When things are moving on the timescale of hours and days, people can put in offers on several places and see which pan out well (get to the survey stage).
They would then have to withdraw the other offers - would be a pain for sellers, but then they do a similar thing by courting increased offers up to exchange.

I recon a buyer should have to put in a deposit when making an offer (something like a grand), which they loose if they drop out (except for reasons of survey etc.). If the seller pulls out, or wants to take a different offer, they can be sued for fees and timewasting (something like a couple of grand).
(Baggenfrock get fucked, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:35, 1 reply, 10 years ago)

you think people don't put in multiple offers? er, ok then
the scottish system, for once, is better, in that once offers are accepted, that's it.

your idea of being able to sue the seller won't work. claims for a couple of grand aren't worth paying a lawyer for, because the fees would exceed it, and you don't get your costs back in the small claims court. and most people don't have the time or the ability to pursue it themselves.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:38, Reply)

Putting in multiple offers is cuntish, IMO - you are agreeing to buy the house. But so is accepting other offers after you've agreed to sell to someone else.
The current system only works if people have a modicum of honour.

But yeah, I haven't really thought it through, the scottish system is probably better. (House buying system, that is. Not the obesity and drug addiction system).
(Baggenfrock get fucked, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:44, Reply)

it's a vicious circle
people put in multiple offers because they know the sellers will keep looking until they've exchanged.

my dad once refused to gazump his buyer because he didn't think it was a fair way to do business. MORE PEOPLE SHOULD BE LIKE HIM.

just not in all his other bad habits...
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:47, Reply)

It's a shame the age of the 'gentleman's agreement' is over
Once you get a critical mass of cunts, everyone has to start acting like a cunt.
(Baggenfrock get fucked, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:56, Reply)

The Scottish system is terrible in areas of high demand.
You get people slamming in insane offers just to scoop places, usually middle age folk using them to rent as a retirement plan.
( Slippery Mick ‏, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:46, Reply)

it needs a bit of a reform
in a shop, if they give you an invitation to treat, to say you can buy that sandwich for a fiver, you pick the sandwich up and take it to the till. you offer to buy it. at that point, the shop doesn't wrestle the sandwich off you and sell it to the man behind you for £6. it accepts your offer and completes the transaction.

this simple formula should apply to house transactions: accepting an offer is binding, subject to the buyer complying with timescales etc.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:48, Reply)

Who pays £5 for a sarnie?
oh...
( sporters I’m sincerely gratitude to you, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:52, Reply)

You can get two for less than a quid in Wilkinson

( drimble he'd been white, he'd been black, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 16:06, Reply)

What's a Wilkinson?
Is it a northern thing?
(Baggenfrock get fucked, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 16:10, Reply)

I'm no economist
but my intuition is that the wild west English system would tend to inflate prices more quickly than the binding Scottish one.
(Baggenfrock get fucked, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:54, Reply)

Except in areas of high wealth and high demand.
Where people whack 50 grand on a blind offer just to secure it because they know they're getting it back on inflation and rent.

See that 50 grand? That's not covered by your mortgage. How on earth do you expect a first time buyer to have that and a deposit?
( Slippery Mick ‏, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 15:59, Reply)

How would that be different in the English system?
Except that anyone else can come along at any time up to exchange and put in an even higher offer.
(Baggenfrock get fucked, Wed 1 Oct 2014, 16:04, Reply)