US contracts could end gazumping in UK, says agent

Our Homebuyers Agency consultants already use this type of offer document. The idea that it's ok for people to change their mind as part of our National Psyche is weird, and I believe, contrary to our aim as estate agents to secure sales from serious sellers to serious buyers. At point of exchange they cannot change their mind and buyer and seller alike are usually very anxious to reach a point of commitment asap. I used this system myself in South Africa and on many occasions secured a binding sale on the day of offer. No gazumping and no gazundering. Just straightforward sales from grateful clients. Perfect.

• 06 June 2009 17:59 PM

As an old fart I feel able to point out one flaw in this discussion: As agents we are obliged to submit all offers and get our clients the best price. On this basis I have no problem with gazumping. If a buyer wants the property they should offer the full asking price and make it a condition that the property is taken off the market for a period of time. No problems for either side and no deposit need be made. Solicitors etc can be instructed immediately. I would concede that it becomes distatseful if the gazump is in excess of a full price offer (in fact I don't consider it a gazump unless it does go over the asking price) but in my experience that does not happen very often. And finally, it may seem like a weak excuse, but agents do not accept or reject offers. They do not gazump. Its the vendors and as their agent we should follow their instructions. Any costs incurred by an earlier buyer can be reimbursed if the vendor has any pangs of guilt but the price is more attractive. I often advise clients against the higher price in the last situation on the basis that if you cancel such a sale at the full price, that buyer is unlikely to come back if anything goes wrong. The buyer at the higher price is then a useful reserve and as the agent on behalf of the vendor I can look to be playing evertbody fairly.

• 05 June 2009 15:54 PM

A very good idea in principal. If a purchaser parts with money in the form of a deposit they are unlikely to withdraw. the contract with the buyer would also make it possible for the agent to charge the purchaser a fee for running the sale through to completion. Estate Agents must secure monies throughout the process of selling a house and not rely on payment on completion. Working for nothing for 4-9 months on a property is beyond understanding

• 05 June 2009 14:24 PM

Excellent system and one which broadly speaking SPLINTA proposed to CLG some time ago. Especially the lodging of deposits. Trouble is, if it was adopted there is little doubt that that 'Unfair Contracts' rules would give a 7 or 14 day cooling off period - which would negate the core benefits.

• 05 June 2009 10:57 AM

I dont want to be negative but there is a serious flaw in this plane...in order to stop gazumping you need to have sales agreed to be gazumped!!!!!

• 05 June 2009 10:36 AM

Well-meaning folk are always trying to solve Britain's so-called property-transaction problems but I'm afraid they just don't get it. The British system has evolved in a free market to suit the national psyche. Our phlegmatic, cautious nature means we prefer a slow transaction, with a long window of opportunity to change our minds. It also keeps the cost down because the chain system avoids the cost and inconvenience of going into rented or bridging. The downside is that if I can withdraw, so can you but it's a risk I'm prepared to take. If someone wants to avoid chains, they can buy and sell at auction or refuse to deal with anyone who has a dependent purchase or sale. The fact that most eschew these last solutions means that, as a nation, we prefer what evolved naturally free from government interference

• 05 June 2009 10:36 AM

I'm sure lots of old farts will disagree, but I like this idea. It should speed things up a lot better than HIPs, and agents will maybe get less stick from disgruntled gazumped punters.

• 05 June 2009 10:21 AM