Solicitors for HoTs and Reimbursement clause?

January 04, 2025
by a searcher from KEDGE Business School in London, UK
Hi there,
I'm at HoT stage with a seller.
They have now gotten their solicitor (non-M&A specialised) involved who is taking apart quite a lot of it.
I'm trying to remind everyone that this is just the HoT and most of it isn't legally binding, but am expecting that the solicitor will push back.
One major point is that he wants to remove the costs section, where we reciprocally agree to pay for the incurred DD costs if we retrieve from the deal during DD.
Any thoughts on this?
Have you involved a solicitor before being under exclusivity (ie to craft the HoTs)?
How have you dealt with the Cost reimbursement clause?
Thanks in advance.
F
from University of Oxford in London, UK
The reciprocal cost reimbursement clause is unusual - the standard (at least in the deals that I have come across) is for each party to bear their own costs. Having said that, when I was working for a mid-market PE fund I have agreed to HoTs where we agreed to reimburse the seller's costs (subject to an daily cap) in exchange for exclusivity, but this was driven by strategic considerations (i.e. we were really keen on the deal and wanted the seller to stop talking to other potential buyers).
Happy to talk further.
from University of Western Australia in London, UK
The reimbursement clause is relatively unusual. However, changing it now (after it was agreed) is reopening negotiations on this point. You might want to reassess how much renegotiating you have patience for. It depends on the commercial terms and how much you want to do the deal.