Offering 7% below asking on a mixed-use London building — sensible after 94 days?

M

MellowLane

Seller
I now have financing evidence ready, which raises a new question: should I lead with a 7% reduction or first ask why this London mixed-use building has remained available for 94 days? It is listed at £982,800 and requires updating, while the completed transactions I can locate do not give me a firm value.

I can offer the seller some choice over completion, but I do not want that flexibility mistaken for willingness to weaken the terms. For example, I would want the survey to cover the commercial and residential parts rather than relying on a basic residential inspection. Which survey, finance and lender-valuation protections belong in the offer, and what documents should I check before risking any deposit?
 
Seven per cent below does not sound insulting in itself, particularly after 94 days. Keep the rationale factual rather than itemising every dated fitting: time on market, updating required, limited evidence from completed sales, clean financing and flexible timing.

I’d make it subject to satisfactory survey, lender valuation, finance and legal due diligence. Provide proof of funds or financing with the offer, but don’t confuse proof with waiving protection.
 
The missing fact is the seller’s motivation. Have they already rejected offers, are they waiting for a particular figure, or is timing more valuable to them than price? The agent may not disclose much, but the answer could shape your approach.

Also, is the commercial part occupied or vacant? Mixed-use completed comparables can differ for reasons that ordinary residential asking-price comparisons won’t capture.
 
I don’t yet know the seller’s motivation or whether previous offers were rejected, so I’ll ask the agent before submitting anything. I also take the point that nearby asking prices may be a weak guide for this building type.

My financing proof is available, but I won’t waive finance or valuation protection. I was treating 7% below as an opening position rather than trying to justify it with a long repair estimate.
 
I’d be slightly more cautious than Bruno about relying on the 94 days. It may indicate room to negotiate, but it does not prove the asking price is wrong. A hard response deadline could also undermine the otherwise cooperative tone.

Set your ceiling now, including any lender valuation gap you could actually cover. For deposit exposure and when commitments become binding, have your solicitor explain the position for this particular transaction before you agree to anything.
 
A practical sequence would be: ask about motivation and prior offers, request whatever completed-comparable evidence the agent relied on, then submit one clear written figure with financing proof and your completion flexibility. Give a date for reconsidering the offer rather than presenting it as an ultimatum.

Keep the essential protections. If the survey later finds a major issue, renegotiate the price or seek a focused repair credit then. Raising hypothetical credits now only gives the seller more reasons to dismiss the opening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top