Originally Posted by Jd1
.... and stupid of the broker because I will be unlikely to use this guy for another offer nor will I recommend him to others.
That's the end of things that I truly don't understand with some (many?) Brokers - it's not simply about the boat in question.
Obviously I appreciate that there are limits to the amount of smoke blowing / handholding that is commercially viable for a Broker to bother with (I too have had my fill of punters who have SFA better to do than use me as some sort of filler for their (lack of?!) social life
), but nonetheless seems bizarre that next to zero effort seems to go in to keeping a potential punter "warm".
Upon reflection (and also having thought about the comments on this thread) I would personally not include these new clauses within the contract (unless already space to do so) - but settle on getting the position confirmed in writing, before signing the contract (in practice in the past I have got those / similar via a mix of from Vendor / Broker - both in writing and verbally! to the point that I am comfortable that am not wasting my time in going forward - always bearing in mind that I might be!
The basis of that approach being that unless the sale
Agreement has been written 110% in favour of the Vendor will always be enough in it to wiggle out of the deal using the Survey. And on that end I would never pay more of a deposit than I would be prepared to lose - in practice (for me) means not 10%......am prepared to accept the risk of a Vendor coming after me legally to try and force a sale
, I just don't want to be in a position where I have to go after him (or the Broker) legally to get a substantial deposit back. of course the risk is that with no 10% deposit means the Vendor won't even talk to me! - over here that not a great problem, elsewhere it might be - but always more boats in the sea