Repairs, closing credit or price reduction after inspection - worth pushing back?

O

otis.elm

Buyer
Established
The response deadline is close, so my first concern is preserving the inspection protection and not putting the deposit in jeopardy. The issue is a 40 m² duplex in Lyon where the inspection identified manageable but genuine work estimated at about €27,600.

The seller is willing to organise the repairs. I would prefer responsibility for selecting contractors and deciding exactly what is done, which leaves me choosing between a completion credit and a lower purchase price. The credit would provide cash for the work, but I am asking the lender whether concessions are capped or affect financing. Is there another cost or shared-building issue I should verify before proposing one remedy?
 
Ask the lender for a clear answer before choosing. A price reduction may lower the amount financed but leaves you finding the repair money afterward. A permitted credit is more practical if cash is the constraint.

I would still resist having the seller manage everything. Their incentive is completion at acceptable cost; yours includes contractor choice and long-term quality. The exception is work that must be resolved for financing or appraisal purposes.
 
What makes up the €27,600? On only 40 m², one major item could matter far more than a list of cosmetic defects. I would separate urgent work from improvements, and confirm whether anything concerns shared parts rather than only the duplex interior.

Also check the exact response deadline and what your inspection wording allows before negotiating. The preferred remedy is secondary if missing the deadline weakens your position.
 
I would not automatically reject the seller’s offer. If the seller is motivated and can complete defined work before closing, that may be cleaner than trying to fit a large credit within lender limits. Buyer control is valuable, but it also means taking on cost overruns and delays.

The compromise is a precise written scope, evidence of completion and a final inspection. I would not accept a vague promise to “fix the issues.”
 
Completed comparable sales should influence how hard you push. If the agreed price already reflects the duplex’s condition, demanding the entire €27,600 again may not be persuasive. If similar completed units sold near your price without these defects, the request is much easier to justify.

A reduction can also create an appraisal-gap issue in the discussion: the seller may think the property supports the original price while you are arguing the inspection changed its effective value.
 
The breakdown is important, but so is financing proof. I would get the lender’s position on the maximum credit and whether unfinished items affect approval in writing, then present the seller with options that are actually workable.

For example: credit up to the permitted amount, with a reduction for the balance; or seller-completed urgent work and a smaller concession for everything else. That responds to the seller’s proposal rather than simply refusing it.
 
Before the deadline, make a short table for each item: estimated cost, urgency, who controls the work, and whether the lender or appraisal could be affected. Then decide the minimum outcome that still makes the purchase sensible.

My preference would be buyer-controlled repairs funded by the largest credit the lender accepts, but not at the cost of losing valid inspection protection or exposing the deposit. If the seller will only do the work, define it tightly and reserve a price adjustment for anything not completed satisfactorily.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top