Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is this a tactic?

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 3,801 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Not if you loose the €2k it doesn’t.

    He’s not going to lose 2000, is he? The house will sell.


  • Options
    #63
    pearsebhoy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31 ✭pearsebhoy


    athlone573 wrote: »
    You'd only be playing their game if you do. Plenty more houses out there

    eh, there's actually not. we're in the middle of a housing crisis.


  • Options
    #64
    pearsebhoy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 31 ✭pearsebhoy


    aaaaaaaahhhhhh wrote: »
    WOW Loads of questions to answer here so bear with me.

    In the end there was 5 other bids, The house was bought for cash for the €179k. Be interesting to see like another poster said, if someone went in higher now and the Buyer pulled out, would you get the call.

    All other bidders had morgage approval but as per the EA, thats not enough these days.

    I was told the buyers were a local who bought it for the kids.

    The house deffo isnt worth the money paid, the houses are old, no extension, attic is too small to convert, fireplace is in the kitchen etc.

    Strange the property is still for sale when its been let agreed.

    The local market is not that great in Waterford, one main developer who has houses priced between 270&350k which is nuts for this part of the country.

    is this the house in hillview? had my eye on it


  • Options
    #65
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,264 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    That makes three, just on this thread.


  • Options
    #66
    kippy
    Registered Users Posts: 18,489 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Dav010 wrote: »
    As a seller, I wouldn’t take a property off daft until contracts are signed. A cash buyer could be bidding on a number of properties, a financed buyer may not be able to draw down mortgage, both can change their mind. Property not sold until contracts signed.

    Not sold. But sale agreed is the status......sold when the contracts signed. This has been my general experience of the property market over the years .. doesn't need to be taken off daft but sale agreed goes on it....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    kippy
    Registered Users Posts: 18,489 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Not if you loose the €2k it doesn’t.

    I don't think you are getting this at all.
    It is in the auctioneers interest in a big way to increase the selling prices of properties overall. In this market selling houses isnt exactly difficult work....I don't think the 2k is at risk at all tbh...


  • Options
    #68
    FromADistance
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭FromADistance


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Not if you loose the €2k it doesn’t.

    We're in the middle of a housing crisis.... you're very nieve if you think estate agents are honest 'brokers' in a house sale transaction. As I've said, never trust a sales person. EVER.


  • Options
    #69
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,264 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    FromADistance wrote: »
    We're in the middle of a housing crisis.... you're very nieve if you think estate agents are honest 'brokers' in a house sale transaction. As I've said, never trust a sales person. EVER.

    I think it is naive to expect EAs to be impartial and to act as “honest brokers” to both sides, that is after all what the term “honest broker” means, impartial mediation.

    Only one side pays them, they act on behalf of only one side, that is not impartiality.


  • Options
    #70
    aaaaaaaahhhhhh
    Registered Users Posts: 734 ✭✭✭aaaaaaaahhhhhh


    Dav010 wrote: »
    That makes three, just on this thread.

    Who would have thought Boards was the place people go to for unbiased assistance :D:D


  • Options
    #71
    FromADistance
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭FromADistance


    Dav010 wrote: »
    I think it is naive to expect EAs to be impartial and to act as “honest brokers” to both sides, that is after all what the term “honest broker” means, impartial mediation.

    Only one side pays them, they act on behalf of only one side, that is not impartiality.

    Who said I expect Estate Agents to be impartial? I said it's nieve to think that they would act impartial. You seem to think that an Estate Agent wouldn't try and squeeze more commission out of a property sale by underhand means. Particularly in this desperate market. Most competent Estate Agents would sell a few hundred properties a year... a few extra hundred euro here and there adds up. The regulations surrounding all this are laughable to be honest. You seem to defend Estate Agents quite a bit... are you one?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    StupidLikeAFox
    Registered Users Posts: 7,700 ✭✭✭StupidLikeAFox


    FromADistance wrote: »
    Who said I expect Estate Agents to be impartial? I said it's nieve to think that they would act impartial. You seem to think that an Estate Agent wouldn't try and squeeze more commission out of a property sale by underhand means. Particularly in this desperate market. Most competent Estate Agents would sell a few hundred properties a year... a few extra hundred euro here and there adds up. The regulations surrounding all this are laughable to be honest. You seem to defend Estate Agents quite a bit... are you one?

    An estate agent can't make a buyer pay more than they can afford.

    They could pretend there is a bid to squeeze an extra 5k here, but he is risking the sale if no buyer can afford it - if the buyer or buyers are willing to pay the extra 5k then that is the market rate. Also, he might get lucky once or twice with this kind of thing but there is zero chance an EA can magically push up the market price artificially - he is not able to name his price, he can only negotiate to find the max that someone is willing to pay, ie the market rate


  • Options
    #73
    FromADistance
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭FromADistance


    StupidLikeAFox wrote: »
    An estate agent can't make a buyer pay more than they can afford.

    They could pretend there is a bid to squeeze an extra 5k here, but he is risking the sale if no buyer can afford it - if the buyer or buyers are willing to pay the extra 5k then that is the market rate. Also, he might get lucky once or twice with this kind of thing but there is zero chance an EA can magically push up the market price artificially - he is not able to name his price, he can only negotiate to find the max that someone is willing to pay, ie the market rate

    There's lots of buyers in the market at the moment as we all know. This isn't 2012 when nothing was selling. Bidding wars are happening day in day out. If you honestly think that estate agents up and down the country are acting honestly you're also quite nieve as well. The industry regulations are a complete joke. The PSRA state that 'records' of bids must be maintained but does not explicitly state what must be recorded or what proof is needed. Wide open to abuse for those smart enough to abuse the system.


  • Options
    #74
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,264 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    FromADistance wrote: »
    There's lots of buyers in the market at the moment as we all know. This isn't 2012 when nothing was selling. Bidding wars are happening day in day out. If you honestly think that estate agents up and down the country are acting honestly you're also quite nieve as well. The industry regulations are a complete joke. The PSRA state that 'records' of bids must be maintained but does not explicitly state what must be recorded or what proof is needed. Wide open to abuse for those smart enough to abuse the system.

    Have you anything to back this up?


  • Options
    #75
    FromADistance
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭FromADistance


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Have you anything to back this up?

    Where's the transparency in the process?


  • Options
    #76
    FromADistance
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭FromADistance


    Dav010 wrote: »
    That would be a no then?

    So 'nothing to see' basically from you. See no evil here no evil. Are you an estate agent? You seem to defend them quite a bit.


  • Options
    #77
    FromADistance
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭FromADistance


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Ah, I must be an estate agent.

    No, I’m not.

    I get a bit fed up when posters allege phantom bids/wrongdoing seemingly just because someone bid higher then them.

    Bit odd that you defend them in the way you do. The industry doesn't exactly have the best reputation lets be honest. The system is wide open to abuse for those motivated enough to do so given the weak regulatory framework in place. Our view points fundamentally disagree, obviously.


  • Options
    #78
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,264 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    FromADistance wrote: »
    Bit odd that you defend them in the way you do. The industry doesn't exactly have the best reputation lets be honest. The system is wide open to abuse for those motivated enough to do so given the weak regulatory framework in place. Our view points fundamentally disagree, obviously.

    I find it odd when you make unfounded allegations with nothing whatsoever to back them up, speculative waffle unless you can offer something to support them.

    EAs have their function and benefits, when a seller engages one to market and sell their house, it is with the understanding that the highest price achievable is what is expected. For some odd reason buyers think that EAs should act on their behalf, yet buyers do not pay EAs.

    Phantom bids is usually the accusation from buyers when someone bids higher or they don’t get the property they want, yet you have not offered one piece of information which supports your allegation.

    As I said, its just waffle, repeating over and over again doesn’t make it fact.


  • Options
    #79
    FromADistance
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭FromADistance


    Dav010 wrote: »
    I find it odd when you make unfounded allegations with nothing whatsoever to back them up, speculative waffle unless you can offer something to support them.

    EAs have their function and benefits, when a seller engages one to market and sell their house, it is with the understanding that the highest price achievable is what is expected. For some odd reason buyers think that EAs should act on their behalf, yet buyers do not pay EAs. Phantom bids is usually the accusation from buyers when someone bids higher or they don’t get the property they want, yet you have not offered one piece of information which supports your allegation. As I said, its just waffle, repeating over and over again doesn’t make it fact.

    Ah I see, 'nothing to see here, move on'. The complete lack of transparency and proper regulation in the process supports my assertions. Says more about you that you're seemingly happy with this state of affairs. We fundamentally disagree so we're done here.


  • Options
    #80
    FromADistance
    Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭FromADistance


    Dav010 wrote: »
    No, it really doesn’t. It’s akin to saying, given an opportunity to steal, people widely steal just because they can. You assume one section of society/profession are inherently dishonest.

    Like most, if I’m going to accuse someone of wrongdoing, I’ll at least have some evidence of that wrongdoing to base my accusation on. That is why we disagree, ironic that you use the phrase “nothing to see here”, have you seen widespread wrongdoing which backs up your accusation? If you have, post it.

    Two pages of rubbish accusations, amazing how higher bids are “phantom” bids, but our bids are “real”. This muck gets trotted out every time someone feels aggrieved at not getting the house they want.

    You're more nieve then I thought. It is nigh impossible to prove the existence of phantom bids due to the lack of full transparency in the system. The regulations support this sorry state of affairs. It could be worse I guess, at least there's some regulation (which took 9 years to put into law!) and a regulatory framework / body in place because let's be honest it was the wide west before that. As I've said, we fundamentally disagree & are done here.


  • Options
    #81
    antix80
    Registered Users Posts: 2,419 ✭✭✭antix80


    EAs are often dishonest..
    But sounds like the seller is looking for a quick sale, a cash buyer, and someone offered asking to take it off the market. No more viewings. Agent gets their commission and everyone's happy.
    The agent is basically telling you the house is off the market, but they're still obliged to pass on bids to the seller.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Graham
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,642 Mod ✭✭✭✭Graham


    Mod Note

    FromADistance / Dav010, both of you knock it off.


  • Options
    #83
    aaaaaaaahhhhhh
    Registered Users Posts: 734 ✭✭✭aaaaaaaahhhhhh


    antix80 wrote: »
    EAs are often dishonest..
    But sounds like the seller is looking for a quick sale, a cash buyer, and someone offered asking to take it off the market. No more viewings. Agent gets their commission and everyone's happy.

    Possibly looking for a quick sale cos the house has been up for about 3 months, which is strange as judging from the EA and this thread, there has been offers made.


Advertisement