Estate Agent giving incorrect details

Fighting Tao

GreeBo wrote: »

Buyers need to know who they are bidding against.

that's the entire point of this thread, despite you and others continually talking about what i should do next and similar nonsense.

For the umpteenth time, i didn't start a thread asking for advice on what to do next to get this house. I have moved on.

This thread is about an EA leading people to believe they are biding against me starting from the asking price. This is factually incorrect.

Please, please stick to this topic.

The bold bit is not true at all. What someone else wants to bid, who they are, and why they are bidding is not need by other bidders. It’s none of your business. You want to know but you have no right to know.

Fighting Tao

GreeBo wrote: »

So i am the only person here who as a buyer would want to distinguosh between bidding against someone else versus bidding against the vendors expectations?

Seriously?

All bidders are bidding against the vendors expectations. Bidders have no chance of buying unless the vendors expectations are met.

kippy

Fighting Tao wrote: »

All bidders are bidding against the vendors expectations. Bidders have no chance of buying unless the vendors expectations are met.

This is it in a nutshell.
OP, you should know this at this point months down the line and with no movement. It doesn't matter who you are bidding against if you don't match the sellers expectations.
As I and others have said countless times, is patently obvious what the sellers minimum price expectations are.
Why beat around the bush wasting more time for all concerned.

I get that you are annoyed.

GreeBo

Fighting Tao wrote: »

The bold bit is not true at all. What someone else wants to bid, who they are, and why they are bidding is not need by other bidders. It’s none of your business. You want to know but you have no right to know.

Fighting Tao wrote: »

All bidders are bidding against the vendors expectations. Bidders have no chance of buying unless the vendors expectations are met.

I didn't say you need to know who they are or anything about them other than that they exist. Corollary of this is that you need to know that they don't exist as it completely changes the bidding process.

The vendors expectations change if no one meets them.

Hence why you need to know if you are biding against someone else or not.

godtabh

GreeBo wrote: »

So i am the only person here who as a buyer would want to distinguosh between bidding against someone else versus bidding against the vendors expectations?

Seriously?

Given that this is your first rodeo I'd chalk it up to experience and move on. This thread isn't turning out how you'd like it too but it does go to show that a bid is a bid is a bid no matter what you think.

GreeBo

kippy wrote: »

This is it in a nutshell.
OP, you should know this at this point months down the line and with no movement. It doesn't matter who you are bidding against if you don't match the sellers expectations.
As I and others have said countless times, is patently obvious what the sellers minimum price expectations are.
Why beat around the bush wasting more time for all concerned.

I get that you are annoyed.

I'm annoyed that the vendor backed away from the price that thru told is they were holding out for. But don't conflate that with the purpose of this thread which is to discuss the legality or otherwise of the EA misleading people.

godtabh

GreeBo wrote: »

I didn't say you need to know who they are or anything about them other than that they exist. Corollary of this is that you need to know that they don't exist as it completely changes the bidding process.

The vendors expectations change if no one meets them.

Hence why you need to know if you are biding against someone else or not.

Its their house. They are the only people who needs to know who bid what. You have no rights here. You have no right to bid. You have no right to know the bid history.

Fighting Tao

GreeBo wrote: »

I didn't say you need to know who they are or anything about them other than that they exist. Corollary of this is that you need to know that they don't exist as it completely changes the bidding process.

The vendors expectations change if no one meets them.

Hence why you need to know if you are biding against someone else or not.

You did say that you should know who you are bidding against. Read the bold part I quoted previously.

Sellers can change their mind just like you can change yours. Tough crap there. They owe you nothing and you owe them nothing.

If there is a conspiracy against you then the PRSA will find it. Good luck with your complaint

Sleeper12

GreeBo wrote: »

Because we are the only bidder and made the bid (with conditions) on Wednesday. We were in touch yesterday evening and nothing had changed so withdrew our offer and reverted to our previous offer.
This morning got we someone else to enquire and they were told about an offer @ asking.

GreeBo wrote: »

No, i withdrew my offer by informing the estate agent via mail that it no longer stood.

The vendor is entitled to do whatever they want, its their house, the EA has to act following the regulations though. To me what they are doing is no different than them inventing oyher bidders. They are actively telling people that the current offer is at the asking. That is incorrect as there is no offer of asking.

My offer was contingent on the house coming off the market, sale agreed would follow.

GreeBo wrote: »

E-mail. They have it on computers now.
My wife rang the agent so I'm pretty confident of the message.


If the offer had a 24 hot expiry, which it didn't, and the agent doesn't revert within 24 hours, then the offer expires before it had a chance to be rejected. Even your own logic is arguing against your point now.

This morning got we someone else to enquire and they were told about an offer

My wife rang the agent so I'm pretty confident of the message.

Which statement is true? Did "We" get someone to ring or did "you" get your wife to ring?

No, i withdrew my offer by informing the estate agent via mail that it no longer stood.

E-mail. They have it on computers now

Which statement is true? was it Via mail or this new fangled Email?


You contradict yourself yet you are certain of what the estate agent has said??? Certain word for word??

godtabh

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm annoyed that the vendor backed away from the price that thru told is they were holding out for. But don't conflate that with the purpose of this thread which is to discuss the legality or otherwise of the EA misleading people.

Are you purposefully mis understanding the house buying/selling process? the only offer that matters is the one written in the contract that has been signed by both parties. Had you exchanged singed contracts?

JeffKenna

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm annoyed that the vendor backed away from the price that thru told is they were holding out for. But don't conflate that with the purpose of this thread which is to discuss the legality or otherwise of the EA misleading people.

Why did you place the offer before open viewings?? Let the minus 65k offer stand. Seems like a silly mistake only giving the EA ammunition to start a bidding war.

GreeBo

godtabh wrote: »

Given that this is your first rodeo I'd chalk it up to experience and move on. This thread isn't turning out how you'd like it too but it does go to show that a bid is a bid is a bid no matter what you think.

My first rodeo?
Did you read the thread since i pointed out before that index this is not my first or indeed second house purchase.

Also if you can point out where i am disputing what a bid is or is not I'd greatly appreciate it since that's not the point i am arguing or even started the thread to discuss? Ive clarified this point several times yet only 1 other poster seems to have bothered to comprehend this.

GreeBo

JeffKenna wrote: »

Why did you place the offer before open viewings?? Let the minus 65k offer stand. Seems like a silly mistake only giving the EA ammunition to start a bidding war.

Can i suggest you read the thread so you don't ask silly questions?

The original open viewings were in October.

JeffKenna

GreeBo wrote: »

Can i suggest you read the thread so you don't ask silly questions?

The original open viewings were in October.

Haha I'm delighted you lost out on the house with your attitude! Good enough for you!

Fighting Tao

GreeBo wrote: »

My first rodeo?
Did you read the thread since i pointed out before that index this is not my first or indeed second house purchase.

Also if you can point out where i am disputing what a bid is or is not I'd greatly appreciate it since that's not the point i am arguing or even started the thread to discuss? Ive clarified this point several times yet only 1 other poster seems to have bothered to comprehend this.

You can’t blame everyone else. If 99% of people don’t understand the message then the problem is with the sender I.e. you have not been clear regardless what you think. That’s basic communications.

GreeBo

Fighting Tao wrote: »

You did say that you should know who you are bidding against. Read the bold part I quoted previously.

Sellers can change their mind just like you can change yours. Tough crap there. They owe you nothing and you owe them nothing.

If there is a conspiracy against you then the PRSA will find it. Good luck with your complaint

Who as in the vendors expectations or an actual bidder.

I could care less about the vendor since that's bit what i am discussing.
This thread is about the EA only.

GreeBo

JeffKenna wrote: »

Haha I'm delighted you lost out on the house with your attitude! Good enough for you!

House is not sale agreed yet.
Stay classy.

Fighting Tao

GreeBo wrote: »

Who as in the vendors expectations or an actual bidder.

I could care less about the vendor since that's bit what i am discussing.
This thread is about the EA only.

And you have not produced any evidence to show they have done anything wrong. The only way to prove to us that it’s not in your head is to lodge a complaint with the PRSA. However, you won’t do that.

GreeBo

Fighting Tao wrote: »

You can’t blame everyone else. If 99% of people don’t understand the message then the problem is with the sender I.e. you have not been clear regardless what you think. That’s basic communications.

Try reading the thread title, the point had been clear from the start for anyone who bothered to read my posts rather than decide for themselves this was s thread missing about the vendor. You have let a troll lead you astray.

GreeBo

Fighting Tao wrote: »

And you have not produced any evidence to show they have done anything wrong. The only way to prove to us that it’s not in your head is to lodge a complaint with the PRSA. However, you won’t do that.

Again read the thread, I've already contacted the prsa.

Fighting Tao

GreeBo wrote: »

Try reading the thread title, the point had been clear from the start for anyone who bothered to read my posts rather than decide for themselves this was s thread missing about the vendor. You have let a troll lead you astray.

Where is your evidence? That’s what we have been asking and you don’t have any to show!

GreeBo

godtabh wrote: »

Are you purposefully mis understanding the house buying/selling process? the only offer that matters is the one written in the contract that has been signed by both parties. Had you exchanged singed contracts?

Are you deliberately misunderstanding the thread?

So when buying a house you would be happy to bid against a non existent undetbidder? Very generous of you.

Fighting Tao

GreeBo wrote: »

Are you deliberately misunderstanding the thread?

So when buying a house you would be happy to bid against a non existent undetbidder? Very generous of you.

This is just another of many where the EA is accused of lying and unfortunately this one grew legs. I get it now. I don’t know much time for EAs but they do want a quick sale. They don’t want hassle as the quicker the sale the quicker they can move on to the next property. There is no conspiracy against you. It’s in your head.

JeffKenna

GreeBo wrote: »

My first rodeo?
Did you read the thread since i pointed out before that index this is not my first or indeed second house purchase.

Why are you still renting then?

GreeBo

Fighting Tao wrote: »

This is just another of many where the EA is accused of lying and unfortunately this one grew legs. I get it now. I don’t know much time for EAs but they do want a quick sale. They don’t want hassle as the quicker the sale the quicker they can move on to the next property. There is no conspiracy against you. It’s in your head.

Did i mention a conspiracy against me?
I've moved on from this house, the thread is about the EA.

Assume i have all the evidence i need to confirm my suspicions, what then, are you still saying you think what the EA is doing is ok?

Sleeper12

GreeBo wrote:

My first rodeo? Did you read the thread since i pointed out before that index this is not my first or indeed second house purchase.

This didn't stop you from making such a huge mistake in your bidding.

In fairness to the poster the way you placed an asking price bid with such a short time limit three days before an open House, he can be forgiven for thinking its your first try at buying a house. When I read your first few posts I pictured someone very young and nieve. I'm not saying this is the case but it's what I got from your posts.

Fighting Tao

GreeBo wrote: »

Did i mention a conspiracy against me?
I've moved on from this house, the thread is about the EA.

Assume i have all the evidence i need to confirm my suspicions, what then, are you still saying you think what the EA is doing is ok?

You know of what assume did...

I’m not going down that route with you.

GreeBo

JeffKenna wrote: »

Why are you still renting then?

Can i suggest you read post #52?

GreeBo

Fighting Tao wrote: »

You know of what assume did...

I’m not going down that route with you.

Well then you might as well stop posting so as that's what's under discussion
In this thread.

JeffKenna

GreeBo wrote: »

Can i suggest you read post #52?

I'm on my phone which doesn't quote post numbers.