Buying a house, mortgages, etc... What do you know?

Word of advice - DON'T DO IT NOW!

Okay first things first, you don't invest in a mortgage, you invest in the house. The mortgage is the money the bank lends you to buy the house. You *may* make money from investing in the house if the value of the house goes up.

Unless you buy one in a really exceptional place right now (ie somewhere that's going to be transformed utterly for the better in the next few years), all indicators are that the value of that house will actually go down in the short/medium term, possibly quite significantly. You will still owe the same amount to the bank (actually, probably more, with interest).

If you're planning on living in that house for 10-20 years then fine, you will get a house at the end of it and your money won't have been wasted. If you don't know where you'll be in a year or three, it's probably a bit of a risk making a short-term commitment because if you sell the house you may not recoup all the money you owe to the bank.

Also the chances are you'll be paying more in mortgage than you would in rent, if you are buying on your own, and that'll leave you less money to actually play with each month.

Finally, how much money do you actually have in the bank and how much would you be able to pay upfront?

cheers Matt. i'm not looking into doing anything for at least a year, I'm merely educating myself so that I'm a little wiser for when the time comes and so I can stop exasperating my mate with daft and really obvious questions. I am well into my overdraft and my credit rating is poor AFAIK.

until recently the bank would (in some cases) lend you all of the money (and then some!) to buy the house. they have now gone back to the old way of asking for (your parents to stump up) a chunky deposit in advance.

The New York Times had this good article on the wisdom of buy versus renting. The logic is sound over there or over here.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/28/business/28leonhardt.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=house+price+rent+buy&st=nyt&oref=slogin

there is this ready reckoner, plug in the long term mortgage rate not the initial discount rate though

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/28/business/28leonhardt.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=house+price+rent+buy&st=nyt&oref=slogin

renting is basically throwing money down the drain

Leaving aside the direction of prices, this actually isn't true if you think where that money actually ends up.

Consider a scenario where you borrow 100,000 at 6% - this means you will be required to pay 6000 in interest (or 500 a month). Regardless of how much capital you pay off in that first year (maybe 2000 as 80-90% of your payments will be paying interest) you have spent 6000 on interest charges

The amount of 'rent money down drain' that is actually down the drain is the amount your rent is above this cost. If your rent is 550 a month you can argue 50 a month is down the drain not 550. If your rent is below the interest charges (which is currently likely) say 420 a month - you would not be throwing 420 a month down the drain you would be saving 80 a month.

Similarly most of the rent you pay will also go towards servicing your landlords interest charges - and over the last few years it is likely that your landlord is actually making a loss and may be well be subsidizing your rent

Secondly, what is your opinion on the direction of the following

unemployment
inflation
interest rates
value of sterling
your salary prospects

Consider exposure to debt in light of the above

matt's first post is all you really need to know.

In other words depends whether you like to throw your money down the drain (to the bank) via a proxy or not.

The amount of 'rent money down drain' that is actually down the drain is the amount your rent is above this cost. If your rent is 550 a month you can argue 50 a month is down the drain not 550.

uh. you know you own the house at the end of the mortgage, right? even thought the first few years are mainly interest repayment, that would still be the general gist, like.

only if you actually go through with buying the house, rather than selling and moving on before the 25 years (or whatever) are up. and selling up and moving on is not what it was a few years ago, profitability-wise.

That NY Times journalist sounds like a meddling menace:

For the last few years, I have been an evangelist for renting.

I’ve told my sister-in-law and her husband that they would be crazy to abandon their reasonably priced one-bedroom rental in Brooklyn. When two of my colleagues were moving to Los Angeles, I e-mailed them a spreadsheet that helped persuade them not to buy a house there.

uh. you know you own the house at the end of the mortgage, right? even thought the first few years are mainly interest repayment, that would still be the general gist, like.

Correct. Also consider the true cost of the house, not the ticket price (100,000) on entry - ie add the compound interest charges over the 30 year loan period to ticket price to get real cost(factor in likelyhood of interest rates being much higher in 5-9 years time to combat inflation - ie look at inflation and interest rates in 1970s)

While your rent is lower than interest payments on loan, save/invest money elsewhere until such point that interest payments become lower than rent, at this point consider buying. If interest payments were never to fall below rent savings over 25 years would be more likely to put you in position of being a cash buyer in 20 years time

Also consider global position and prospects of UK in 20 years time and effects of peak oil

Dubloons in a sock is what he is saying.

Factor in insurance buying/selling costs and maintenance in addition to interest payments

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/27886

^^^ good overview

laxalt?

Kondratieff - the rent will also increase, at least by inflation.

So my mortgage is 980 a month, about the same as what rent would be now.

But in 20 years time it will still be roughly 980 a month, whereas rents will be few grand. And in 25 years time, I'll have paid off the mortgage, so won't be paying anything, whereas I would be still be paying rent till I died (OK getting housing benefit because my pension will be so lousy, but you get the point).

Kondratieff - the rent will also increase, at least by inflation.

Note necessarily true as the BTL crowd are finding out.

Rents are soaring now. They've been falling or staying stable, because of the increase in supply, but now people aren't buying, demand for rental properties is increasing, leading to higher rents and yields for wankers BTL investors

Good point. Might be wise to wait till the point where rent overtakes interest payments (and maybe a little on top to cover maintenace and costs) and at that point use the money you have saved into a deposit to reduce the debt exposure at the point you buy

Would it have been better to buy in 1990 or rent from 1990 till 1996 and then buy?

Also have rents increased over the last 7 years by inflation? Have salaries increased over last 7 years by inflation? Do rents increase in recessions? Do salaries increase in recessions? Do job prospects increase in recessions? Have food and fuel prices been artificially low over last 25 years? What happens if % of salary taken up by food and fuel increases to long term average? Does this mean smaller % of non-increasing salary is available for housing costs?

For a while they were depressed or falling, what I am saying is the link to inflation should not be taken for granted.

Where are rents soaring?

Why is demand for rental properties increasing? Where were these people living before?

Yields are increasing because prices are dropping not because rents are increasing.

Also have rents increased over the last 7 years by inflation? Yes.

Have salaries increased over last 7 years by inflation? Yes.

Do rents increase in recessions? Don't know. But we're not in a recession.

Do salaries increase in recessions? Yes, but not in real terms (ie by less than inflation).

Do job prospects increase in recessions? Obviously not.

Have food and fuel prices been artificially low over last 25 years? Don't know. What does artificially mean in this context?

What happens if % of salary taken up by food and fuel increases to long term average? People have less money to spend on other stuff.

Does this mean smaller % of non-increasing salary is available for housing costs? Probably, but that doesn't mean less demand for housing. People just have EVEN less money to spend on anything else.

Have food and fuel prices been artificially low over last 25 years? Don't know. What does artificially mean in this context?

prices distorted by subsidy and low demand in from parts of the world that needed more but couldn't afford it.

Where are rents soaring? In London.

Why is demand for rental properties increasing?

Because people who were previously buying are continuing to rent, so people are not leaving the rental sector, but the rate of new entrants to the rental sector is the same.

But this is all short-term stuff. The general point is that your mortgage payments will remain roughly stable for the duration of your mortgage (OK they change according to interest rates, but that's going to be in the order of 3 or 4 percentage points either way),whereas, over the whole period you would expect rents to increase at roughly the same rate as costs more generally, ie by a minimum of 3-4% EVERY YEAR. (RPI)

So for the first couple of years of a mortgage, it's almost always going to be more advantageous to rent, but as it goes on, it looks better the other way round.

Because people who were previously buying are continuing to rent, so people are not leaving the rental sector, but the rate of new entrants to the rental sector is the same.

Reliant on immigration. Pound falling against zloty and others. As people lose jobs likely to move back home. Spare rooms start to be rented out - increase in lodgers. Lot of underutilized space in UK housing + oversupply of unsellable flats

Where are rents soaring? In London.

Haven't seen evidence of this

So for the first couple of years of a mortgage, it's almost always going to be more advantageous to rent,

Actually, historically its actually been cheaper to buy than rent (if this wasn't the case it would provide no income for landlords other than ungettable at equity gains). Is only really at the top of credit bubbles that buying costs more

Also im not talking about total mortgage cost vs rent - in that case capital is being paid off, a saving is being made

I'm talking about interest payment component vs rent. Both of these are 'dead money'. Capitol payment on top is analaguous to saving

mattdc still otm, if you find somewhere you still think you'll be in 20 years and you can afford it, then you should buy.

all the rest is wank, really, short of actually having hugely detailed figures on future occurrences and the necessary time/understanding to decipher it.

It depends on how your mortgage is structured - if you are paying off a sizeable amount of the house itself each month plus the interest on top you are doing pretty well. It may be more expensive month to month and your payments may fluctuate, but you'll be making visible progress - you are actually owning a bit more of the house month by month and will have an end date in sight.

If its structured in such a way that you are paying less (or even nothing) upfront and less per month, but are in a situation where after five or so years you've only paid the interest off and don't own any of the actual house, well that's a bit dodgy.

(It's a bit dodgy because what you're doing is essentially renting it from the bank without actually increasing your share in the house)

Where are rents soaring?

They are increased based on "index." (I'm not sure if you call it the same in English.)

Also, take into account that once you retire, you will get less than your wages. At least that's the case here. I'm sure you'll retort: "Buh buh you can SAVE money on the bank." Good point, but the interest is lower than the index (or whatever the fuck you call it) which basically means your money (plus interest) is worth less in time.

Ok, I know very little about all this and even less when it comes the English terms. But from what I have been reading - yes, we're looking into buying a house as well - buying is still MUCH better than renting a house. That said, I think it'll need to be NOW (or actually go back in time cause houses have doubled in prices compared to a decade ago). House prices in Belgium are rising at double the rate compared to neighbouring countries. This isn't like in the US though, but we're still living in a crap country (cue: food prices being MUCH higher than in neighbouring countries). LE FUCKING SIGH.

We're looking into buying a house to rent out. It's even more of a hassle than buying for yourself. :-(

any other tips/advice people can give me and your experiences in this.

As my mum said: RESEARCH RESEARCH RESEARCH. "Basically make it your hobby."

"Owning part of the house and more each month" is sorta kinda true but not really: it's true in the emotional/commonsensical sense, but not in the legal sense: the bank's security remains in place over the whole of the property, so even if you only have five grand outstanding on your mortgage when you default, they can still sell your property out from under you, take their five grand and had the rest back to houseless you.

Calumerio is right. The bank is always the winner in this case.

One of the things you need to ask (yourself or the bloke selling the house):

- Why is the person selling it. (IF they're stupid, and believe in some cases they are, they'll blab or give away that there's something wrong with the house.)

- Location of the house (You should compare prices in the neighbourhood.)

- There's such a thing as value based on age. (The older the house, usually the value does go down.)

- When they give you a budget (say 250.000 euros) deduct a certain amount cause, be assured, you'll beed to spend that on repair and such. If you don't, you'll probably need to beg for more money. Trust me, you ALWAYS have to spend more on it than you think.

Oh yes, I'm not sure if it works this way in England/the US: but you can ask the people for the last "reports" if you buy an appartment. Renters come together (or the people appointed) to talk about the shit which has to be done in the building. If something'swrong then it'll be in the report. This way you know if there's sth wrong with it.

even if you only have five grand outstanding on your mortgage when you default, they can still sell your property out from under you, take their five grand and had the rest back to houseless you.

Yes that's true, but you still have a big chunk of the money you put in at the end of it. If you default on an interest only mortgage the bank sells your property out from under you and leaves you with fuck all.

- There's such a thing as value based on age. (The older the house, usually the value does go down.)

This certainly doesn't hold true for the UK. Older houses are often way better constructed and 'original features', whatever that mean if not commanding extra prices speed sales.

Because people who were previously buying are continuing to rent, so people are not leaving the rental sector, but the rate of new entrants to the rental sector is the same.
------
Reliant on immigration. Pound falling against zloty and others. As people lose jobs likely to move back home. Spare rooms start to be rented out - increase in lodgers. Lot of underutilized space in UK housing + oversupply of unsellable flats

While immigration is a factor in this, it's not the only one. A lot of people enter the rental market when they're in their late teens or early twenties and don't want to live with their parents any more / have to live away from their parents because of the location of their job. A lot of people typically leave the rental market in their late twenties / early thirties because they've got the steady job & steady relationship situation where the time seems right to 'buy' a property. At the moment a lot of those people can't buy so they're still renting, but meanwhile kids are still turning into 18-year-olds who want to leave home.

And what do you think their job prospects are going to be like? And they'll only be able to pay higher rents if they get higher salaries. mortgage=wage+credit, rent=wage - You can't borrow to pay rent - its entirely reliant on ability to pay via salary.

Also by back home - this includes moving back to parents after redundancy not just returning to Poland or wherever. Still a lot of oversupply with in most cities to be worked through yet also

Also excess of boomers in houses now to large for them, to rent out spare rooms to cover increased heating costs. Rich on paper but unreleasable gains. Return of the lodger

I bought a tiny little condo in DC along with my boyfriend back in July 2007. It was kind of a crappy deal--high monthly payments with a 7.125% interest rate, and we didn't start paying off any principle for 10 years. We were able to make the payments just fine but couldn't really save any money. Then, in May, we got a letter in the mail from our mortgage servicer. It was an offer to refinance under terms so good, I was sure it was a scam. We followed through with it, though--jumped through all the hoops, etc. And after a considerable delay and much nail-biting, we got approved. They lowered our interest rate to 5.5% and literally lopped $70,000 off our loan! That lowered our monthly payment by almost $300, and we now pay off some principle with each payment. I'm still waiting for an anvil to fall out of the sky and crush me.

no, that was the bank dodging the anvil

e.g. your mortgage is now better rated as an investment risk (less likely to default) than it was previously. After a year of making payments your credit may have improved, also lots of other mortgage-backed securities based on loans like your original one started imploding, so if they move you to a better structure they only write down their time value of that $70,000 instead of the entire principal + 1 year's interest of your condo's value. Your mortgage can now be traded with greater confidence to increasingly risk-averse underwriters.

anyway good job lou thanks for shoring it up around here while I'M STILL LOOKING.

This is correct - US banks scared of defaults and jinglemail - better to restructure. Problem with foreclosing too many is increasing inventory of unsaleable assets (plus foreclosing means losing out on all future interest on the loan)

- When they give you a budget (say 250.000 euros) deduct a certain amount cause, be assured, you'll beed to spend that on repair and such. If you don't, you'll probably need to beg for more money. Trust me, you ALWAYS have to spend more on it than you think

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^this

I got fucked on this by having to shell out an extra $8,000 for sewage repairs on the house we bought last year -- repairs that, by all rights, SHOULD have been covered by the purchase contract, but it was a probate sale and the lawyer was a douchebag of major proportions.

:) Thanks, Tombot. I knew they probably wouldn't do something like this without the current mortgage crisis but didn't truly understand (well, it's still a bit over my head but you shed some light). Good luck looking (and be careful! We only looked at a couple places before we found our condo and it was all over before we knew it.

Because people who were previously buying are continuing to rent, so people are not leaving the rental sector, but the rate of new entrants to the rental sector is the same

And the huge number of new developments that are unsellable at any price are now be available to rent

Kondratieff, you're half right: Babyboomers seem keen to sell their houses because they are getting older and want to live in an appartment: Those houses will drop in price. Also newly built appartments are difficult to sell (too many around) so look out for those at an affordable price.

Older houses are often way better constructed and 'original features', whatever that mean if not commanding extra prices speed sales.

Not necessarily. Also take into account that in the past they had different needs and such. (For example people want bigger bathrooms,...) We went to check a 17th century house (basically one big bedroom and another big one in the attic).

That said, here if you buy a newly built house you pay taxes on it. (As opposed to a house older than 3 yrs, then you only pay notary costs, if I'm not mistaken.)

hey signed a contract for first place ever. seeing the bank, that we previously got pre-approval from, this evening. wooo

my friends that bought the house recently were working with a real estate agent that just wasn't working out, and then went with someone from their credit union, and it was a much better experience for them.

gf's brother developed these apartments, so we're getting ours minus what would have been the agent commission minus 10k. plus we get the 21k first homebuyer's grant from the gov't. plus gf's parents are giving us $50k. Kind of pleased w/the situation tbh.

so we're looking at a saving of about $100k in total!

wonder how the redfin business model is doing, if i were in the market atm i'd be hesitant to add another layer of 'innovation' to an already shaky process but it intrigued me when i was window-shopping last year

Compare this to 2-3 years ago when all you needed to do was walk into a bank to be offered a large amount of money.

You didn't even need to go to the bank. I would phone the bank for some reason and they would offer me a bigger mortgage/loan/free sex right there and then.

Interestingly both my parents and my parents-in-law benefited from cheap mortgages back in the early 60s. In my parents case a 100% mortgage backed up by the GLC (or possibly the LCC) to help move people out of poor housing in the east end and in my parents-in-law case the Birmingham Municipal Bank - run by the city council, again to help people buy new housing out of the city centre. My, how times have changed, etc.

When my parents were buying their house in the mid-70s they were in a similar situation to now. They ended up buying the house they did because they couldn't get affordable mortgage terms on the house in Monterey my dad inherited from his mom, who had just died. Thanks crappy real estate/finance industry for making me grow up in the shithole town I did.

house buying ppl, have you ever fallen in love with a house only to have the agent say "no way, i would argue argue argue against buying this"?

realtor's pov is that because the house is on zoned industrial land, surrounded by a mixture of other houses and industry, it won't appreciate as fast as strict residential neighborhoods. he also says we'd have a harder time selling it because far fewer buyers would be interested.

of all people, ilxors would get why it'd be cool to live in an industrial neighborhood. right? and even though it's a long shot, i've gotta bet one of us has bought in what might be considered (to suburban acura driving real estate agents) an odd neighborhood. have you had to talk a real estate agent around to your point of view? have you had to explain "i'm living in it, that's most important, investment potential is secondary"? did you switch agents or heed what s/he said? thx 4 advice.

Fuck an agent.

No thank you, don't fancy'em.

If it is somewhere you can see yourself living for a while, great. If you're possibly going to move or resell, its not a good idea to buy in a place that won't at least allow you to change homes in the same situation you were in when you purchase you first home.

Where you want to live is the real consideration, but you don't want to have to compromise your ability to live somewhere ELSE you may want to live.

You've probably already done this, but look up the address you're considering on Zillow.com and check out the values of all the surrounding property- how long are people owning these homes? Are they selling? Are they appreciating? Do think about the amount of time you plan to live there- if you suddenly (god forbid) lost your job and had to sell in, say, two years, do you foresee buyers? Another option is to use the realtor resistance as a bargaining chip and make a lower offer- the realtor maybe exactly right about the liabilities of the property, but if you're into the hosue, this could be a way to get it for less.

In general, you want a realtor you can basically trust, but you must be aware that they make a percentage and want you to trend towards the upper scale of what you're comfortable buying. That said, it's not in their longterm interest to saddle you with a home you can't sell. Word of mouth is important for them, it's how they get clients.

Just had an offer accepted on our first house. Ulp...

Congrats!

xp real estate priced to esl

no-good screed goes unpunized

:( help me

― yosemi to me like a valley (tremendoid)

lol for reals, never saw this before. :D

If it turns out our vendor has the same solicitor as us, does this make things easier or harder?

(NB. our vendor has the same solicitor as us.)

Considering that approx 80% of the hassle of my recent house move was down to various sets of solicitors blaming each other for non-communication and failure to send paperwork etc then I'd say this can only make things easier. The only thing that I could see being a problem is if you have a serious disagreement with yr vendors, but even then one would hope that a decent solicitor will mediate effectively and help you sort things out whilst still protecting both sets of interests.

Congrats on the impending ownership as well - I waffled a bit on the other house thread with various tipz, but it is *so great* having yr own place.

That's what I figured - hoping it'll make things run more smoothly like.

(what other house thread pls?)

Buying A House C or D

My input on this was mostly to do with the bits before you're in offer-accepted-mode, but I've plenty of *fascinating* advice about the protracted negotiations and travails that await you in the run up to exchanging contracts / completing / nearly having a "turn" on moving day etc.

so

Mortgage repayments can't be met. What options is one likely to be presented?

Acting as agent for someone else, but i do live in the house so i'm not exactly detached from situation.

i tends to lapse into dickensian when faced with stressful situations

Talk to Citizens Advice they can help with loan modification. Talk to the bank early.

early was some months ago.

The mortgage holder is of limited responsibility iirc

Been talking to the bank on my dad's behalf- he's living in the states and doesn't really want to know afaict- the current balance of the mortgage is 150% the value of the house, arrears are into 5th month, monthly payments are more than twice going rents in area.

Lol.

Sucky real estate carnage. :(

Let it go and start putting anything that MIGHT have gone toward the mortgage payments into savings. At least in the states it's taking banks like 6 months (or more?) to get around to foreclosing so chances are you can stay quite a while. No clue about your area of course so this may be no help at all.

yeah, probably. Rent from brother and me is going straight into dad's account, i think i'll have to stop that. Should come to a head over next few weeks, financial consequences likely to be easier to deal with than fam dram tbh

Oh hey and he's living off your rent and not paying, eh? Makes a body wish they'd stopped paying rent MONTHS AGO, and I should know, because my (non-familial, thankfully) roommate just did that to me earlier this year.

Sorry about the dram.

eh i dunno- his work makes him legit uncontactable for much of the time. That's maybe the worst aspect- he might be working all hours to try to get cash together or he might be screwing us, and i've not much idea which.

buying this house is going to fucking kill me. at least there is a yard in back where my family can secretly bury my corpse.

holy shit, i forgot about the corpses, can't even let the bank have this place.

Hey I just bought a house. o_o

:D

Finally official!

Oh man, it took 2 months to close, or what? Congrats!

Yeah, two months! Hope I never have to do this again, and thanks!

Grats

leee :)

A home-owner query rather than a "Buying a house" one but ...

We have recently had a garage roof replaced. I have an email from the builder stating that this work is guaranteed for one year. Within this year, the roof has started leaking in multiple places (That is, I assume this is not a small repair job).

I have emailed the company and they have agreed to come out and have a look (though they cancelled a planned appointment to do so). I like to think that the company will make the repairs but what will our course of action be if they do not or if they appear to be doing so shoddily?

Ta.

you take them to court i guess, which they are counting on you not doing because of the enormous hassle involved

A lot more than i did a week ago

Congrats....??
It's a headfuck eh?

Okay, got a question for people who know more than me. Wife and I are selling our house in Houston. We were planning on listing it in June and moving to Savannah. Recently a neighbor found out that we were going to move and casually offered what seems like a pretty decent offer for our house and our area. We hadn't even signed with a realtor yet, so this is pretty cool so far. We sign with our realtor who was originally going to get 3% of the sale. We said hey, that seems like a lot since you're not actively listing it or staging or doing any of that, so she agreed to 1%.

It should be noted that neither my wife nor I are savvy with money or property, we are artsy fartsy types who are paranoid of getting screwed over.

We just found out that the potential buyer has a realtor and our realtor tells us that the other realtor will get 3% of the sale. This seems nuts to me. The house was never listed, why the heck would we pay that much money for the other person's realtor? Is that bonkers? Is it normal? I understand that 6% total is standard for a house being listed, but that's not what is happening here. Why would I pay for this other person's realtor in these circumstances?

It's Easter and my realtor is churchy so my brain is spinning out over this.

Well, here comes a situation to drag me back into ILXor after not posting for a long time.

Don't agree to sell it to them. I would say that before the added fact that they want to add a realtor to the pay-cycle. You should not agree an off-market price without getting some level of due diligence on your side. If they have such a good offer it can be the winning bid after it is on the market for a week.

I will bet a beer it will not be the winning bid.

Houston to Savannah, you must really love humidity.

horizontal is correct. i don't think it's bonkers for a realtor to default to 3% in that situation because they don't see a downside and they know there's a good chance you won't object. i can see wanting to accept it and be done with it but if your brain is spinning over the 3% maybe you don't really want to do this.

Ok, further wrinkles: i’m living in the house with the kids until the school year finishes. Wife is already in Savannah. It would be great to find a house before we have to move so we can go straight into new house from Houston. So if we sold now and backleased it for $0 until July 1, there’s a decent chance we could find a house in the interim.

Also, our house needs some work done on it that the buyer is fully aware of. We could probably get a bit more money for the house but we would have to put a good bit of money into it.

Our realtor did a market analysis thing that said our house is worth under what these folks have offered. But it’s hard to get an even comparison because our lot is way bigger than most. I think I like our realtor but I’m a bad judge of businessy people.

Humidity sucks balls. Kinda irritated to move from one humid hellhole to another. Houston is super diverse but it sucks to drive in it. Savannah is chill but the YE OLD SOUTH thing grates.

i guess i can't tell what your goal is based on your first post. if it's to get the most money you can for your house, just let it go to market.

Look on Redfin at what places are listing for and the sale price. Listing price is not a good guide of what the house sells for in a lot of the country right now. I know many markets shifting at 30% over ask or above. Your realtor advised a good list price - that might not be a good sale price.

Also, there are a lot of markets right now where people are waiving inspection and contingencies. It seems batshit crazy (because it is). Unless it is code you can refuse to fix things and deduct an agreed amount from the agreed price if it shows in inspection. If someone waives that, it doesn't matter.

Personally I would tell them it is going on the market, offers are due by x. If they show out as the best offer in that then great. I just don't see why you would choose to not see what other offers there are.