Buying a new home while selling your existing one often sounds neat on paper. One property out, another in, no renting in between. In NSW, this usually takes the form of a “simultaneous settlement”, where the sale and purchase are scheduled to complete on the same day.
What tends to be underestimated is how tightly these transactions are connected in practice, even though they remain legally separate. Timing, access to the property, and access to sale proceeds can all become critical pressure points.
This article explains how buying and selling at the same time usually works in NSW, with particular focus on the use of sale proceeds and the role bridging finance can play. It is not financial advice. Decisions about borrowing, loan products, or affordability should be discussed with a licensed financial adviser or lender.
What is a simultaneous settlement?
A simultaneous settlement occurs when:
you sell your existing property, and
you purchase a new property,
with both settlements scheduled for the same day.
In many cases, the funds received from the sale are intended to be used to complete the purchase.
Legally, however, these are still two separate contracts with different parties and obligations. The law does not automatically treat them as one transaction, even if your intention is that one funds the other.
Using sale proceeds to fund the purchase
For many sellers, the purchase of their next home depends on the sale proceeds from their existing property.
In practical terms, this usually means:
the sale settlement must complete first, or
both settlements must be carefully timed so funds are available when needed.
If the sale funds are not available on the day the purchase is due to settle, the buyer (you) may technically be in default under the purchase contract, even if the delay is short and outside your control.
This is one of the key legal risks in back-to-back transactions.
What happens if the sale does not settle on time?
If your sale is delayed, but your purchase is still due to settle, the consequences can be serious.
Depending on the contract terms, this may result in:
Importantly, the fact that you were relying on sale proceeds does not excuse non-completion unless the contract specifically provides for it.
Bridging finance – where it fits in conceptually
Some buyers explore bridging finance to manage the gap between selling and buying.
At a high level, bridging finance is designed to provide short-term funding so that a purchase can complete before sale proceeds are received.
From a legal perspective, the key point is not how bridging finance works financially, but that:
it introduces additional loan documentation and costs
it often comes with strict timeframes
it may affect settlement coordination
Whether bridging finance is appropriate, available, or affordable is not something a lawyer can advise on. That assessment must be made with a licensed financial adviser or lender.
Selling first vs buying first – legal risk trade-offs
People often ask whether it is safer to sell first or buy first.
Legally, each approach carries different risks:
There is no universally “safe” option. The right approach depends on risk tolerance, timing, and the advice you receive on your individual circumstances.
Possession and the problem of gaps
One of the most common practical issues arises when settlements do not align perfectly.
Questions such as:
staying in the sold property after settlement, or
moving into the purchased property before settlement,
require specific legal agreements. Informal arrangements are risky and can create insurance and liability issues.
If possession arrangements are needed, they should be documented properly.
Settlement chains and compounding risk
Simultaneous settlements often form part of a chain:
your buyer may also be relying on a sale
your seller may be buying elsewhere
multiple lenders may be involved
The longer the chain, the greater the risk that a delay elsewhere affects your transaction, even if you have done everything required on your end.
Planning and communication matter
From a legal perspective, buying and selling at the same time works best when:
settlement dates are realistic
dependencies are identified early
agents, lenders, and lawyers communicate clearly
contingency plans exist if timing slips
Most settlement problems are not caused by unusual events, but by ordinary delays combined with tight timelines.
The role of professional advice
Simultaneous settlements sit at the intersection of legal process and financial structure.
Lawyers assist with:
They do not advise on:
Those issues should be discussed with a licensed financial adviser, lender, or mortgage broker before contracts are exchanged.
Final thoughts
Buying and selling a home at the same time is common in NSW, but it compresses risk into a very small window.
When sale proceeds are needed to fund a purchase, or when bridging finance is involved, timing becomes critical. Understanding how these pieces interact before committing to contracts gives you more options and fewer surprises.
Early advice tends to expand choices. Late advice usually manages consequences.
A specialist property lawyer can help
If you’re thinking of simultaneously buying and selling property, our specialist property solicitors can give you guidance on whether it’s the right choice, and help you to understand your legal risks. To speak to a conveyancing lawyer about buying and selling a property at the same time, give us a call or submit an enquiry now.
