Three people want to buy your house. One names the highest amount, one wants to move in very early and one fits well with your moving-out schedule. To make a choice you need more than a descending price list. Decisive is which offers actually concern the same thing, which conditions are still open and what additional tasks and expenses will arise for you.
This comparison method is for a private sale in Germany. It leads to a reasoned selection for the next clarified sales step. It does not evaluate any single person, does not assign a credit rating and does not calculate a legal acceptance period. A formal bidding procedure is a different task.
First clarify the existing state of declarations
Keep the complete purchase proposals and your previous replies with dates. If you have already promised something or a declaration is legally unclear, that state belongs in the appropriate advice before further selection. a higher amount does not remove possible obligations from another process by a new table row.
For the obligation to transfer or acquire real estate ownership § 311b Absatz 1 BGB requires notarisation. [BGB-311b] The comparison overview does not replace this step. It also does not follow from this that every message before the notary appointment is legally without consequence. The exact wording and any side agreements must be professionally assessed.
Record the same sales basis for all proposals
Note which property, ancillary areas and agreed fittings are being compared. If one person expects additional furniture, another a prior clearance and a third still expects repairs, different packages will initially stand side by side. Have the deviations explained. Do not use self-invented market values for this.
Supplement with the purchase price expectation, desired handover date, stated prerequisites and the next required step. For every decisive indication the actual source and its status belong. An oral hope for a date and a concretely coordinated plan receive different labels.
Recognise untenable prerequisites before making a calculation
Determine your factual minimum requirements. Can you actually move out at the desired time? Does a follow-on apartment first have to be available? Which property question would have to be answered before a further decision? A handover that is impossible for you will not be made appropriate by many plus points for the purchase price.
The financing status is a separate point to check. The content of a bank statement submitted is dealt with in the separate article on financing confirmation. Only take from that the status that has actually been clarified into the comparison. A high price expectation with unclear financing is not transformed into an allegedly secure amount by a freely chosen percentage deduction.
Fictitious comparison: The additional price does not fully cover the early move-out
A seller compares three purchase offers for the same scope. For A and B the financing statuses communicated are, in the example, professionally classified for the intended next preparatory step; that does not constitute a payment guarantee. In the completely invented case her own preparation produces the following status:
- Named purchase price – Offer A: 507.000 Euro; Offer B: 499.000 Euro; Offer C: 515.000 Euro
- Desired handover – Offer A: in four weeks; Offer B: in twelve weeks; Offer C: after sale of their own house
- Own additional transitional costs – Offer A: 11.300 Euro; Offer B: 2.500 Euro; Offer C: not yet determinable
- Essential open question – Offer A: final coordination of an early move-out; Offer B: final coordination of the planned process; Offer C: own sale and therefore payment/handover date unclear
For A the seller assumes in the example 4.800 Euro for interim accommodation, 1.500 Euro for storage and 5.000 Euro for two removals. For B she calculates 1.500 Euro for one removal and 1.000 Euro additionally in continuing own living costs because of the later move-out, together 2.500 Euro. The costs common to all variants for the first four weeks remain outside this differential comparison. These are exclusively invented calculation values; neither price recommendations nor market values. In a real comparison complete suitable offers and your own requirements are used.
The calculation for this limited selection is as follows: A yields 495.700 Euro after subtracting the stated transfer costs, B yields 496.500 Euro. A’s purchase price, which is 8.000 Euro higher, is offset by 8.800 Euro of additional transfer costs. In this calculation B is therefore 800 Euro ahead.
With all other assumptions unchanged, A would have to reach 507.800 Euro to produce the same comparative amount as B. This is a computational threshold for this case, not an appropriate sale price. Other differences or new costs can change the result.
Do not present a comparative amount as available net proceeds
The table only deducts the transfer costs that are incurred differently. Loan repayment, sales costs, taxes and other common or differing items are therefore not yet fully taken into account. For that reason the amount is not already available as a moving budget.
Your own burden also remains visible: perhaps temporary accommodation is personally not viable despite financial compensation. In that case this reason is expressly recorded. It is not presented as an allegedly objective monetary value.
Proposal C remains a conditional scenario at this stage. The seller specifically asks about the open personal sale and the consequent next status derived from it. She does not assume an invented risk of failure nor treat the condition as already fulfilled. Until the answer is received, C cannot claim the same decision certainty as a more fully clarified proposal.
Conclude the selection with a limited next action
In the example the seller wishes to pursue B for further contract preparation: the handover schedule fits better, and the limited cost comparison also speaks in its favour. At the same time she records which prerequisites still need to be checked before committing. The result therefore reads neither “B definitely pays” nor “all others are unreliable”.
Document the actually decisive factual reasons, the compared status and the next responsible clarification. Our organisational recommendation: no private character dossiers and no unnecessary disclosure of complete competing proposals. Data protection and permissible selection criteria must be examined separately on the basis of the actual case.
A later change of price, scope or date triggers a new comparison status. You do not thereby have to retell every conversation. However, you should recognise which assumption supported your selection and whether it still applies.