right of pre-emption - what about agency fees!?

[nijntje]

Hello,

We have just received our "compromis de vente" and noticed their is a right of pre-emption. I understand that SAFER can buy our house and land if they wanted, it is unlikely to happen but never say never right? I noticed in our "compromis de vente" that in case of pre-emption the agency fees will still have to be paid buy the buyers!! Is this for real? Can they even do that?

The sellers will end up with their money and get rid of their house, but the buyer ends up with nothing end has to pay the estate agent?!

Advice please!

Thanks

[Russethouse]

 But if you are the pre-empted you will not be the buyer will you - some one else will ...or is that too simple ?[8-)]

[minnie]

RH: Ah but are they the sellers and not the buyers?

[Russethouse]

 You might be right Minnie, but surely the buyer is the person who ends up with property.....but what do I know [8-)]

[nijntje]

ok, thank you for your answers, I try to be a bit more clear..

We are the buyers...so just received our CDV and at the end of the CDV in the section Negotiation is this : "S'il y a preemption, les honoraires de negaciation seront dus"

It also says in English: "In the event of the exercise of the preemptive right, this remuneration of the agent will remain due"

I take it this means we will still have to pay the fees or am I wrong?

Thanks again for the help!

[Anton Redman]

Tell the immobeliers to cross out the clause and stamp and initial it. If they wont walk away, there are millions of houses, thousands of sellers and scores of people buying. If they are positive they are risking noting. 

[Russethouse]

 I agree with Anton.

Isn't there a time limit on Safer being able to declare an interest ?

[AnOther]

[quote user="nijntje"]It also says in English: "In the event of the exercise of the preemptive right, this remuneration of the agent will remain due"

I take it this means we will still have to pay the fees or am I wrong?[/quote]I really am struggling to understand by what logic you come to that quite perverse conclusion !

The buyer - meaning the person or entity who buys a property - pays the agents fees, I don't know how much more simply it could be put.

Besides, the advertised price will have almost certainly included the Immo's fees and AFAIK a pre-emption has to be either at the same price you had agreed, or the full asking price, not sure which, but in any case whoever buys is automatically paying them.

[Judie]

As an estate agent, I can tell you that SAFER have up to two months from when they are first notified of the sale to exercise their right of pre-emption. If nothing is heard from them in the time then it is accepted that they won't pre-empt. A payment of about 100 euros can be sent with the notification to speed up the process.

As several posters have already pointed out, it's the body who purchases the property who pays the fees of the estate agent. In the case of pre-emption then SAFER would pay.

[AnOther]

Actually this whole thing about SAFER pre-emption puzzles me a little.

I can understand them maybe wanting to buy a property, and being given first refusal, but why wait until a sale is agreed to step in and effectively steal it from under the nose of another buyer. If they want it they want it and it would take nothing more than an email from Immos to notify SAFER every time a property came onto the market giving them the opportunity there and then. I'd imagine that they would probably be quite happy to do this as in some cases it might result in an instant sale, good for both Immo and seller. I guess that fact that they don't could mean that SAFER only have to match what another prospective purchaser has offered so don't want pay over the odds but that said I'm sure many sellers would be open to negotiation for a guaranteed quick sale. It would also be good for private buyers if SAFER had already declared no interest as then they would not face the prospect of having the property they have set their hearts on snatched away at the last minute, as could be the case here.

I read somewhere also that SAFER have 3 months to pay even AFTER the acte has been signed but don't know if it's true or not.

Tough if you're the seller and need the money for your next house, will they pay for a bridging loan I wonder ?

[Russethouse]

Clair posted about SAFER earlier this year :

If the SAFER is involved, you have to take into consideration that the land may be bought by a local farmer.

The SAFER buys farms or rural properties and then sells to farmers, communities, private (conservatories, associations, federations, businesses , etc ...), national or local institutions, (Conservatoire du littoral, natural parks, agencies, etc ...), whose projects meet the objective of its missions.

It's called "la loi de préemption" (Art. L143-1 ; Art. L143-2 du code rural):

To enable SAFER to have a consistent part of their missions, the law provides an opportunity for SAFER to have a right of first refusal. They are systematically informed of the planned sale by notaries and can buy in place the original buyer. The purpose is to sell to another buyer whose project best meets the challenges of local development.

 

[AnOther]

[quote user="Russethouse"]

To enable SAFER to have a consistent part of their missions, the law provides an opportunity for SAFER to have a right of first refusal. They are systematically informed of the planned sale by notaries and can buy in place the original buyer. The purpose is to sell to another buyer whose project best meets the challenges of local development.

 [/quote]So all it would need would be for the onus to be placed on Immos to inform SAFER and get the right of refusal out of the way at the point of a property being placed on the market. Checks that this had been done and a property refused, plus private sales without an Immo, could still be captured by the Notaire during the sale process.

The argument against could be that with the traditional length of time it can take to sell property a refusal say 2 years ago might be met with an acceptance if offered today.

[nijntje]

[quote user="AnOther"]I really am struggling to understand by what logic you come to that quite perverse conclusion !

The buyer - meaning the person or entity who buys a property - pays the agents fees, I don't know how much more simply it could be put.[/quote]

Let me explain how I came to this "perverse conclusion" (as you put it).

The compromis de vente says:

- both parties acknowledge that agent X has introduced them and that they will pay the agent $$$$$.

- "the costs, expenses and honoraires of this sale shall be payable by Mr and Mrs (myname)"

- "S'il y a préemption, les honoraires de négociation seront dus." (in case of preemption, the negotiation fees remain due)

To summarize: Mr myname has to pay the fees, in case of preemption, the fees remain due.

Thanks for the replies, I now understand that it should not say this, so I'll definitely ask the realtor to remove it.