You bought a home. Then you got cold feet and exercised your legal right to a cooling-off period. The sale is canceled.
A few weeks later, you start to regret it. The property turns out to still be available, and the seller is willing to do business with you again. A new purchase agreement is drawn up.
But do you then have another three-day legal cooling-off period?
The answer is: usually not… but sometimes it is.
The general rule: no second cooling-off period within 6 months
The law aims to protect private buyers from making hasty decisions. That is why a buyer is normally given a three-day legal cooling-off period.
But lawmakers also wanted to prevent a buyer from endlessly buying and then canceling the purchase of the same home.
Therefore, Article 7:2 of the Dutch Civil Code provides that when:
- the same private buyer and seller;
- within six months;
- enter into another purchase agreement;
The buyer does not acquire a new right to the statutory cooling-off period if he has already exercised that right.
In short: You may use this “escape” for the same residence only once every six months.
An example
Suppose:
- On April 1, you’ll buy a home.
- On April 3, you may cancel the purchase during the statutory cooling-off period.
- On May 15, you decide to buy the house after all.
Because you have already exercised your statutory cooling-off period and all of this is taking place within six months, you do not have a new right to a three-day cooling-off period.
But please note: this applies only if the first cancellation took place during the cooling-off period
This is where things often go wrong in practice.
Many people think that any previous termination causes the cooling-off period to expire.
That’s not true.
The exception applies only if the initial purchase agreement was rescinded by exercising the statutory cooling-off period.
Dissolved due to the funding reservation?
Then it’s a completely different story.
Suppose a buyer does not rescind the initial purchase agreement during the three-day cooling-off period, but later successfully invokes the financing contingency because he is unable to secure a mortgage.
A few weeks later, it turns out that financing is possible after all. The buyer and seller therefore sign a new purchase agreement.
In that case , the buyer is granted another three-day statutory cooling-off period.
Why?
Because the first agreement was not terminated by invoking the statutory cooling-off period, but on an entirely different ground for termination: the financing contingency.
The six-month statutory limitation period therefore does not apply.
Practical Advice
Will a new purchase agreement be entered into following a previous termination?
In that case, it is wise to always draw up a new purchase agreement. This is because an agreement that has been terminated cannot be “revived.”
Be sure to also carefully check why the first agreement was terminated:
- Terminated during the statutory cooling-off period? In that case, in principle, no new statutory cooling-off period applies within six months.
- Was the contract terminated on other grounds, such as the financing contingency? In that case, the new purchase agreement does trigger a new three-day statutory cooling-off period.
Conclusion
So the well-known “6-month rule” does not apply to every second purchase agreement.
Only if a buyer has previously actually exercised the statutory cooling-off period does that right lapse for six months in the event of a new purchase between the same parties.
However, if the original contract was terminated for another reason—for example, due to a successful invocation of the financing contingency—the statutory cooling-off period simply starts over with the new purchase agreement.
So it’s not just a matter of whether the initial sale was rescinded, but more importantly, why it was rescinded. That small legal distinction can have major consequences.