Buying and selling houses

We sold our house in France last year. The 'diagnostics' are a whole series of special tests that each have to be commissioned separately. Oddly enough it does not require a structural survey

It does include: energy performance (DPE), lead and asbestos surveys, termite survey(where applicable, electrical and gas installations, natural/industrial risks, and a sanitation check for properties with septic tanks.

Each test requires a seperate expert from a separate company. As second home owners it took us nearly six months to get them all done as obviously no one comes if we are not there.

We did not need a termite survey, but we had a septic tank, which had to be inspected by an organisation called SPANC. We also had to have a radon test.

An interesting side of the French system is that both exchange and completion take place at the lawyers office with all parties present and on each occasion the contract to be signed is gone through clause by clause to be sure everyone is in agreement.

Our lawyer had everything online and the main screen showed each clause for us to read and agree. We had delightful buyers, the parents of one of our neighbours, so after exchange we all went out for lunch together to celebrate.

As an example.
My daughter recently sold her house in France and moved,
in France. A 'survey' or Diagnostic is compulsory , the
process was completed in 3 months and that included the
slow down month of August.

I have been in the process of selling a small, pre council flat
back to the council since June,2025.
Every month has been a question relating to another question
etc etc what a mess the system is. June to now October and
still not finished. An overhall needed. Yes

My biggest grievance is that it was sold in April and there is
a long long housing list Some poor soul could have been
re-housed months ago but the system is so bad .
Broken Britain is everywhere.

Nik1ta

A problem with the seller providing the survey is who does the surveyor owe his duty of care to? Is it to the person who pays him (ie the seller) or to anyone who relies on it? What if he misses something: can the buyer take action against him? This an issue of contract law as the buyer has no contract with the surveyor. It’s similar to lender valuation surveys where the lenders make it clear that the valuation is for their valuation purposes only and their borrowers can’t rely on it as a survey. There would therefore have to be legislation to make the surveyor liable to the buyer and anyone who relied on the survey. No doubt that would massively increase what the surveyor charges.

Yes I suppose it does that does all make sense. Just very expensive time for the buyer, especially the younger generation who are already struggling to get a deposit together.

M0nica

butterandjam why do so many people using the Scottish system complain about how much unsuccessful bids cost them?

I suspect people do not trust sellers surveys, that plus mortgage lenders require surveys to be done before they grant a mortgage and you need to have an assured mortgage incase your bid is successful.

Do they? News to me. What are the costs of an unsuccessful bid?

The seller has zero input to the Scottish Home Report , it's nothing like the defunct English Home Information Pack.

standard practice in Scotland, is for someone who will need a mortgage to have negotiated a Mortgage In Principle with their lender ( loan level based on income) before they reach the stage of making an offer. The bidder's own lawyer will have checked their MIP is valid (and the source of any other funding) before he submits their offer to the seller's lawyer.

When they make an offer, it will be subject to conditions that must be met for the purchase to proceed, such as success obtaining the mortgage or survey report.

Wherever we have bought across three Continents, and six countries, only in UK does surveying exist. Everyone else looks at the potential property, sizes it up and waits for the vendor to disclose any major deficiencies [law in France]. We bought here. Didn't have a survey. OH said waste of money. I agreed. Absolutely nothing wrong so we saved a huge amount.

A problem with the seller providing the survey is who does the surveyor owe his duty of care to? Is it to the person who pays him (ie the seller) or to anyone who relies on it? What if he misses something: can the buyer take action against him? This an issue of contract law as the buyer has no contract with the surveyor. It’s similar to lender valuation surveys where the lenders make it clear that the valuation is for their valuation purposes only and their borrowers can’t rely on it as a survey. There would therefore have to be legislation to make the surveyor liable to the buyer and anyone who relied on the survey. No doubt that would massively increase what the surveyor charges.

I think the seller should have an approved survey done, not the buyer-& hand out copies to the buyer.
My mum paid for four surveys on four different houses- two vendors pulled out, so mum lost that money which was quite a bit.
My niece is buying a house- what a slow, slow process, towing & froing, with the solicitors about the gas checks.
The vendor should really have all those gas/ electricity checks done & to hand for the buyer to see. Would stop the faffing. My niece is paying someone to go in the property to check gas/ electrics.

This announcement by the government is just spin. They simply do not understand the housing market. Sellers packs with draft contact documents, search results, answers to pre contract standard enquiries, title information, chain information etc, have been tried before with some limited success and are still used on a voluntary basis. The problem with the seller providing a survey report on the property is that buyers are understandably reluctant to trust a survey provided by the seller! It is currently perfectly legally possible to pay a non- refundable deposit and to enter into a binding option to purchase within a set timescale. This simple fact is that buyers are reluctant to commit until they have their finance and any related sale sorted and most delays are down to buyer issues on obtaining mortgage funding, not to the legal process itself. Transactions collapse because we are all human and some people change their minds or have a change of circumstances or can’t obtain the necessary finance.
The real reasons for the current problems in the property market are down to government policies and the financial uncertainty they have created.

I recall being asked for a further sum on the day of exchange. I paid, of course, as the vendor knew that I would.

I remember the habit of ‘gazumping’ in the UK. Presumably that is a disgusting thing of the past ? It takes, usually, around 4-6 weeks to get a house in Victoria where we live. Once an offer has been accepted that is it after a short ‘cooling off’ period. No one can come in with a higher offer at that time. Some purchasers and/ or vendors agree to a longer settlement time, maximum 120 days but that long would be unusual. The usual deposit was 10% until just recently when it has been dropped to 5% . We have a huge problem with not enough houses and the cost is horrendous now for young ones. The government is intent on providing vile boxes with no parking spaces but that is what you would expect from them, they’re not bright.

CountessFosco

ArthurAskey

Buyers and sellers in England should be required to place a deposit of say 0.5% of the agreed purchase price with a solicitor that is paid to the other party in the event of one of them pulling out after an offer has been accepted .

Where we have lived {all over the world} it is 10% so everyone is very careful before even putting in an offer. 10% is often a sizeable sum. Well done AA for a sensible answer

Presumably this would be after a survey had been done.

ArthurAskey

Buyers and sellers in England should be required to place a deposit of say 0.5% of the agreed purchase price with a solicitor that is paid to the other party in the event of one of them pulling out after an offer has been accepted .

Where we have lived {all over the world} it is 10% so everyone is very careful before even putting in an offer. 10% is often a sizeable sum. Well done AA for a sensible answer

We once had to pull out of a sale because our buyers were having problems with their buyers and we could see no end in sight.

We gifted them the money they had spent on the survey and solicitor which we thought was only fair. Perhaps some sort of liability for expense incurred?

It wouldn’t work with the Scottish system obviously but then the situation wouldn’t occur. There has to be be a better way but I don’t like the sealed bids. I think it’s potentially open to abuse.

cc

I can see the advantages of the Scottish system as, once accepted. offers are more secure. However I think that it must push prices up significantly as I gather you have to offer more than valuation in many cases. I don't know how mortgage companies would deal with this, as they obviously can't lend more than valuation?

The seller may not always accept the highest bid, as bids are in a format that includes buyers financing, such as cash or relying on a mortgage and readiness to proceed.
I would imagine that the majority of houses in Scotland require a mortgage and still sell with the bid system. However, I don’t know as we paid cash for ours.

I can see the advantages of the Scottish system as, once accepted. offers are more secure. However I think that it must push prices up significantly as I gather you have to offer more than valuation in many cases. I don't know how mortgage companies would deal with this, as they obviously can't lend more than valuation?

ArthurAskey

Buyers and sellers in England should be required to place a deposit of say 0.5% of the agreed purchase price with a solicitor that is paid to the other party in the event of one of them pulling out after an offer has been accepted .

What happens if you do what we did and pull out on the offer being accepted? No money was spent by either of us. No solicitors even informed - there wasn't time.

The reason we did this was because there was another house tha we really, really wanted ever since it had come on the market 18 months previously, but our house had also been slow to sell in a poor market and it went under offer a few days before our house sold.

We kept in touch with the estate agent, as previous offers had fallen through and just before we made an offer on another house, we double checked with the agent who told us that exchange was expected to take place within the week and this sale was secure.

So we offered on the other house. As the phone call came through that our offer was accepted an email came through to say out of the blue the sale of the house we really wanted had fallen through. The buyer had tried to gazunder the seller and she had told them to get lost and they had pulled out.

We immediately withdrew the offer for the alternative house and offered on the one we really wanted and had wanted for so long - and we are living there now. As I said, no money was spent on either side, only disappointment on the sellers side, which we acknowledged.

Buyers and sellers in England should be required to place a deposit of say 0.5% of the agreed purchase price with a solicitor that is paid to the other party in the event of one of them pulling out after an offer has been accepted .

MOnica...news to me about Scotland!

I like the idea that when you make the offer and it is accepted that it is legally binding. I was once selling a property and I had 3 separate people make an offer one day and once I accepted suddenly pulled out without explanation. Fortunately, none of the legal work had been done but the final buyer strung me along for months before suddenly insisting at the last minute the price be dropped significantly before they would exchange. I was devastated but felt cornered because the house I was buying was going to fall through and I would have had to still pay the solicitors fees.

We could do with the Scittish system.

butterandjam why do so many people using the Scottish system complain about how much unsuccessful bids cost them?

I suspect people do not trust sellers surveys, that plus mortgage lenders require surveys to be done before they grant a mortgage and you need to have an assured mortgage incase your bid is successful.

I take on board what’s been said about the sellers survey. It was many years ago that my sister bought, and subsequently sold later, in Scotland.

I still don’t like the sealed bids thing, where you have to make a guess at what others are offering. Desperate people, like my sister, end up offering thousands more than the next lowest, out of desperation to secure something.

I have bought two houses in Scotland (in a Buyers' market) by making cheeky wee offers below valuation, I was also the first (and only viewer) as l made an offer that immediately took it off the market (not all properties go to a closing date).
I also received a cheeky offer on a property l intended to sell but hadn't yet marketed - but too cheeky in that case.
The housing markets in Scotland and England are far from straightforward.

Lathyrus3

Presumably you were able to offer enough right away to beat the other bidders.

I was very sorry for my sister as bid after bid failed.

The home report of the house she finally secured omitted several sues she discovered later. It is of course commissioned and paid for by the seller so the surveyor is working for them, not the buyer.

In Scotland, each intending buyer submits a "letter of interest" from their own lawyer to the sellers lawyer.
They are all entitled to know how many LOI's there are, so each buyer knows how many others are interested , how much competition they face.

The survey valuation, and the sellers " for sale price " are the start line. The seller (and buyer) in Scotland both expect the property to sell for more than the asking price.

No messing about with "cheeky offers" below the asking price.