OP After the buyers of your house die of the pox, you should contact their estate to see if you can buy directly from them. Of course, you might want to have the house extensively cleaned and sanitized after it was infected by the pox. Just a thought.

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Why should the sellers have to chase you down for a better offer? If you wanted to go higher, put in an escalation clause. It seems like you want the sellers to ping-pong back and forth between you and the other offeror, watching you each creep up in tiny increments. If I'm the seller, I want finality. I set a deadline, and whichever offer is best gets the house.

+1. The sellers want the best price they can get for the least amount of work. You basically gambled that they would work you for more money and they decided to take another higher offer without your gamesmanship. You tried to get the house for lower than you were willing to go and they decided to just take a higher offer. If you were willing to bid more, you should have put an escalation clause in which would have let your offer match the other offer automatically without them having to negotiate with you. You gambled and deserved what you got. The other buyers bid higher and won the deal. You have only yourself to blame. When I sold my last house, I wasn't playing these stupid games. No escalation clause lost out to a higher bid and I didn't have to spend time negotiating and compromising. Buyers like you are a pain in the a$$.

OP sounds very immature and unhinged, given her wish for the sellers' fate.

I hear you, OP.
We witnessed some shady interactions when we put a contract on a house in 2011. It hadn't moved in months, had dropped the price; we put in a great offer, and out of the woodwork the selling agent produced clients that got the house. (So that selling agent represented both parties.)
Our agent was friends with this double agent, so he brushed it over. But it seemed really sketchy to me and put a bad taste in my mouth about realtors. Oh, excuse me: Realtors.

It's not your house if you haven't bought it...sorry!

Anonymous wrote:Two realtors dominate our neighborhood and price-fixed it to create an artificial low. Houses on a very busy main road around the corner with smaller lots and homes list for 500k to 1 mil more.

Price-fix a lower list price? How did this affect the final sale price?

Anonymous wrote:A pox on you and the sellers. Especially for not calling us for our final and best offer after we speak hours listening to your bullshit. I hope your old asses fall down those stairs, and I know you ain't got good taste.

Maybe they just didn't like you and wanted the house to go to someone they they liked.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two realtors dominate our neighborhood and price-fixed it to create an artificial low. Houses on a very busy main road around the corner with smaller lots and homes list for 500k to 1 mil more.

A seller does not have to choose one of these two realtors. If your neighbors are not happy, use a different realtor. Or am I missing something?

They just choose who sold the house prior (name recognition) then bitch about low pricing. They definitely fall into the trap. Realtors doing this are unethical and potentially breaking the law

A similar thing happened to us. We went back and forth with the owners for a month and agreed to their price. It's a long story but we were working with a realtor who originally told us she was representing them and they didn't want any other realtors involved. Then the owners told the real estate agent that she didn't represent them so she decided she represented us (I'm telling you it was crazy!). Anyway, after a month of back and forth, "our" realtor called and said we had a verbal agreement and she was just waiting for the signed paperwork. Then a few hours later she called to say that we lost the house to a couple who came in at the last hour and paid all cash ($1.1m), had no contingencies and could close in 2 weeks. It all worked out in the end because we got a much better house (for us) that was less expensive. The new owners are doing an AMAZING renovation on the house that we could have never afforded. In retrospect, I am so relieved we didn't get that house but I was pretty devastated. I did not use that realtor when we bought this house.

This is a silly expression, OP. It simply was not meant to be. Do your homework next time, and don't try to get something for nothing.

If you can't afford the neighborhood, it wasn't meant to be.

Why pox the buyers? Isn't the seller "at fault" here for leading you on?

Houses are listed artificially low to produce a bidding war all the damn time. This is the business. There's nothing unethical about it if that is what the seller wants. And it actually makes agents work a lot harder than pricing it perfectly and getting one or two good offers.

You didn't offer enough, OP. If you were willing to go higher, you should have bumped the escalation. That's how it works.

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it. Why should the sellers have to chase you down for a better offer? If you wanted to go higher, put in an escalation clause. It seems like you want the sellers to ping-pong back and forth between you and the other offeror, watching you each creep up in tiny increments. If I'm the seller, I want finality. I set a deadline, and whichever offer is best gets the house.

We had an escalation clause with a good offer and cap. Buyer's clause said "please call." We didn't get the benefit of a call.