I have never met this agent and so can't comment on the validity of all the facts and nobody has had any contact with their clients, so all we have heard from them is only what the agent has reported. I have engaged the services of a reputable law firm (paid up-front to a Forum sponsor
![Cheers :cheers:](./images/smilies/icon_cheers.gif)
The agent has reported that the clients are now angered and disappointed (they have already threatened to cancel the deal twice) because they can't understand that I'm not handing over the keys until I have received payment for the house in full. They seem to think it's quite normal to pay a 20% deposit, move in and then pay the balance when the house transfers at the Land Office - 30 days after notice is given. My response is that they can move in after the transfer has taken place and once the funds are cleared in my bank. If they want to move in before the transfer date, they can, provided I've received payment in full and the house is theirs.
Am I being unreasonable, do you think or using common sense? The clients claim that they can't "run away" with the house and that's really not my concern. I'm not, and never have been, interested in renting the house out. I don't want to be a landlord or liable for anything that happens in the house once it's no longer mine. Now the agent is, once again, saying the deal is off and quite frankly I'd rather wait until a more reliable buyer happens along.
What stance would you or have you taken if you've experienced something similar? And let's not get into the fact that the agent expects me to pay him 5% of the sale price for a mess entirely of his creation!