They were trying to buy a 3,700 square foot custom home, their second choice location behind a neighborhood they actually preferred, though they still genuinely liked this particular house. The listing had been sitting on the market for 155 days, originally priced at $1.1 million before eventually dropping to $875,000, a $225,000 cut over five months that told its own story about how the property had been performing.
What made the situation unusual was that the listing agent was also the owner himself, a veteran broker currently living in the house while renovating his next place. After several rounds of counteroffers, they’d submitted what they’d explicitly labeled their highest and final offer, $850,000 with a $16,500 credit and an August 28 closing date.
💸 Take Back Control of Your Finances in 2025 💸
Get Instant Access to our free mini course
5 DAYS TO A BETTER BUDGET
What the Seller Countered With Instead
Rather than accepting or simply rejecting that offer outright, the seller came back the next day with terms that stripped out nearly every concession they’d asked for. He countered at $860,000 with zero credits, a cut to their own agent’s commission, and an “information only” inspection, framed around his claim that the house was flawless and didn’t need the usual protections built into a standard inspection contingency. He also wanted to keep the high end fridge and dryer, appliances worth roughly $6,000 combined, items that would typically be expected to convey with a home at this price point unless specifically excluded upfront.
On top of all of that, he suddenly claimed he wasn’t in any particular rush to sell, mentioning a second offer that would supposedly net him more money, despite still choosing to counter their offer rather than simply walking away toward that better deal if it genuinely existed.
Why the Sudden Change in Tone Looks Like a Bluff
The combination of claims, no urgency to sell, a competing higher offer, paired with his continued engagement in active counter negotiation rather than simply ending the conversation, doesn’t add up cleanly. If a genuinely better offer were actually on the table, there wouldn’t be much reason to keep negotiating with a buyer whose offer was reportedly less favorable, since accepting the other offer would resolve the situation faster and more profitably than continuing back and forth over terms.
That inconsistency supported their suspicion that the sudden shift in tone reflected wounded pride after watching the price drop by over 20% across five months, more than it reflected an actual change in his underlying motivation to sell. A seller genuinely uninterested in moving forward typically stops negotiating rather than escalating demands while still actively countering.
Why Giving Up the Inspection Contingency Is the Biggest Red Flag
Of everything being asked, the “information only” inspection carried the most real risk. A standard inspection with the right to terminate exists specifically to protect buyers from discovering serious, costly problems after closing, problems that even an owner living in the home might not be fully aware of or might be inclined to downplay given his own financial stake in getting the sale finalized without complications.
Claiming the house is flawless doesn’t actually substitute for a genuine inspection contingency, since that claim comes from someone financially motivated to make the sale happen smoothly, not from an independent, disinterested evaluation of the property’s actual condition. On a $3,700 square foot custom home, the potential cost of undiscovered issues without a real inspection safety net represents a significant financial exposure, especially layered on top of already being asked to give up their credits and lose out on appliances they’d presumably factored into their overall offer.
Weighing the Location Against the Terms Being Demanded
Since this wasn’t even their top choice location to begin with, the leverage to walk away or hold firm carried real weight rather than being purely a negotiating tactic. Being willing to lose the deal entirely, because a comparable alternative in their preferred area still existed as an option, meant they weren’t in a position where they had to accept increasingly unfavorable terms just to secure this specific property.
That context matters considerably for how firmly to hold the line here. Accepting a higher price, zero credits, lost appliances, and no meaningful inspection protection would represent a substantially worse deal than their original highest and final offer, for a house that wasn’t even their preferred location in the first place.
Why Holding the Original Offer Makes More Sense Than a New Counter
Given the strength of their position, not needing this specific house, combined with the seller’s inconsistent signals suggesting bruised ego more than genuine leverage, holding firm on their original highest and final offer, rather than immediately proposing a new middle ground at $850,000 with a reduced $10,000 credit, would likely be the stronger move. Countering again so quickly after already labeling an offer as final risks signaling that “final” wasn’t actually final, potentially inviting further attempts to chip away at terms in future rounds.
Letting the silence do some work, allowing the seller to sit with a property that’s already dropped over 20% in five months, weighed against a real offer already on the table, puts the pressure back on him to decide whether continuing to hold out for better terms is actually worth risking losing a serious, ready buyer over appliances and inspection terms that most buyers would consider standard rather than unreasonable requests in the first place.
Featured on Cents + Purpose: