x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Written by Rosalind Renshaw

The Yanks are coming!: One story that intrigued me last week was the news that US repossession giant REDC (or Auction Today over here) is set to take over the UK auction market by bringing in a new model whereby their premium is drawn from the buyer, not the vendor.

This, as many bloggers have noted, brings up a number of points.

Firstly, the impact on the wider market - increasing the numbers of repossessions sold at auction could drive values down further. Secondly, pressure will be on UK auction houses, who generally draw their fee from the vendor. Thirdly, questions have been raised about lenders’ TCF (treating customers fairly) obligations.

On their website, the REDC give the following explanation of where they draw their ‘10% buyer’s premium’:

“Let's assume you are the winning bidder on a property at £100,000. The buyer's premium would be £10,000 plus VAT (£1500) making the final purchase price £111,500.”

From this answer it would seem the buyer’s final purchase price includes the auctioneer’s commission. So if the purchaser is seeking finance, at what price does the lender base the valuation for loan purposes? It must/should be on the accepted bid, exclusive of the buyer’s premium.  Is this something the potential purchaser will be aware of/understand? Is there potential for fraud, calculated or otherwise, by the purchaser?

Now personally, I’m on the side of independent local estate agents. Auctions have their place but should only really be used as a last resort. I’ve heard many reports from estate agents who have had a buyer lined up for a repossessed property, only to have the rug pulled from under them at the last minute by a big auction house who have hijacked the sale with a much smaller offer.

On the other hand, maybe a new entrant to the residential market is exactly the kind of shake up that our industry needs? The razzmatazz of the American-style auctions, with their blaring rock music and tuxedoed ‘ring men’ roaming the crowd, whipping up excitement is reported to create a real buzz around the auction, with few properties remaining unsold at the end of proceedings.

Time will tell how this turns out. Maybe the sensibilities of British property buyers won’t react well with the circus atmosphere that the Americans have promised. Conversely, maybe their new take on residential property will prove popular and be the catalyst for some much needed innovation in the UK residential property industry?

The first auctions are due at the end of this month and I should think that most of the first few dates will be taken up by as many curious UK auctioneers, lenders and asset managers as prospective buyers.

Comments

  • icon

    Mark - "...the lender has a duty of care to the defaulting borrower to obtain the best possible price for the repossessed property..."
    Like THAT happens in every case...
    Lenders are getting rock-bottom firesale valuations and then underselling again. Open your eyes and it is there to be seen.
    THEN those figures taint the 'statistics', which brings down 'valuations' further.
    Self-fulfilling prophecy which can only stop at zero unless they are pulled into line and made to do what the law says should be done...

    • 17 March 2009 17:47 PM
  • icon

    Wierd web site- Guide price on one is 500K, this currently being marketed by Connells off shoot Sharman Quinney at 305K. Interesting to see how thats going to work. The yanks have the house painted white, SQ yellow- are they into air brushing as well?

    • 16 March 2009 12:47 PM
  • icon

    As we all know the lender has a duty of care to the defaulting borrower to obtain the best possible price for the repossessed property.
    Consequently all Agents have a variety of hoops to jump through to prove this point and publish in the press either 7 day or Public Notices.
    What possible logic is there in denying the defaulting borrower the 10% buyers premium?
    On a £100,000 sale the purchaser is paying £110,000 of which £10,000 goes to the auctioneer. A 'normal' Auction House would presumably charge circa 2% plus VAT. On the generous side, allowing for the catalogue, this would total no more than £3,000.
    The remaining £7,000 is being withheld from the vendor.
    How does this differ from a Selling Agent withholding a £7000 higher offer and that £7000 being paid to him instead by the purchaser?

    • 16 March 2009 12:36 PM
  • icon

    Lets not forget that behind most repossessions are a tragic story involving real people and families. any repossession should be a last resort and should be dealt with in an understanding and sensitive manner.

    • 16 March 2009 12:36 PM
MovePal MovePal MovePal