Buying at Auction - a recent experience with a questionable agent

Hi

I attended an auction about 5 weeks ago. The bidding went slowly and then just stopped. I was one of the main bidders. The agent then put in a "Vendors Bid" at about 10% higher than the last bid. The place was passed in.

I spoke with the agent after the auction about negotiating and was gently brushed off. I indicated that I would like to negotiate further though on Monday. The highest bidder walked out about 5 mins later and I spoke with him out on the street. It appears he was gently brushed off as well.

At this point (it was a Saturday) I let it rest. I rang the agent first thing Monday and was told it sold on Saturday afternoon and that he had tried to phone me. I answer ok and bid him a good day.

The fact is though,,,he had my phone number AND my partners number. Neither of us had any missed calls on the day. I feel as though this agent has let his elderly clients down and sold the place without properly trying to negotiate on their behalf.

The property was also not listed or any trace of it on the internet sales sites as well.

Proving anything though is another thing.


Anyway that is the background to my question.

When I attended the auction to bid I was given a form to fill out and ask to sign that I was bidding on my own behalf.
If I attend another auction I would like my partner to speak with the agent and register separately from me. The intention is that we may at least get a chance of a phone call should the property get passed in.
If my partner has the winning bid I would still like to purchase it in my own name though....is this possible?

 

What state?
If by partner do you mean spouse? If not spouse relative?

The main thing to worry about is being charged stamp duty twice.

For nsw see s18 Duties Act
DUTIES ACT 1997 - SECT 18 No double duty

It may be done in limited circumstances for just $10 extra duty.

 

Thanks for the reply.

It was in NSW, the partner I would like to go into this venture with is a friend.

I obviously don't want to pay any extra duties.

The intention is to at least make the agent appear to try and contact and negotiate with 2 separate under bidders. Should things go well the purchase should go ahead in my name.

The intention is to make it a little more difficult for an agent to push the property towards HIS preferred buyer instead of the one willing to pay the highest price (if only he was asked).

 

The agent is employed to sell the house. It is reasonable to assume that the highest bidder is the most interested. Also clear that the vendor would not accept the auction price.

Sounds like the agent then obtained an offer at a price that the vendor accepted.

Success! Once an agent gets a successful contract he/she is hardly going to jeopardise it by ringing people who bid at the auction and had the chance to buy it then.

Sometimes you only get one shot.
Marg

 

Was the sale price higher than the final bid?

 

Hi Marg

Have to slightly disagree with you on most of your points.
1. The agent is not just employed to sell the house. His job is to obtain the highest price possible.
2. The highest bidder was fobbed off.
3. By the agents own admission the seller accepted an offer lower than the vendor bid. He refused to state the exact amount - then shortly after our phone call ALL internet information on the property seems to have disappeared...Something smells.
4, The vendor does seem to have accepted a price.....this decision looks like it came at a price.
5. Agents ring people up after 'passed in" auctions all the time trying to obtain the best price...IT'S THEIR JOB!

6. I will agree with you that sometimes you only get one shot. That my dear Marg is why I asked the question re having a friend also anonymously bid on your behalf and with the agent not knowing this.
No one seems to be able to answer this question.

Sev

 

I don't really get the problem. You're complaining about an agent who is allegedly playing games in selling a property.

Now you seem to want to play games yourself and somehow think that will help you secure a property.

What's wrong with the 'strategy' of just offering what you're willing to pay?

 

Why not simply bid up to your limit?
Then walk away, knowing you have given it your best shot.
Why play games? If you do, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.
And in some states, dummy bidding is actually illegal.
Marg

 

The only obligation beyond client duty is to ensure the price satisfies the vendor. Sometimes it is NOT the highest bid that wins a sale. (An auction yes).

Sounds like the higher bidder beat you to it.

 

The person who had the highest last bid before the vendor bid may have rung the REA that afternoon and put in a higher bid that was accepted.

There is a lot of things that could have happened but it was disappointing that the REA said he called you when he didn't.

 

There is a negotiating concept called "Ball in Court (BIC).

If you want to increase your chances of winning in negotiations, you must, where possible (and preferably, always), keep the ball in YOUR court. In that way, you have (some) control over what is going to happen next.

This might sound cruel but, to me, @seven dropped the ball and someone else (the purchaser) picked it up and hit the winning shot.

All successful salespeople (REA's and others) understand the BIC concept very well.

It never ceases to amaze me how many people drop the ball (in most cases, without even knowing it) and wonder why they miss out.

 

There's a little wrong with what someone is willing to pay for a property.....overpaying maybe.....or a unique place that is hard to set a true value on...again one might overpay.

I am not playing a game when I suspect the agent of not doing his job properly to secure the highest possible price for the seller. Followup calls are common practice in the negotiating process - that is if it's done properly.

 

How does this equate with dummy bidding.

I will explain what a dummy bidder is so that you can understand.
A dummy bid is the seller getting someone to bid with no intention of purchasing the property ,, as in a dummy bidder. What I am proposing is in effect an 'agency'.

Marg, I am wondering if you have ever actually purchased at an auction.

 

Hi Y

Yes that is a possibility. I have actually seen this myself and know this happens.

 

Sorry Paul, wrong with that assumption. The highest bidder at the auction is actually quite peeved off with what happened as well. They are locals wanting an upgrade and went to some trouble to prepare for this, to say they (the wife anyway) is unimpressed would be an understatement.

 

No the highest bidder is quite unhappy as well. The deception by the Real Estate Agent is the troubling part.

 

Hi Kierank

What you say is food for thought and has enlightened me somewhat - Thankyou! I still think that this particular sale stank - the old couple selling the place have paid the price here.

 

I think someone just beat you to it. If you were the winning purchaser you will be celebrating right now, for buying it under your limit/or even bmv.

Whilst its in vendors best interest for the agent to obtain the highest sale price for them, but you would agree not all agents work ethics, competency are the same.

Also how do you know the highest bidder was telling you the truth? Esp if they know you are trying to secure it as well.

Good luck on the next auction, maybe try to be the highest underbidder if property is passed and the price is still under your max. limit.

 

TF
Please read the whole post. The Agent did not follow through for his clients with phone calls to both highest bidders, vendor bid etc.

I am sure someone is celebrating that they were able to purchase the place without being the highest possible paying purchaser. So I do not really understand your point (if any!).