even getting a counter offer, i am simply being
told its being looked at! both offers have now expired!

I don't think you're being scammed, but I *do* think you're being jerked
around.

Several things you should consider:

First, in some jurisdictions (and I don't know what's the case in yours), as a
buyer, you don't have any such thing as "your" agent: *both* agents are
legally *obligated* to work in the financial interest of the *seller*, as it
is the *seller* who pays their fee. Unless you have a written agreement with
"your" agent that stipulates that he is working in your interest only, assume
that he does *not* work for you. Please note that his behavior is consistent
with that assumption.

Second, even if your agent really *is* your agent, remember that he has his
own interests to look out for as well. The higher the selling price of the
house, the higher his commission on the sale. His personal interest in seeing
a higher selling price is in direct conflict with any contractual obligation
he *may* have to you as buyer to help you obtain the home at the lowest
possible price. Most realtors are able to set their personal interests aside,
realizing that it is in their best interest long-term to serve their clients
ably and honestly. I've met a few that are not, and it seems that you have
too.

Third, the seller is under no obligation to respond _at_all_ to any purchase
offer that falls short of his full asking price. Certainly it's *courteous* to
do so, even if only to reject the offer outright without a counteroffer, but
he's not required to. If you receive no response within the time limit
specified, assume your offer has been rejected.

Finally, recognize that, even after three months, this seller still thinks
that he can eventually sell this house to someone for more money than you're
offering, and doesn't appear to much care just how long it takes. Either he
has a grossly unrealistic idea of what the house is worth, or he's in no great
hurry to sell it, or both. Either way, you have no leverage with which to
persuade him to reduce the price, other than your willingness to walk away.

IMO this seller is going to be a pain in the @$$ throughout the entire
transaction, and so is your agent. My advice: walk away from both. Find a
different agent, from a different agency, tomorrow morning. And look at other
houses.

Alternatively, you could try to get yourself some compensation for having to
deal with two pains in the @$$: offer the seller $175K, with a 24-hour
deadline, and stipulate that this is your "best and final offer" to be either
accepted in full, or rejected in full. Just be ready to walk away if it's
rejected (which I think you should do anyway).

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Doug Miller wrote:
If it hasn't sold in three months, the asking price is too high.
Too high for the location, too high for the condition,
whatever, doesn't matter.

True in the price range in Vancouver, anyway, where the average time on
market is about 45 days.

OTOH, in some areas of the U.S. the average TTM for high end homes (
$1.5M) can be 350 days.

The seller is under no obligation to respond _at_all_ to any
purchase offer that falls short of his full asking price.

Actually, the seller is under no legal obligation to respond to any
offer, regardless of price or conditions. In the U.S., at least.
Although under some listing contracts s/he might be liable for the
realtor's commission on a full price offer.

In article ,
" CID wrote:

am I correct to say that if they accepted my offer VERBALLY during the
original deal, are they ethically or legally force to go through the
deal?

I don't know about Canadaland, but here in the states, there
is no such thing as a verbal agreement when it comes to real
property. The courts only look at what is in writing, and
sometimes only what has been legally recorded.

do I have any legal ground to raise some hell on this?

No.

Am I right to say the whole thing sounds very suspicious? not able to
contact the owner agent for 2 days.. making my offer wait and wait..
never really be told a final answer? Simple ys or no should be
sufficient. I am not even getting a counter offer, i am simply being
told its being looked at! both offers have now expired!

Yes. First off, I think you are being advised to set your
offers to expire too quickly. Second, you don't trust your
agent, so you should part company. He/she will probably
still get a commission, but I think they are screwing
with you. For example, he said that he couldn't contact
the selling agent...that is BS...that is supposed to be
the communications path.

If it was me, I'd write a brief letter to the agent stating
that you are terminating your representation agreement, you
wish to do not further business, that you are retaining a
different real estate agent, and if the agent thinks that
he has some type of commission coming, that you will be
happy to pay that commissions once you are so ordered to
do so by a court of the proper jurisdiction. If you
signed an agreement you the real estate agent, this letter
will not hold up, but at least it will get his attention.
In the mean time, I'd contact the selling agent, and see
if you can work out a deal. Make sure you are up front
about the scumbag dude that you started working with.

-john-

--
================================================== ====================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ====================

thanks for all the replies guys. I appreciate it.


One thing i forget to mention,

I signed a 3 month contract with this agent. So i guess I am stuck
with him for another month and half. I have emailed him a detailed
instruction on the house i am looking for and what price range. I have
also strictly stated that under no circumtances will I pay more than
my stated maxium price. I have told him that I am in no rush to buy a
house. So this in friendly terms have told the agent that I am no
longer looking to buy a property through him. I will wait it out for
another month and a half until it expires. Meanwhile I will simply
wait it out i guess let it expire and keep on the look out for another
agent /house


On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 18:18:03 -0600, "John A. Weeks III"
wrote:

In article ,
" CID wrote:

am I correct to say that if they accepted my offer VERBALLY during the
original deal, are they ethically or legally force to go through the
deal?

I don't know about Canadaland, but here in the states, there
is no such thing as a verbal agreement when it comes to real
property. The courts only look at what is in writing, and
sometimes only what has been legally recorded.

do I have any legal ground to raise some hell on this?

No.

Am I right to say the whole thing sounds very suspicious? not able to
contact the owner agent for 2 days.. making my offer wait and wait..
never really be told a final answer? Simple ys or no should be
sufficient. I am not even getting a counter offer, i am simply being
told its being looked at! both offers have now expired!

Yes. First off, I think you are being advised to set your
offers to expire too quickly. Second, you don't trust your
agent, so you should part company. He/she will probably
still get a commission, but I think they are screwing
with you. For example, he said that he couldn't contact
the selling agent...that is BS...that is supposed to be
the communications path.

If it was me, I'd write a brief letter to the agent stating
that you are terminating your representation agreement, you
wish to do not further business, that you are retaining a
different real estate agent, and if the agent thinks that
he has some type of commission coming, that you will be
happy to pay that commissions once you are so ordered to
do so by a court of the proper jurisdiction. If you
signed an agreement you the real estate agent, this letter
will not hold up, but at least it will get his attention.
In the mean time, I'd contact the selling agent, and see
if you can work out a deal. Make sure you are up front
about the scumbag dude that you started working with.

-john-

wrote:


am I correct to say that if they accepted my offer VERBALLY during
the
original deal, are they ethically or legally force to go through the
deal?


They didn't accept your offer. You were still going back and forward on
the price, at which time, they put your offer aside, and decided to see
what they could get at the open house, effectively saying "no" to your
offer. It may have been a tactic to scare you into coming up to $202K,
and that's perfectly within their rights. Sounds to me like they are
firm on what they want to get for the house, and won't take anything
less.

If the house has been on the market for a long time, it is likely that
they aren't in position to take anything less. They aren't desparate
enough. They can wait - however long it takes - for someone else to
come along and offer what they are asking.

If $195K is all you think the place is worth, and you're not willing to
come up to $202K, then walk away from this deal and don't give it
another thought. Or, if you really, really love it, then offer them
$202K. (ultimately $7K is really not all that much more, IMO).

When I was house hunting, there was one house that was in a similar
situation. According to my research, it was waaayyyy overpriced. I
offered a fair and reasonable price, and even backed up my offer with
concrete comparable analysis that showed that was all they could
reasonably expect in the market. They did the delay tactic with me too.
I walked away, because I didn't think it was worth what they were
asking. They were renting the place and had no reason to sell anytime
soon. They could wait it out for a buyer (ahem, sucker) to pay their
inflated price.

That house sat on the market for 13 months, during which time, the
renters moved out, and it sat empty through a harsh winter. At that
point I was a happy new owner of a nicer, bigger place for less than
what they were asking, but I still checked on occasion because I was
curious whatever happened to it.

It finally did sell, but for about $20K less than what I had offered,
or over $80K less than what they had originally wanted. I was later
told by my real estate agent that the pipes froze during the winter,
creating lots of damage, and a buyer swooped in and nabbed it at a
"distressed" price.

I'm not crying... but they probably are.

jen

shinypenny wrote:
That house sat on the market for 13 months, during which time, the
renters moved out, and it sat empty through a harsh winter. At that
point I was a happy new owner of a nicer, bigger place for less than
what they were asking, but I still checked on occasion because I was
curious whatever happened to it.

I think this happens more frequently than you might expect. I've had a
couple of friends who got stuck with houses that they bought new and
then couldn't sell for their original purchase price. Their
neighborhood was still being built out, and buyers would always pick the
new homes (where they could select colors, carpet, etc.) over the used
house.

OTOH, I once owned two homes at the same time, living in one while
renovating the other. I put the first one on the market at a price the
realtor said would only attract "1%" of the buyers. It took 11 months,
but finally the property sold to a buyer who was in a time crunch and
wanted a house in my neighborhood, and at the time it was the only
property available. The only reason it worked was that I wasn't in a
hurry....since I still needed the house as a place to live.

There is certainly a direct relationship between pricing and the time to
market.

In article , " CID wrote:
thanks for all the replies guys. I appreciate it.


One thing i forget to mention,

I signed a 3 month contract with this agent. So i guess I am stuck
with him for another month and half.

If I were you, I'd be looking that contract over carefully, perhaps with the
help of a lawyer, for ways to get out of it.

Unless you're content to wait six weeks to start working with a better agent.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

CID wrote:
I signed a 3 month contract with this agent. So i guess I am stuck
with him for another month and half. I have emailed him a detailed

Never, ever sign an exclusive agreement with a buyer's agent. What is
the advantage to you, the buyer? Answer: none.

wrote:
thanks for all the replies guys. I appreciate it.


One thing i forget to mention,

I signed a 3 month contract with this agent. So i guess I am stuck
with him for another month and half. I have emailed him a detailed
instruction on the house i am looking for and what price range. I
have
also strictly stated that under no circumtances will I pay more than
my stated maxium price. I have told him that I am in no rush to buy
a
house. So this in friendly terms have told the agent that I am no
longer looking to buy a property through him. I will wait it out for
another month and a half until it expires. Meanwhile I will simply
wait it out i guess let it expire and keep on the look out for
another
agent /house

You are not being scammed but you have a combination of a difficult
(probably impossible) seller situation and an agent you don't trust to
represent you well.

Waiting the contract out is certainly the least complicated solution.
Might help to put it in writing to the agent now that you do not plan
to renew your agreement (this gets around any "evergreen" clauses that
say that it automatically renews unless notice is given) and
instructing them that they are not to refer any listings to you from
now on. Otherwise they could spam you with every listing in the MLS on
the last day of your agreement and then demand commission if you ever
bought any of them.

Chip C

In article ,
" CID wrote:

I signed a 3 month contract with this agent. So i guess I am stuck
with him for another month and half.

You might be stuck longer. Any place that the realtor shows you,
tells you about, or any place that you find during the contract
period, becomes a sale made by this realtor even after the contract
expires. That might hold for as long as a year.

Consider coming right out and telling the realtor that you
think that he is a crook, and you no longer want to deal with
him. Tell him that you are planning to report him to the local
board of realtors. See if he will release you from the contract.

I have emailed him a detailed
instruction on the house i am looking for and what price range. I have
also strictly stated that under no circumtances will I pay more than
my stated maxium price.

E-mail might be easy, but it isn't the language of business,
at least not yet. It is better to call and talk in person,
or write a letter.

-john-

--
================================================== ====================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ====================

John A. Weeks III wrote:
Consider coming right out and telling the realtor that you
think that he is a crook,

I think this is way out of proportion. The realtor really did nothing
wrong here that I can see. It was his job to relay the information from
the seller. It's not his fault if the OP just didn't like the
information he received ("We're holding your offer until after the open
house.")

jen

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 18:04:04 GMT, someone wrote:

I think the BUYER sounds like just as much a PITA as the Sellers could
possibly be. Who or what does he think he is? The Other Side is
under no obligation to give him the answers that he wants when he
wants them. Maybe the Seller has an unreasonable expectation as to
what their house is worth, but pointing this out to them NEVER helps.
If the Seller didn't take his 1st offer, putting in an even lower one
for an even shorter time will accomplish nothing for the buyer.


Reply to NG only - this e.mail address goes to a kill file.

In article .com,
"shinypenny" wrote:

John A. Weeks III wrote:
Consider coming right out and telling the realtor that you
think that he is a crook,

I think this is way out of proportion. The realtor really did nothing
wrong here that I can see. It was his job to relay the information from
the seller. It's not his fault if the OP just didn't like the
information he received ("We're holding your offer until after the open
house.")

Maybe, but I think the two realtors got together and figured
out this scheme. They knew they had a live one, but they
wanted to see if they could get a better buyer, or scam
this one into paying more. I do think that something crooked
went on here.

-john-

--
================================================== ====================
John A. Weeks III 952-432-2708
Newave Communications http://www.johnweeks.com
================================================== ====================

how can I : the buyer " be a PITA when I have offered my maxium to the
seller? I think its common cortesy to at least let the buyer know if
you are turning down the sale.

Update,

guess what guys.

after my offer expired, out of the blues I am being told that the
sellers will take 197.000

they waited two days to let me know this.


I will sit and think on it now. since, they did the same to me. what
erally ****es me off the most is the FACT they agreed at 195.



you turn down the On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 20:34:40 GMT,
(v) wrote:

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 18:04:04 GMT, someone wrote:

I think the BUYER sounds like just as much a PITA as the Sellers could
possibly be. Who or what does he think he is? The Other Side is
under no obligation to give him the answers that he wants when he
wants them. Maybe the Seller has an unreasonable expectation as to
what their house is worth, but pointing this out to them NEVER helps.
If the Seller didn't take his 1st offer, putting in an even lower one
for an even shorter time will accomplish nothing for the buyer.


Reply to NG only - this e.mail address goes to a kill file.

In article , " CID wrote:

how can I : the buyer " be a PITA when I have offered my maxium to the
seller? I think its common cortesy to at least let the buyer know if
you are turning down the sale.

I agree; I don't think you're being a PITA, but I *do* think that you're in
danger of getting wrapped up in the idea of besting this seller in whatever
little game he's playing. Guess what: games like that have either one, or two,
losers; no winners. The only way to win the game is by refusing to play; i.e.,
walk away, and buy some other house instead.

Update,

guess what guys.

after my offer expired, out of the blues I am being told that the
sellers will take 197.000

If you don't have that in writing, you don't have that at all.

they waited two days to let me know this.

I will sit and think on it now. since, they did the same to me. what
erally ****es me off the most is the FACT they agreed at 195.

No, they didn't. You offered 195, and they did not accept in writing,
therefore they did not agree at that price. If they *had* agreed at 195, you'd
have a signed agreement. As Sam Goldwyn is reputed to have said, Oral
agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on.

If I were you... I'd find a different house to buy. Your last paragraph shows
that you're already thinking about participating in the game. You can't win.

Here's how the game is played: Based on this *oral* representation that the
seller will accept 197, you offer 197. You've lost the game already: that's 9K
more than you wanted to spend on this house. (Your initial offer was 188K, if
I recall correctly.) The seller will *not* accept this offer, though; instead,
he'll counter at about 202, figuring that if you've come up this far, you'll
probably come up a little farther. He might be right. You'll offer 199-nine,
and he'll counter at 201-five. You lose.

Some people just can't help but try to beat the other guy out of every nickel
they possibly can in any negotiation. Based on what you've described so far, I
think this seller is one of those people.

In a successful negotiation, both parties feel that they have a good deal (or,
if not a good deal, at least the best deal they're likely to get in the
circumstances). If you buy this house at anything over the 195 that was your
last offer, I suspect that you will not feel that you've gotten a good deal.

The only way to win the game is not to play.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

John A. Weeks III wrote:
Maybe, but I think the two realtors got together and figured
out this scheme. They knew they had a live one, but they
wanted to see if they could get a better buyer, or scam
this one into paying more. I do think that something crooked
went on here.

Calculate how many additional $ it actually puts in the RE agent's
pockets if they get him to come up a few thousand.

jen

Doug Miller wrote:
In a successful negotiation, both parties feel that they have a good
deal (or,
if not a good deal, at least the best deal they're likely to get in
the
circumstances). If you buy this house at anything over the 195 that
was your
last offer, I suspect that you will not feel that you've gotten a
good deal.

The only way to win the game is not to play.

Except then he loses out on the house, and as he said in his OP, there
are few properties of this size and in this range available.

His original bid was $192. Seller came back and asked for $202,
probably hoping the buyer would meet him in the middle at $197. He
didn't. Seems to me the seller is prompting him to meet him in the
middle at $197. IMO, it's too late to go back and regret his opening
bid. If he'd wanted only to pay $195, then he should've started with an
opening bid of $190.

They are quibbling now over $2K. If it were me, and I REALLY wanted
this house, I wouldn't get all bent out of shape over $2K. If I were
the seller, I also wouldn't get all bent out of shape over $2K! Six
months from now, once settled in the house, that $2K is going to be a
distant memory for them both.

Perhaps there is a way to save the deal that would be win-win for both:
go with the $197, but ask the seller to throw in $2K's worth of
something. Fixtures, window treatments, furniture, fireplace irons,
needed repairs, more favorable closing date, kick-back to help with
downpayment. Get creative and find a way to eek out your $2K worth of
perceived value. Ask both agents to put their heads together to find a
way to help save the deal - it's in their interest to close this, too.
Seller gets his price, buyer gets something of value in return. Deal
goes through, everyone is happy!

P.s. our neighbors got some pretty nice, new leather furniture out of
their recent, similar negotiation.

jen

In article . com, "shinypenny" wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:
In a successful negotiation, both parties feel that they have a good
deal (or, if not a good deal, at least the best deal they're likely to get in
the circumstances). If you buy this house at anything over the 195 that
was your last offer, I suspect that you will not feel that you've gotten a
good deal.

The only way to win the game is not to play.

Except then he loses out on the house, and as he said in his OP, there
are few properties of this size and in this range available.

"Few", perhaps, but not "none". Others may be available with less hassle, and
may be even more attractive in other respects as well. I see a buyer in danger
of becoming obsessed with "winning" the negotiations for this house, and
missing out on the possibility of a more suitable deal somewhere else.

His original bid was $192.

Yes, but he said he *wanted* to pay 188. So he already bid 4k over what he
wanted to pay.

Seller came back and asked for $202,
probably hoping the buyer would meet him in the middle at $197. He
didn't. Seems to me the seller is prompting him to meet him in the
middle at $197.

I don't read it that way at all. If that's what the seller wanted to do, why
did the seller *ignore* his bid of 195? If the seller wants to meet in the
middle at 197, there is no clearer way of signalling that than to respond to
an offer of 195 with a counteroffer at 199. Instead, the seller ignored that
offer completely. (Yes, I know there was an oral response, but oral =
meaningless. Lack of written response = ignored completely.)

I think the seller wants 200 at a minimum. And that's why the home's been on
the market for over three months: the seller won't sell for less than what he
*thinks* it's worth, and what he thinks it's worth doesn't conform to reality.

IMO, it's too late to go back and regret his opening
bid. If he'd wanted only to pay $195, then he should've started with an
opening bid of $190.

He *wanted* to pay 188k at the outset.

And your math doesn't add up, either. The seller was asking 205 initially; if
the buyer wanted to settle at 195, he should have offered 185.

They are quibbling now over $2K.

No, they're not. The seller's "offer" of 197 is *not* in writing, and
therefore it does not exist in reality. They're still $7K apart (the
difference between the buyer's most recent *written* offer of 195, and the
seller's most recent *written* counteroffer of 202). Oral statements have
exactly *no* value whatever in real estate transactions. Only what's in
writing has any dependable meaning. And I'm betting that the seller will
*refuse* a written offer of 197.

If it were me, and I REALLY wanted
this house, I wouldn't get all bent out of shape over $2K.

As noted, nobody's getting "all bent out of shape over $2K", because they're
*seven* thousand apart, not two.

If I were the seller, I also wouldn't get all bent out of shape over $2K!

Again, it's 7K, not 2K, and IMO this seller is not the reasonable individual
that you seem to be. From what the buyer has posted so far, ISTM that the
seller is playing mind games, trying to squeeze every last nickel.

Six
months from now, once settled in the house, that $2K is going to be a
distant memory for them both.

Agreed, if in fact the difference were only 2K. But until the seller puts 197
in writing, they're still _at_least_7K apart. ("At least" because both the
buyer's offer of 195, and the seller's counter at 202, have expired. The
seller may now be looking for his full asking price of 205, and the buyer may
be thinking of going back to his original offer of 192.)

Perhaps there is a way to save the deal that would be win-win for both:
go with the $197, but ask the seller to throw in $2K's worth of
something. Fixtures, window treatments, furniture, fireplace irons,
needed repairs, more favorable closing date, kick-back to help with
downpayment. Get creative and find a way to eek out your $2K worth of
perceived value. Ask both agents to put their heads together to find a
way to help save the deal - it's in their interest to close this, too.
Seller gets his price, buyer gets something of value in return. Deal
goes through, everyone is happy!

Right, that's the way that reasonable people arrive at successful
negotiations. I'm sure you and I could easily conclude a successful real
estate deal that would leave us both content. But I think, based on what the
buyer has described so far, that the seller does not fall into the category
of "reasonable people". And I also think that the buyer is in danger of
getting so wrapped up in the idea of winning the negotiation that he's
neglecting to consider that there may be other, better opportunities for him.

Don't misunderstand me: you've given very good advice here, about ways to
sweeten the deal. But I seriously doubt that the seller will accept the
proposal. I think the seller will reject an offer of 197 *without* the
additional concessions you suggest, let alone *with* them.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

shinypenny wrote:
Perhaps there is a way to save the deal that would be win-win for
both: go with the $197, but ask the seller to throw in $2K's worth of
something. Fixtures, window treatments, furniture, fireplace irons,
needed repairs, more favorable closing date, kick-back to help with

Very good advice. Except I'd ask for a minimum of $7K in 'gimmies' to
start.

Doug Miller wrote:
Except then he loses out on the house, and as he said in his OP,
there
are few properties of this size and in this range available.

"Few", perhaps, but not "none". Others may be available with less
hassle, and
may be even more attractive in other respects as well. I see a buyer
in danger
of becoming obsessed with "winning" the negotiations for this house,
and
missing out on the possibility of a more suitable deal somewhere
else.

Yes, I see this too. The best advice I got while house-hunting was to
chill out, and that things happen for a reason. If one house fell
through, it just wasn't meant to be, because there was a *better* house
on the horizon. And the person who gave me this advice was correct. I
did ultimately get a better house. Took me 9 months of looking and 3
deals that fell through for various reasons. If the OP is in position
to take his time, then this might be good advice for him as well.

His original bid was $192.

Yes, but he said he *wanted* to pay 188. So he already bid 4k over
what he
wanted to pay.


I might want to pay $12 for a house. But it's not going to buy me that
house!

He calculated that he was comfortable with $192 as a starting point. If
that was his last and final offer, he'd have walked away long ago. The
seller has surely picked up on this: he has a bit more money to put
into it, and his level of interest in the house is high.


Seller came back and asked for $202,
probably hoping the buyer would meet him in the middle at $197. He
didn't. Seems to me the seller is prompting him to meet him in the
middle at $197.

I don't read it that way at all. If that's what the seller wanted to
do, why
did the seller *ignore* his bid of 195?

Could be for a variety of reasons. I suspect the seller is letting his
emotions get away with him too. The seller's agent may have been trying
to convince them to accept, but the seller was certain that if they
just gave it another weekend and open house. Or, quite likely, there
was another interested buyer eyeing the house, who hadn't yet made an
offer. The seller took a gamble that the second offer would come in. If
the seller had said "no" outright, then he's completely lost the buyer.
If the seller continued the negotiations, then if the second offer came
in during that time, he would probably be obligated to stick with his
original negotiations with the OP.

If the seller wants to meet in the
middle at 197, there is no clearer way of signalling that than to
respond to
an offer of 195 with a counteroffer at 199. Instead, the seller
ignored that
offer completely. (Yes, I know there was an oral response, but oral =

meaningless. Lack of written response = ignored completely.)

Yes, see above. Ignoring/delaying may have been a better strategy if
they had hopes of a second offer coming in.

I think the seller wants 200 at a minimum. And that's why the home's
been on
the market for over three months: the seller won't sell for less than
what he
*thinks* it's worth, and what he thinks it's worth doesn't conform to
reality.

It may not even be a matter of what he *thinks* it's worth. It may be
that he's overleveraged and he has a bottom-line minimum he MUST get
out of the deal to break even. How long has the seller owned the house?
Have you researched how much he paid for it? Has he invested a lot into
home improvements/renovations. That is good info to know.

IMO, it's too late to go back and regret his opening
bid. If he'd wanted only to pay $195, then he should've started with
an
opening bid of $190.

He *wanted* to pay 188k at the outset.

See my previous comment.

And your math doesn't add up, either. The seller was asking 205
initially; if
the buyer wanted to settle at 195, he should have offered 185.

I'm really bad at math, and it was late. Thanks for the correction. :-)

They are quibbling now over $2K.

No, they're not. The seller's "offer" of 197 is *not* in writing, and

therefore it does not exist in reality. They're still $7K apart (the
difference between the buyer's most recent *written* offer of 195,
and the
seller's most recent *written* counteroffer of 202). Oral statements
have
exactly *no* value whatever in real estate transactions. Only what's
in
writing has any dependable meaning. And I'm betting that the seller
will
*refuse* a written offer of 197.

Well, when I went through the process, it started with a written offer,
everything else was done verbally, and once a verbal agreement had been
made, we put it in writing. YMMV depending on your state.

If it were me, and I REALLY wanted
this house, I wouldn't get all bent out of shape over $2K.

As noted, nobody's getting "all bent out of shape over $2K", because
they're
*seven* thousand apart, not two.

If I were the seller, I also wouldn't get all bent out of shape over
$2K!

Again, it's 7K, not 2K, and IMO this seller is not the reasonable
individual
that you seem to be. From what the buyer has posted so far, ISTM that
the
seller is playing mind games, trying to squeeze every last nickel.

Yes, I do get the impression the seller is not handling this all that
great. Which is why I wouldn't automatically blame the agents. The
agents are only acting according to how he is instructing them to act.
For all he knows, the agents have been trying to talk sense into the
seller.

Six
months from now, once settled in the house, that $2K is going to be
a
distant memory for them both.

Agreed, if in fact the difference were only 2K. But until the seller
puts 197
in writing, they're still _at_least_7K apart. ("At least" because
both the
buyer's offer of 195, and the seller's counter at 202, have expired.
The
seller may now be looking for his full asking price of 205, and the
buyer may
be thinking of going back to his original offer of 192.)

And he's perfectly within his rights to do so. I doubt it will buy him
this house though.

If he decides to go that route, I'd cool off and let the issue sit for
several weeks. There's a risk that it'll sell to someone else in the
meantime. If he's willing to take that risk, then wait it out. The
longer it sits, the more leverage the buyer will have.

Perhaps there is a way to save the deal that would be win-win for
both:
go with the $197, but ask the seller to throw in $2K's worth of
something. Fixtures, window treatments, furniture, fireplace irons,
needed repairs, more favorable closing date, kick-back to help with
downpayment. Get creative and find a way to eek out your $2K worth
of
perceived value. Ask both agents to put their heads together to find
a
way to help save the deal - it's in their interest to close this,
too.
Seller gets his price, buyer gets something of value in return. Deal
goes through, everyone is happy!

Right, that's the way that reasonable people arrive at successful
negotiations. I'm sure you and I could easily conclude a successful
real
estate deal that would leave us both content. But I think, based on
what the
buyer has described so far, that the seller does not fall into the
category
of "reasonable people". And I also think that the buyer is in danger
of
getting so wrapped up in the idea of winning the negotiation that
he's
neglecting to consider that there may be other, better opportunities
for him.

Don't misunderstand me: you've given very good advice here, about
ways to
sweeten the deal. But I seriously doubt that the seller will accept
the
proposal. I think the seller will reject an offer of 197 *without*
the
additional concessions you suggest, let alone *with* them.


Could be.

If it were me, I'd be asking myself, "How much is this property worth
to ME?" I get the impression the OP can afford to come up to $197 and
maybe even $202. It's not a matter of unafforability; it's a matter of
pride and scoring a good deal.

I did ultimately come up a few thousand more on my house than I thought
the property was really worth. But it is such a fabulous house! I love
it. I figured that the few thousand wasn't worth losing the house, and
ultimately, since I'm staying put for a long, long time, I'd make it
back in appreciation. Also, I sat down and calculated what I was paying
in rent. Every month I spent house-hunting was adding up.

Another way the OP could go - which is risky - is to say, "I'm sorry,
but I can't pay a single penny more than $195. I would really like to
make this deal work. How can we make this deal work?" He runs the risk
of the seller saying, "I'm sorry, but I can't accept any less than
$197/$200 or whatever." That is the calculation the OP needs to make
for himself.

jen

Hi guys. I do really appreciate all your inputs in this matter. This
is probably my second last home i will ever purchase. i dont like
moving around, and jsut the idea of moving out makes me shiver. I
sold my previous place due to my growing family ( got married and got
two kids now ) ebfore i was single and a 850 sqt home was more than
adequate for a bachelor.

Anyhow,

back to my real state dealing hell


I found out the following.

there are two parties that own the current house I want to go for.
Apparently one of the owners wants out and has moved away. they owned
the house for just about 1 year. Purchased of the home was at 148,0000
just over 1 year and a half ago. - Yes, it jumped 50k in a year.
Prices in the fraser valley tend to go up and up. Its a game that
people play, sit and wait , or pay a premium for a house. The market
has not really moved ( Hot market ) as it was 1 year ago. Most houses
are taking a while to sale even at 200k. For instance, there was
another property I was looking at (209k) fairly good size and it has
been sitting for 6 months now. no buyers.


My gripe with the the deal I am going through is mainly to the fact
that I was told that my offer would be accepted after the open house (
given that no offer higher than mine came up, i guess ) It really
bothers me that my agent didnt think of putting this up in writting.



-Update


as per my previous post, the agent called me out of the blues and has
advised me that they are willing to take 197 for the house now. thats
2k more than i maxed out at my last offer. However this time I told
my agent. " Write it down , on legal paper, have the owner sign it
stating that they are accepting the offer at 197" if they dont do so,
I will not sign any offers at all. If this last ditch to saev the
deal falls through, I am gone elsewhere. The house has been on the
market for 3 months now, so I really doubt its going to be moving
soon. If it does, oh well. next house I guess.





On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 13:29:01 GMT, "Travis Jordan"
wrote:

shinypenny wrote:
Perhaps there is a way to save the deal that would be win-win for
both: go with the $197, but ask the seller to throw in $2K's worth of
something. Fixtures, window treatments, furniture, fireplace irons,
needed repairs, more favorable closing date, kick-back to help with

Very good advice. Except I'd ask for a minimum of $7K in 'gimmies' to
start.

I found out the following.

there are two parties that own the current house I want to go for.
Apparently one of the owners wants out and has moved away. they owned
the house for just about 1 year. Purchased of the home was at 148,0000
just over 1 year and a half ago. - Yes, it jumped 50k in a year.
Prices in the fraser valley tend to go up and up. Its a game that
people play, sit and wait , or pay a premium for a house. The market
has not really moved ( Hot market ) as it was 1 year ago. Most houses
are taking a while to sale even at 200k. For instance, there was
another property I was looking at (209k) fairly good size and it has
been sitting for 6 months now. no buyers.


TMI... Any chance that a Fraser Valley agent might be aware of this
newsgroup? ;-)

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005 18:20:17 GMT, "Travis Jordan"
wrote:

CID wrote:
am I correct to say that if they accepted my offer VERBALLY during the
original deal, are they ethically or legally force to go through the
deal?

do I have any legal ground to raise some hell on this?

Don't know about BC, but here in Florida an offer to purchase (and a
commitment to sell) aren't valid until presented in writing. Since all
parties to the transaction understand that it isn't a legal or ethical
issue.

Am I right to say the whole thing sounds very suspicious? not able to
contact the owner agent for 2 days.. making my offer wait and wait..

It sounds like the buyer may be psyching you out. They are under no
obligation to accept or reject your offer within the timeframe you
specify.


An offer that is not accepted is inherantly rejected. You are under
no obligation once the deadline for acceptance has passed and the
seller is not under any particular obligation to you directly unless
they accept your offer. Sometimes, people do go out of town or are
just hard to reach, deal with it.

As the OP above states, most places require that real estate contracts
*must* be in writing to be enforceable so anything else is probably
not...I don't know about Canada, got some odd variants on English
common law mixed in with other oddities so check locally.

I must say, I don't think this person should be buying a house until
he learns a few things about contract law in his country/province.

Maybe some negotiating skills also. I don't mean this as a personal
attack but you really don't sound like you quite know what you are
doing.

There's a strong element of gamesmanship in buying and selling a
house..seller wants every penny he/she can get and you (any you) want
the place for free with the seller picking up the property taxes
too...grin.

Be glad Canada doesn't use full Brit real estate tactics...in England,
seller or buyer can renege on the deal right up until the actual
"exchange of contracts", what we Yanks call "closing" and sellers do
this freuqently as they may get a better offer at the last moment
(called 'gazumping', I beleive). In fact, a standard practice now in
makng offers over there is to require that the seller will pull the
property off the market if the offer is accepted.

Buying a house is not for the weak of heart or feeble of mind.
Pick up a couple of books and read up on real estate law for the
prospective homeowner and tray again.

Good luck,


Jim P.