Offering 7% below asking on a Mumbai mixed-use building

Q

QuietCedar

Real estate agent
The main constraint is the lack of reliable completed-sale evidence. The property is a Mumbai mixed-use building advertised at ₹105,200,000 for 68 days, and its required work is not yet defined well enough to price confidently.

I am considering ₹97,836,000, which is 7% below the asking price, supported by financing evidence and a completion timetable that could suit the seller. Would you explain the amount through the uncertain comparables and updating costs, or wait until occupancy, income and inspection details are clearer?

The opening price can be revised if new facts justify it; waiving inspection, financing protection or a valuation condition would be much harder to undo. I also want a sensible response deadline and clear limits on when the deposit becomes exposed.
 
Seven percent below is not inherently aggressive, particularly when completed comparables are unclear. Present it as a reasoned starting point, not a verdict on the property: current condition, updating costs and the limited evidence from completed sales.

Attach credible financing proof, offer the seller a completion window that suits them and set a reasonable response deadline. I would not waive inspection or financing merely to make the price more acceptable.
 
The missing fact is whether the building is vacant, owner-occupied or tenanted. With mixed use, existing occupancy and the income attached to each part could matter more than 68 days on the market. Also, does “updating” mean cosmetic work, or possible structural, services or compliance issues? Until those are clearer, repair credits and a valuation shortfall are difficult to price.
 
Agreed on occupancy. I’d also avoid treating 68 days as proof that the seller is under pressure; there may be little urgency or the property may simply have a narrower buyer pool.

The offer could ask what completion timing the seller prefers without asking them to reveal motivation outright. That creates value outside price. Keep any deposit amount and release conditions tied to clearly written milestones rather than using a larger exposed deposit as reassurance.
 
One more distinction: financing proof and waiving financing protection are not the same thing. You can demonstrate that funds are available while still making the purchase conditional on the lender approving this particular mixed-use building. If the lender’s valuation comes in below the agreed price, the contract should make clear whether you can renegotiate, add cash or withdraw. That appraisal gap can otherwise undo the benefit of negotiating 7% off.
 
I wouldn’t request repair credits in the opening offer. That can look like you are discounting defects before an inspection and planning to negotiate the same items twice. Offer ₹97,836,000 based on present condition, retain inspection rights, then address significant findings with evidence. Cosmetic updating should already be reflected in the initial number; unexpected material problems are different.
 
A practical sequence would be: confirm occupancy and permitted uses, review the property and available records, obtain whatever completed-sale evidence is available, and have the lender assess whether the mixed-use nature changes its approval or valuation. Then submit the price with financing proof, flexible completion, a clear response deadline and limited conditions for inspection, finance and valuation.

The tone matters less than clarity. Don’t call the asking price unrealistic; say the offer reflects the condition and evidence currently available, while leaving room for the seller to counter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top