Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
26th September 2014, 10:08 AM
A client of mine has just suggested that I lost her a bid on some land (which had the word Manor in the address). I had said to her get an evaluation or that a £40000 claw back or they could share the costs would just about cover it. I don't know which one she went with (it wasn't evaluation) but I do know the seller knows thats what I had said as he was the one that walked me round the land. What my clients is saying is that the other bidders did not even think about the archaeology and that the seller had gone with one of them. I have tried two defences so far, one is that the other bidders had thought about archaeology because I would have thought that the seller would be honour bound to tell them that the archaeology could cost up to £40000 and have taken that into their costs. (the other is that the seller was sexist). None of these reasons have gone down well Just wondered if anybody had been through this? Does the seller have to tell the other bidders?
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2009
26th September 2014, 12:36 PM
Not sure, but isn't it the buyers prerogative to find out about any hidden surprises about land before they buy it?
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
26th September 2014, 01:48 PM
Can see this thread showing up a sad lack of knowledge of such things amongst the too-poor-to-own-property ranks of archaeologists }
Didn't they introduce some 'pack' thingy a while back that sellers had to prepare for prospective buyers? [says man/male reptile working off half-remembered snippets from radio newsbulletins driving to and from jobs...]
Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
26th September 2014, 02:27 PM
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2013
26th September 2014, 04:53 PM
I know archaeologists are generally very knowledgeable folk, but wouldn't it be worth looking at some property-related forums for advice on seller obligations? Here's some:
http://blog.zoopla.co.uk/2009/04/03/top-...ty-forums/
I reserve the right to change my mind. It's called learning.
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
29th September 2014, 06:44 PM
Tool Wrote:I know archaeologists are generally very knowledgeable folk...
You speak from the advantageous position of having had a life in the real world before joining our merry ranks! }
:face-stir:
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
29th September 2014, 06:51 PM
Don't quite see how you can be so precise about the price prior to eval. What if the curator decides that works amounting to £100,000 are necessary or that the site is so important that permission is refused.....or that no archaeological works are required? Don't think the seller has any liability at all. Surely it is the buyers planning proposal that might require archaeological works, not the seller?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
29th September 2014, 07:16 PM
Have to say I don't like the title of the thread.
I have to say I have been involved in the buying on land for over 25 years and there is no easy answer to this. It all depends on what view the other bidders have taken. Many will ignore the archaeology even if it is a SAM others will be put off by it.
The evaluation is relatively unimportant - the question is what is the extent of the archaeology and how much will have to be dug out. The less information the more of a guess is been made.
Dr Peter Wardle
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2013
29th September 2014, 08:07 PM
Dinosaur Wrote:You speak from the advantageous position of having had a life in the real world before joining our merry ranks! }:face-stir:
My tongue may have been inching, sorry, millimetreing, towards my cheek, but hey, I'm from construction. The same industry that provided the following question a couple of weeks back about our metalled surface - 'so, is that made of metal then?'
I reserve the right to change my mind. It's called learning.
Posts: 8
Threads: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
30th September 2014, 07:52 AM
Peter the point that I am trying to get at is does the seller have to inform the other bidders that an archaeologist has suggested that there might be a cost of archaeology to be considered in the value of the land?
Quote:The evaluation is relatively unimportant - the question is what is the extent of the archaeology and how much will have to be dug out. The less information the more of a guess is been made.
to my mind the less information the more of a guess is made makes the relatively inexpensive evaluation the only tool that an an archaeologist has to cost the archaeology.
Quote:Don't quite see how you can be so precise about the price prior to eval
Yes and the evaluation should be done before sale or as a condition of sale.
.....nature was dead and the past does not exist
