Ha!
I made an offer of $368,000 and just got an email from the agent to say that negotiations are in excess of $390 so i need to put in my best offer!
The CIV on the rates notice says it's $385,000, does this mean council valuation for the house and the land?
With respect to your pricing due diligence, rates notices are almost entirely IRRELEVANT. They serve at best academic interest and the basis on which how you you will be paying in rates to the relevant council. Otherwise IRRELEVANT. And yes, one other thing, they are irrelevant!
With respect to negotiation, what you have found out is validation that the owner wants offers north of $390k. Sometimes you need to test the agent/owner with a lowish offer to see where they stand. And that's a good thing as you now know the basis on which you can base your next step, if you choose to.
You asked the question about being puzzled why the owner thought they could achieve between $400-$440k? There could be many reasons, minimum amount owner needs, comparables in that price range, agent advice on what think it is worth. Again largely irrelevant. What does the market think? At this stage, the agent indicated another offer which appears to be over $390k? Well it either is or it isn't and given the language they are trying to let you know that they are not going to consider anything around that price. At least for now.
The agents comments about what the owner wants (ie $440k) is also sending you a message to say, you need to go higher.
I suspect that the agent has said to them the house is worth somewhere in between $400-$440k and would be on their authority. The owner has probably said something like, well I would only want to sell if we can get $440k then.
With regards to under-quoting and regulations around price advertising, what the agent has mentioned to you (owner wants $440k) shows they are technically under-quoting and have breached the REIV guidelines (assuming they are a REIV member). The regs are that prices should not be advertised as 'offers over', 'negotiations from' etc, it should be either a range, where that range is 10% only or a single price. So with regards to the above, they should be advertising $440-$440. But its academic until the REIV and Consumer Affairs start to address this seriously, and my gut instinct tells me they wont in the current softish market.
The advertised offers over $390k, makes it sound cheaper for people looking at it, because it starts with a 3. Not much more science to that. But a pretty powerful one, because under-quoting, alas works i.e. it gets people interested and generally can then be conditioned upwards throughout the marketing campaign because the real value is something generally a bit higher and interest will typically be around this level.
Just heard from my broker and got the ok to offer subject to bank valuation, although not quite unconditional but sounds better than S/T finance.
I need a building inspection though as I don't want to end up with a lemon.
This is not a walk in the park!
Even when you have unconditional offer, the bank's terms and conditions for those, still say something to the effect that they still need to value the property and have a right to refuse to advance you the funds. But don't be spooked by that, because generally, at least for established houses as opposed to OTP's, an arms length negotiation between a buyer and seller is almost always the valued price.
And one more thing.....council rates are irrelevant.....