Seller withdraws after accepting offer

IANAL but as I understand it a contract needs: goods, offer, acceptance and consideration. You didn't pay the deposit, so there's no contract.

Even if there was, you've no *claim* as there's no damages. You don't have a contract stating defaulting terms either.

But if I were a lawyer, I'd offer you the comfy chair with tea and biscuits...
 
Last edited:
GlennG said:
IANAL but as I understand it a contract needs: goods, offer, acceptance and consideration. You didn't pay the deposit, so there's no contract.

Even if there was, you've no *claim* as there's no damages. You don't have a contract stating defaulting terms either.

But if I were a lawyer, I'd offer you the comfy chair with tea and biscuits...
Click to expand...

I can only speak about employment contracts but if I offer you a job starting next Monday at an agreed salary which will be paid a month later and you agree to turn up next Monday then a valid contract exists between us. Consideration (work to be done and salary to be paid) has been agreed but has not yet happened.

Expecting to succeed in a claim for damages is a wholly different matter!

Richard
 
RadiumRob said:
Please can anyone advise me what rights (if any) I have in the following situation?

Negotiating through a broker, a seller verbally accepted my offer on his boat only to withdraw it from sale the following day stating that his wife had decided they wanted to keep the boat. The withdrawal was reported to the broker before I had a chance to pay the deposit.

The offer was the asking price with a few fairly low value extras thrown in, so it isn’t as if the seller was being unfairly dealt with.

I have the RYA guide book, but this doesn’t seem to offer much help other than to say a verbal contract is binding.

Naturally, the broker is fuming as it seems that the seller is in breach of his contract (the broker having arranged a deal at the agreed asking price).
Click to expand...

Lots of good advice. What you considered an exciting prospect and then having the rug pulled from under you must have been a real dissapointment. I am curious and sure others are too, as to what type of boat it was? perhaps someone amongst the forum could help in finding what you are looking for.
 
The seller has obviously changed his mind. It's better that you found out now than after you had spent money on a survey. Annoying as it is, just move on.

The broker may be able to present him with a bill but, from your point of view, he is likely to try even harder to find something suitable for you.
 
My understanding is that an offer is made and accepted subject to a survey and trial sail, then if the buyer is happy a contract is signed. As a seller you would have to go through that process in reverse. Thus I don't think there is any chance of a legal claim. Also the broker has no comeback, he didn't sell the boat so no commission.

I'd just get on with looking and not waste time money. People are allowed to change their mind.
 
Lakesailor said:
Have you read any of the other posts?

He doesn't have any chance of getting any satisfaction by going to law.
Click to expand...

Yup read them. There exists a possibility that acceptance did not occur and in fact a counter offer was made that would negate the original offer by the seller and then the seller has the OPTION of accepting the counter offer.

However if he can show that a contract exists then of course has a remedy at law if the other side does not perform.
 
I think everyone should have a cup of tea, a bex and a good lie down. It's karma.

The OP will end up finding the boat of his dreams and will enjoy balmy evenings in the cockpit thinking "Thank Heavens I didn't end up buying ....."

…while the seller’s SWMBO will be nagging his balls off saying “It’s been two years now we’ve been trying to sell this boat – we should have taken RadiumRob’s offer!”
 
KellysEye said:
My understanding is that an offer is made and accepted subject to a survey and trial sail, then if the buyer is happy a contract is signed. As a seller you would have to go through that process in reverse. Thus I don't think there is any chance of a legal claim. Also the broker has no comeback, he didn't sell the boat so no commission.

I'd just get on with looking and not waste time money. People are allowed to change their mind.
Click to expand...
Your understanding of the normal "broker" boat sale process is sadly wrong. Offer, acceptance, contract subject to survey/trial sail is normal.
 
TQA said:
Yup read them. There exists a possibility that acceptance did not occur and in fact a counter offer was made that would negate the original offer by the seller and then the seller has the OPTION of accepting the counter offer.

However if he can show that a contract exists then of course has a remedy at law if the other side does not perform.
Click to expand...
You seem to have missed the point of my post and most of the others'. Whatever the legal status of the sale, whether straightforward or convoluted, as in your hypotheses, going to court will not get him satisfaction.
He has no claim for loss. He has lost nothing.
He isn't going to get either an award for being disappointed or a judgement that the boat shall be his.

The OP just needs to do what most people would do and keep looking.
 
Stork_III said:
Your understanding of the normal "broker" boat sale process is sadly wrong. Offer, acceptance, contract subject to survey/trial sail is normal.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what K E was suggesting (and myself previously) that until contract is signed then one doesn't exist :confused:
 
People who have boats usually have money so take her to court over it. Make the bitch sell through a court case or at least the threat of one.

One extreme above now the sensible option below

Relax just a case of bad luck, just think you will go off and buy another boat and you may see the bitch and her poor husband out and they might invite you on board for a drink at which point because you have bought a slightly bigger yacht you can do the Harry Enfield line "my boat is considerably bigger than yours". OR you might just take a spanner to the sea cocks and why not eat the greasy crisps they offer and drop crumbs all over the teak deck while of course spraying oil based sun protection on making sure to apply enough to print your body template into the teak. Oh and don't forget to spill some red wine over something and if you have them bring the Grand kids along with some marker pens :-)

Oooo actually that reads like aCharter guest scenario sorry got side tracked there

OK SENSIBLE OPTION

MOVE ON!!
 
Last edited:
Lakesailor said:
You seem to have missed the point of my post and most of the others'. Whatever the legal status of the sale, whether straightforward or convoluted, as in your hypotheses, going to court will not get him satisfaction.
He has no claim for loss. He has lost nothing.
He isn't going to get either an award for being disappointed or a judgement that the boat shall be his.

The OP just needs to do what most people would do and keep looking.
Click to expand...

Wow there is a lot of incorrect info being posted on this thread.

I The contract need not be in writing. OK verbal contracts are harder to prove than writen ones but if the statements were witnessed by a 3rd party that is usually good enough. Also if a judge decides that on the balance of propablity a contract exists that is also good enough.

2 Assuming a contract existed and the seller backed out then the buyer can sue in a civil court for breach of contract and win damages

In this case they would almost certainly be entitled to reliance loss, also known as wasted expenditure loss and arises when the claimant has incurred out of pocket or wasted expenditure in preparation of or partial performance of the contract. The purpose of reliance loss is the same as expectation loss in that it is designed to put the claimant in the same position they would have been in before the contract was entered into. Travel expenses, survey, cost of phone calls.

They might also win unliquidated damages. These are assessed by the court and are designed to compensate the innocent party for any losses incurred as a result of a breach of contract. For example the buyer could show that they bought a similar yacht at a higher price and that it was the best deal they could get. They would then win the difference.

I should also mention the remedy of 'specific performance'. Here the judge would force the sale to go through at the agreed price. Judges rarely grant this unless the item sold is a unique example.

I was in business for years and got sued as well as suing people for breach of contract. I also taught law from the point of view of staying out of court. If you have to go to court usually only the lawyers come away with a profit.
 
Stork_III said:
Offer, acceptance, contract subject to survey/trial sail is normal.
Click to expand...

I'll try one last time on this, offer then acceptance SUBJECT to survey/trials, surely no survey no trials = no contract

Let's try this

OP - I'll give you £20k for boat subject to survey/trial

Seller - I accept

Seller - changed my mind not selling

OP - Sh*t, I'll get some lawyers in for £30K and sue you

Seller - what for ?

OP - for changing your mind and 'cos a bunch of forum lawyers says I can

Seller - Keep me informed, I'm going sailing :p
 
TQA said:
Wow there is a lot of incorrect info being posted on this thread.
Click to expand...

Yes, and you are just adding to the list.

Unless there is a good record of the verbal contract including all the terms and conditions that the plaintiff is going to rely on, then the courts will assume that the contract is one that is normal for that type of transaction. That would not cover any of the damages you suggest might be claimed in breach.

Remember from what the OP says a price was agreed verbally and the next day the seller changed his mind. No deposit, no completion date, no terms and conditions and so on. How could anybody justify any loss that might have occured in 24 hours of agreeing a price?

If what you say is right, nobody would ever buy or sell anything. That is also why any deal that is agreed needs to be in the form of a written contract so that both parties know exactly what they have agreed to and what the consequences are following a breach.

So, I doubt on the basis of a phone conversation agreeing a price in a transaction where there is a well establihed contract process, that any form of binding contract has been established, nor would the "breach" as described have resulted in any quantifiable or forseeable loss.
 
Add to the mix that if the seller's wife owned half the boat rather than jointly owning it with her husband (an important distinction) then it wasn't his to sell so no contract, verbal or otherwise existed.
 
Tranona said:
Remember from what the OP says a price was agreed verbally and the next day the seller changed his mind. No deposit, no completion date, no terms and conditions and so on. How could anybody justify any loss that might have occured in 24 hours of agreeing a price
Click to expand...
I'm sure others have made this point too, but for me this is the main consideration. We don't even know if it was a full 24 hours either!

Cheers, Brian.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top