Is This Just Wrong?????

We went and looked at a property in Bayside suburb of Melbourne last night. The property has been on the market for 4 weeks. It is currently tenanted and the tenant is apparently making it very difficult for the agent to show people through - wont allow any inspections on weekends. At the inspection the agent told us that the tenant is interested in purchasing the property - the property has been on the market for 4 weeks and she hasnt made an offer. He also said if we put in an offer he would then tell the tenant that an offer has been made and give her a chance to make an offer. This morning we have put in an offer and the agent will be calling her to tell her an offer has been made (not how much). This seems just wrong to me - we have made the first offer and should be left to negotiate with the vendor - she has had 4 weeks to make an offer and has not done so. This seems unethical - where do I stand here?
Traci.
 
I'm not sure what the problem is. You have made an offer. The agent knows there is another interested party, so he'll tell them it's time they made an offer. The agent will try and get the offers up as high as possible. If it was your place and you were selling it, isn't that what you would want the agent to do?
Looking on the bright side, if that tenant is making things tough for the seller, it's going to reduce the number of interested parties so that could keep the price down. The tenant would know that.
 
I thought this was standard practice. If a property is open for inspection on the weekend and someone makes an offer on the Monday, it's normal for an agent to ring all the interested parties who attended the open and advise them all an offer is made. They will usually give them until say 4pm that day to also submit an offer. Whether or not it's the tenant makes no difference. The agents job is to get the best price for the vendor, so if they didn't do this, I think it would be almost negligent of the agent.
 
never hurts to remember that the agents job is to get the best price for the vendor - they work for the vendor after all.
 
This seems just wrong to me - we have made the first offer and should be left to negotiate with the vendor

This is simply not going to happen. The agent will continue to seek as many offers as he can, which is just doing his job.

What you CAN do is to put a time limit on your offer, i.e., this offer expires in 24 hours. That way the RE agent is forced to at least present your offer to the vendor unless the vendor has stipulated that only offers over a higher figure be presented.
Marg
 
littlelee if you have come across to the agent half as keen as you have in your post, he knows he has a 'live' one. The agent may be just playing games with you and there is no tenant interest.

Make an offer which you think is fair and reasonable and if the agent plays games, move onto the next property. There is always another one, whether IP or PPOR.
 
Got the property, tenant didn't want it after all. I actually work in real estate - assistant property manager/admin. We dont do things that way which is why I asked. If someone makes an offer and no one else has, then our agents deal with that buyer and negotiate until an agreement has been made or one or the other ends it. If someone has made an offer and the offer is knocked back and the buyer doesnt up his offer, then someone else makes an offer we dont go back to the original buyer to see if they want to make another offer, we negotiate with the current buyer and the vendor if that all makes sense :) We are down in small town Hastings though, so perhaps things arn't as cut throat down here :)
 
If someone makes an offer and no one else has, then our agents deal with that buyer and negotiate until an agreement has been made or one or the other ends it. If someone has made an offer and the offer is knocked back and the buyer doesnt up his offer, then someone else makes an offer we dont go back to the original buyer to see if they want to make another offer, we negotiate with the current buyer and the vendor if that all makes sense :)

Remind me not to sell through your agency then! As a buyer I despise when agents don't come back to me when another offer has been made. How do they know we wouldn't increase our offer and were just waiting to see how desperate the owner gets? The ultimate goal is to get a fair price for all, and agents are simply LAZY who don't chase leads (ie: by calling other potential purchasers after they get one offer).
 
The ultimate goal is to get a fair price for all


No such thing IMO....it depends which hat you are wearing.


If you are wearing the Sellers hat, I would contend your ultimate goal would be a thru the roof, unconditional cash offer with a very short settlement.


If you are wearing the Buyers hat, I would contend your ultimate goal would be a thru the floor, multi-conditional full finance offer with a very long settlement.


Where the deal eventually ends up "crossing the line" on the spectrum between those two extremes depends entirely on the strength of the parties negotiating. A 'fair price for all' has no bearing whatsoever.
 
Top