selling under private treaty + auction did not go ahead

[HattrickNZ]

Hi there

I recently rang an agent to see how much a house sold for - just doing some research.
He said he could not tell me for a few month because it was sold as a private treaty.
Has anyone come accross this and what does it mean or why would the seller/buyer do this?

Also the house was meant to go to auction, but it never did and I was not notified.
REA said they only have to notify if the auction is brought forward, and in this case it wasn't so they did not have to.
Why would the seller do this? Surely they would be better off going to the open market or auction to get the best price?

All sounds fair enough to me. Just found it interesting as never came accross it before.

tks

[Davo36]

So if it didn't go to auction and the auction wasn't brought forward, what actually happened there? At what time did they buy it?

I think some sellers may be grabbing any half decent offer at this time.

And I don't think they have to say what a house sold for.

Annoying how they make you ring around to find out what houses sold for though.

[HattrickNZ]

It sold a few days before the scheduled Auction. Or More I saw a sold sign on it a few days before the auction. So not sure what happened exactly. Maybe there was numerous owners and they sold it between themselves, but that is pure speculation. if that was the case, would seem a shame if they had to pay commission...

It's not that he does not have to tell me that I am referring to. Its the fact that it was private treaty - so they can hold back on the price for a certain period.
Imagine if this info was held back more often? How would people know the market value of anything?

[Keys]

How would people know the market value of anything?

By paying for it. Willing buyer, willing seller.

[HattrickNZ]

agree, but comparing prices is a nice indicator, but like u say maybe not essential.

[Keithw]

the other way to look at it is:
What difference does it make how much it sold for, you didnt buy it and you cant buy it now because someone else did.
Using any sale as an indicator on another sale is only valid if it is like for like, & even then there can be significant differences between similar properties.
This particularly shows up in blocks of units / apts CV;s
Same apts but one has recent sales while the other doesnt & you will likely find the CV of the one sold more recently will be higher.

As Keys says, the market value is whatever a current buyer is prepared to pay and that the seller is prepared to accept.

[Davo36]

I reckon seeing what other properties have sold for is invaluable if you're a buyer.

You used to be able to see what everyone was asking for their property. They had prices.

Now it's all hidden away. I suspect agents like this.

[HattrickNZ]

agree it would favour the seller if nobody new what house prices were.
But equally agree "Willing buyer, willing seller." as this happens in other trades/insustries I am sure.
But that is a different question.


The original question was, if you did buy a house, as a seller why would you not want to disclose the price? Or as a buyer why would you not want to disclose the price? Just trying to understand the logic/motivation, when I presume the default is for it to be disclosed.


If it had of went to auction, it could have posssibly been a public thing, where anyone present would have known.


Anyhow, no biggie.

[Davo36]

But equally agree "Willing buyer, willing seller." as this happens in other trades/insustries I am sure.

Can't think of many other things that sell this way. Milk powder and what else?