Under contract properties coming back on the market

Agree. My comment was on gazumping when under offer. If unconditional yes, your remedy is specific performance if the seller fails to complete (although query what happens if another buyer comes along and in good faith "buys" the property not knowing someone else already as agreed to buy it. It may come down to whether the first buyer registered a caveat on the title).

When a property is indicated as being "under offer" I think it's pretty clear what what that means so I can see how that can be misleading. Further, technically something "under offer" could still be "for sale" could it not (as the seller could always decide to sell to a higher offer and pay the agreed upon penalty in a prelim agreement)?

 

You mean RP data software would consider such properties to have longer "time on market" due to how re.com displays the "under offer"? If so, the software should be adjusted to take this practice into account should it not?

 

Wonder if any agents can comment on this practice. I must say it annoyed me too to see place I have owned listed as being "under offer" wel past the time a contract is unconditional. I think they probably go by the settlement date.

 

RP Data merely looks at the number of days house was listed for sale. If a house is listed under contract for 4 weeks, they don't know whether its sold or just 4 crashed contracts one after another.

 

"Oh that ones sold, but I can offer you this similar property"

 

Yep thought that must be it.

 

We had a contract on a place that failed B&P which crash.

It then crashed numerous times in the following months until it finally sold.

The place we have unconditional is still under contract has been this way for 2 months and still has another 2 months nearly 3 to go.

 

Yes, pretty common here. Property I recently bought recently was listed for quite a while even though unconditional, with no indication anything had changed. Only just before settlement was listed as "under contract", and after that for 2-3weeks. It was way sold by then!

But yes, once you learn "the game" up here..if no ofi times it's sold, or even as you say maybe even with open times, it can be still under contract already.

90% of Brisbane listings are just wasted space. I believe it may be the high realestate.com.au fees, that means that agencies after the real sale just use it for an advertising medium, but that is not really right.. It should be law that if the listing has changed status it needs to be updated within 48hrs.

It's very frustrating but rea's here seem to make their own rules

 

If you see an actual example of deceptive conduct please do complain to the ACCC.

 

Not in my contracts in QLD - I always ensure that the property is at seller's risk until settlement.

 

Do you include an extra clause? Can you share details?

 

Agree with every word you said. I think the whole RE industry in Brisbane lacks in professionalism or at least standards aren't as good as in Sydney.

 

Or pass to me and I will submit a complaint.

 

He would include an special condition like I do to with my purchases.

 

Agents, whether in QLD or NSW or elsewhere can play these games, they all do as they see fit, after all it is them controlling the ad.

I have had agents mark properties sold when still in cooling off or conditions not satisfied, nothing or under offer after settled, ad appearing only after unconditional (I suppose so they can still charge client or meet contract conditions yet not have to deal with multiple buyers) etc etc

Agents want people to call or message, however I am not so sure why as many do not get back to you at all nor go to any effort to find you something else these days.

 

Not worth it I would say.

In NSW it is sellers risk it is assumed, but I get insurance as soon as I have a financial risk no matter where place is, then the insurer can argue with vendor or vendors insurer.

 

I don't have a Contract with me but I would include a Special Condition along the lines of:

Regardless of any other clause in this Contract, the property is at the Seller’s risk from the Date of this Contract until Settlement Date.​

 

Why?

 

It's a buyer's risk in NSW as well and banks always advise that you get insurance.

I would always insure - end of the day its just less than $100 for contract period but peace of mind.

 

Standard NSW contract the property is sellers risk, unless early possession, is the norm, check each contract, but I too prefer to insure when I have an interest.

To save 30 days of insurance & because if something goes wrong, better for insurer to argue if reqd, that is only reason.