Conditional contract of sale - whats fair...?

Hi

Just wondering whats fair and reasonable....

option a: price offered unconditional

option b: price upped by $5k - but conditional on building & pest inspection & subject to finance - Would it be fair to expect only 1 week, and that considering the above options that 2 weeks is unfair - a bit long.

Also is a seller within their right to ask the agent to not adjust the advertising to under contract until this conditional period has passed and the contract is locked in.
Also would the seller be able to continue to expect open for inspections etc until contract is locked in etc

 

IMHO, what is "fair and reasonable" doesn't come into it.

As a buyer, you specify your T&C's.

It is up to the seller to determine whether each of your T&C's is acceptable or not. If a T&C is not acceptable, they may modify it in attempt to reach agreement.

What is acceptable to one seller may not be to another. There is only one way to find out - put it in your offer.

 

Do option a price with the option b contingencies.

Seems fair to me

 

Dude - I'm the seller

I want to push back and say 1 week for the finance, instead of 2 weeks
considering they would go unconditional vs conditional over 5k......

 

Dude, as I said earlier, it is up to the seller to determine whether each of the T&C's is acceptable or not. If a T&C is not acceptable to you as a seller, you may modify it in attempt to reach agreement.

 

The buyer might find it hard to get an approval in 1 week, depending on their level of pre-approval etc.

If you do sign it up STC then your agent definitely should not show it as under contract on line and should continue to actively market it until it is a done deal

 

If you really want to sell it, take the unconditional at 5k less. 5k is peace of mind to secure a sale.

 

Thanks for the advice

I just find it strange / almost playing games, that it goes conditional over a difference of 5k

 

They might find issues with your home on the P+B and end up doing something like offer 10k less as a result.

 

I assume that if they were to have P&B issue and offer less, the seller can just say no, and drop the conditional contract and continue on with selling it on the mkt...

 

Thats why I'd go with the unconditional at 5k less. More time on market = uncertainty and you can't go on with definite plans in your life.

 

If you are the seller I would not quibble over 5k. You can spend that in advertising or ongoing holdings costs.

 

It is up to you to determine what is fair and reasonable.

I personally would take the 5k less but if you really wanted to get that extra 5k and okay with the conditions of offer b. I would ask the agent to come around and call the purchaser and have him tell that he is with the vendor and they are going to sign today and want to know if their offer is the best offer as either both offers are very close (if trying to get a couple of 1-10k but may end up with no increase) or they are not in the winning position (basically you are saying increase the offer or they wont be the purchaser).

This can cause the purchaser a to either;

1. Pull their offer - Don't want to be apart of this
2. Increase their offer - most likely now their best offer
3. Leave their offer alone - this is their best offer

If you use the line of you are not in the winning position the purchaser will most likely say I will cancel their offer and if you then back peddle you have lost all power in negotiating so I would only have that said if you are ready to sign for the 5k more.

You can also do this vice versa but you cannot tell both parties they are not in the winning position or you have no offers.

Perhaps I should become your REA haha.

 

We have accepted $6K less for a contract with fewer conditions. We knew there were issues so accepted a contract from a builder who understood what he was buying. Quick and easy.
Marg