Nagotiate price increase AFTER buyer has signed contract?

[Fudge]

I'm a little confused, having never purchased a house in Queensland. Am I correct in assuming that the seller signs the contract, then the purchaser puts the price they want and also signs?

No, this is not normal with my dealings. I think it is a way for the RE agents to try and speed up the sale of the property.

Generally, when I buy property, I download the corect forms from the internet, fill out the contract to the best of my knowledge, incl the purchase price I am willing to pay for the property, (include any additional special terms and conditions) and present this to the agent. By doing this, the agent and seller knows you are serious and not wanting to waste their time.

This also gives the impression to the seller.....'wow, I have a contract in front of me', and they sometimes get excited and sign the contract.....other times, you might need to negotiate on price and / or terms.

Surely that is a crazy way of doing it, and open to this kind of mess? If you have already signed, and they change the price then sign, could that not make it a legally binding contract at whatever price the vendor wanted.

No, if it was done this way, I don't think they can legitimately change the price. Any change to the price (or for that matter a change to anything in the contract) must be signed / initialled by each party, confirming acceptance and the old figure to be lined out. (In saying this, I think a way around it would be to forge initials, but that is unlawful......and no agents would do this would they??


MissMuffit,

I agree with Wylie and Ozperp......

Quickly chase up status of original contract, and put it to rest.

Good Luck

Cheers,

F.

 

[MissMuffitt]

I'm a little confused, having never purchased a house in Queensland. Am I correct in assuming that the seller signs the contract, then the purchaser puts the price they want and also signs?

Surely that is a crazy way of doing it, and open to this kind of mess? If you have already signed, and they change the price then sign, could that not make it a legally binding contract at whatever price the vendor wanted.

LOL skater, I couldn't agree more!!
That first lot of "Playing the game" as the RE told me to do was a disaster from the start I felt. They offer $275,000, I cross it out and put $295,000, they cross that out and put $280,000 and on it went till I stopped sending it back. And said better luck next time.

Second RE knew what I needed and told the purchases that I would not accept under that amount, so no mucking around at their end, got the price I wanted straight away from them

As far as the first RE is concerned with that stuffed up contract. Apparently they did a few things they should not have in regards to the contract.
Email is not how you are supposed to send contracts, there was a case apparently where the purchaser got out of a contract because it was sent via email. I don't know the whole story but the 2nd RE would only FAX the contract, and I had to FAX it back. Also, the 1st RE only sent the 1 signed page this last time (It had to the entire contract so I have been told.)
Anyway, I have not heard anything from them again, I wonder if "No news is good news" in this case...

 

[wylie]

I LOVE our Queensland way as it pretty much eliminates gazumping and funny business.

If I am wanting to buy a house, I get the agent to fill out the contract and I put in the price I want to pay (let's say $500K).

Agent takes the contract, all filled out and signed by me to the vendor. Vendor wants $530K so he crosses out my $500K, inserts $530K and signs the contract and initials where the price has been changed.

Agent brings contract back to me. As soon as I initial the section where the price is changed, it is a binding contract. Of course, if I decide I don't wish to pay any more, the contract is incomplete as it does not have all signatures required in all sections required.

If I decide I no longer wish to buy that house, I would put that in writing and either send it to the agent, or call in and get the contract back or see it ripped up. Reason for seeing it destroyed is that while that agent is holding a contract signed in all the places necessary by ME as a purchaser, the vendor can sign it any time and it then becomes a binding contract.

There are no verbal agreements (as they are worth nothing until a contract is signed by both parties anyway), no letters of intent that mean nothing until an actual contract is signed .

The ONLY downside I can see is that I would have to be careful if I put two contracts on two different places without making sure I had my butt covered in case they were both accepted first time. Of course, anybody doing that would have to make sure they were covered in whatever state that happened.

It is such an easy system, but just as I don't understand (or like) the systems in other states, I guess those from other states who are not used to this system don't like it or don't understand it.

It is so simple.

 

[MissMuffitt]

I understand it and yes it would have worked if they had been more realistic with their first offer.
$20,000 under is a long way off, and I thought the RE should have listened to me when I said NO WAY, don't bother sending it to me at that price.
Then it was back and forwards over the space of a week, to finally end with nothing anyway. then another week and they still thought they had a chance because of the silly dealings with the RE.
Negotiations ended as far as I was concerned at the last $290,000 email.
Anyway it will all be at an end soon... only another 30 days till settlement!

 

[wylie]

Negotiations ended as far as I was concerned at the last $290,000 email.

The email didn't sound to me like it was clear enough to end the negotiations.

Have you checked to see whether the first people think that they now also have a binding contract?

I would definitely check it out, and quickly.

 

[Fudge]

The ONLY downside I can see is that I would have to be careful if I put two contracts on two different places without making sure I had my butt covered in case they were both accepted first time. Of course, anybody doing that would have to make sure they were covered in whatever state that happened.

This can still be done, and if they get accepted at the same time (or roughly before you get a chance to cancel one), the buyer can use their 5 business day cooling off period to relinquish any deal. (Refer to the PAMD Form 30C - The warning statement)

Cheers,

F

 

[Perp]

This can still be done, and if they get accepted at the same time (or roughly before you get a chance to cancel one), the buyer can use their 5 business day cooling off period to relinquish any deal. (Refer to the PAMD Form 30C - The warning statement)

I think wylie's more worried that both buyers will want to enforce their contracts, Fudge!

 

[MissMuffitt]

Both contracts were not signed on the same day... the first people only signed on the 14th after no communication with me for a week! The silly RE didn't tell me they were still talking to these people.
If you were told that the people were going to put an offer on another property the next day and that when he sent the email it was the last day to accept their offer or they were going to make the offer on the other house what would you think...
The people who have a legally binding contract signed on the 10th. It was all well above board and we have the signed contract here sitting in front of me.
Since I sent the original RE an email saying that we already had a contract for the $295,000 and that the original people had missed out, but if he wanted to keep there contract as a backup??? I have heard NOTHING!
We have not received a FULL contract sighed my the original people, it was only one of the pages of the contract that was the last email he sent me. It has to be the entire contract in one go.. no bits and pieces....
And it is not a good idea to send the contract via email anyway, as there has been a court case about it and the people got out of the contract because it was sent email (2nd RE told me that story).

 

[MissMuffitt]

2 months notice for the tenant...

My conveyancer rang me on Friday. The sale of the property goes unconditional on the 31st, and the new owners want me to give the tenant 2 months notice from them. The tenant is still in lease until the 18th of Feb, and settlement is on the 15th of Feb, so they will have to deal with her anyway.

I think it will be ok to give her 2 months notice after it is unconditional... any other ideas about this?

Also on another note, I am going to ring the bank on Monday morning and only get the amount to pay out the loan and other expenses, not up to the 88% they wanted. I know I will have to pay more early repayment fee, but I don't see the point in having more money than we need just sitting there...