The seller offered repairs, but contractor control changed the question

I

iris_roan

Buyer
Founding Member
Any concession has to be acceptable to the lender and leave enough usable money for the work. That is the practical constraint on this 165 m² Berlin apartment, where the inspection identified manageable items estimated at about €11,040 against a price near €1,118,000.

The owner is willing to have the defects fixed, but contractor selection and supervision matter to me. Should I seek a completion credit, if the financing permits one, or accept a price reduction that may not provide cash for repairs? I also want the inspection protection and deposit position preserved while we negotiate. A split arrangement might work if the seller handles only anything required before completion and I take responsibility for the rest.
 
If contractor control is the priority, I would not ask the seller to complete the work. Their incentive is to satisfy the agreement cheaply and quickly, while yours is to get the result you actually want. A credit is more useful than a price reduction if it leaves you with money available for repairs—but only if your lender and the transaction structure permit it.
 
What is the response deadline, and are the €11,040 estimates written and itemised? Those two facts affect how firmly you can negotiate. A short deadline plus rough verbal estimates gives the seller an easy reason to resist the full amount.
 
There is also a middle option: seller handles only anything that must be addressed before completion or financing, while you request an adjustment for the remaining work. I would separate urgent defects from cosmetic or deferrable items rather than negotiate one undifferentiated €11,040 figure.
 
Before choosing the form of concession, send the lender the exact proposal rather than asking generally about “credits.” Confirm how it would affect the loan amount, your required funds and any appraisal gap. Then have the agreed wording checked by the people handling the Berlin transaction. A concession that cannot be reflected cleanly at completion is not much of a concession.
 
Before requesting the whole €11,040, how does the agreed price compare with completed Berlin sales in genuinely similar condition? That missing fact would change my view.

The repair total is modest beside €1,118,000, and an inspection finding does not by itself prove the apartment was priced as defect-free. If comparable units needed the same work, sharing the cost may be reasonable. If they were already repaired and sold around this level, there is a stronger basis for the full adjustment. The response deadline still matters, so I would gather that evidence without delaying the required notice.
 
A price reduction can sound equivalent without being equally useful. Depending on the financing, part of that reduction may simply reduce borrowing rather than put €11,040 in your hands for contractors. Ask the lender to show the numbers for the original price, a reduced price and the proposed credit. Written financing confirmation would remove a lot of guesswork.
 
Do not let the negotiation run past the inspection response deadline while everyone debates the format. Keep any required notice timely and in writing, and find out what happens to the deposit if no agreement is reached. The exact consequences depend on the signed terms and local handling, so the contract matters more than general buyer stories.
 
Seller motivation may decide this. If they want a clean, predictable completion, they might prefer a modest price reduction over coordinating contractors. If they are focused on preserving the headline sale price, repairs may appeal more. You could offer two clearly costed alternatives and let them choose, while excluding seller-managed work if contractor control is non-negotiable.
 
One refinement to my earlier suggestion: identify which estimates contain contingency. Repairs can uncover extra work, so accepting exactly €11,040 transfers that overrun risk to you. That may still be worthwhile for control, but it should be conscious. Conversely, demanding more than documented costs may make a reasonable seller less receptive.
 
I would make the next step very concrete: organise the findings by urgency, attach the itemised estimates, confirm the deadline and deposit position, and obtain lender calculations for both structures. Then propose either the permitted credit or a price reduction with the same negotiated value. If neither works financially, compare that outcome with seller repairs—but specify scope and completion evidence rather than accepting a vague promise to “fix everything.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top