Reply With QuoteFor a newish house, in a burgeoning market - Just go for Purple Bricks?
Al
My new wife wants to sell her house.
It's in a new town development that's well established near Cambridge.
There are 3 agents within the town.
All are playing hardball with the fees. Quoting 1.5% and more. The house ought to fetch just over £260k; it's 20 months old and only got lived in by my wife on her own for about 12 months from new. It's as new and a very easy sell.
I asked my wife to tell the agents she would be happy to pay a flat 1% like all the Cambridge agents charge (many are 0.9% or 0.8% actually)
Their response......."We would only do 1% of an agreed asking price, with anything over that price being charged at a 10% fee."
That sounds like some seriously dodgy practice to me. Is it normal?
I can see that it might make the agent work far harder to sell it for more if they're getting a 10% booty out of it, so I'm wondering if we should do it!??
On the other hand, it's making me feel more and more like going with an online agent that has a fixed fee of £750!
Don't know what to do.....
Last edited by mr noble; 27th September 2017 at 12:41.
For a newish house, in a burgeoning market - Just go for Purple Bricks?
Al
I wonder if those three agents are colluding?
A flat 1% fee is fairly usual and I wouldn't deal with any agent that wants unusual terms.
Use Purple Bricks, I sold my house on there within 2 weeks and it cost me £800 instead of the £12,000 I would have paid to a local agent ( and that was 1% + VAT)
Sounds to me like your local agents are in collusion as well with a bit of price fixing going on.
Last edited by Vanguard; 27th September 2017 at 11:58.
If it's near Cambridge and the Cambridge agents are all cheaper can't you use one of the Cambridge agents?
Why do you think that is dodgy? They've told you the deal, you tell them what you think of it, i.e. not very much but probably using less than three words. Some people probably buy the crap they spout, but it's always seemed like a parasitic industry to me.
If the house is worth £250,000 and the fee is 1% on the first £250k and 10% on anything over, I'd be happy to accept that as long as the 10% included the VAT.
You can be confident that the estate agent will be pushing to get you the very best price possible; if he managed to get it up to £260k then even though you're paying an extra grand in fees, you're still £9k better off than you expected! It strikes me as a win win situation as long as the estate agent doesn't undervalue the property in the first place, although that should be easy to check.
Dodgy in as much as, charging 10% of what they sell for over a (low) agreed value, just seems like a dodgy way to offer their services.Originally Posted by catch21
An agent should try to sell a house for the max price possible. That's what the 1% fee is paying for! You don't expect to then have to pay extra if you want them to actually do some work......
The agent has undervalued the property in the first place. Saying he sold one last week at £250k in a better spot and with a garage etc......
The exact same houses are currently selling brand new from Taylor Wimpey for £289,995, so why they think a 20 month old one in perfect condition with arguably the best view out back of all of them, is worth £40k to £50k less......beats me!
If I was a buyer, I'd happily pay £270k and save 20 grand over buying the exact same new one. Is it worth 20k to be able to choose your own floor tiles?
I am thinking Purple Bricks is probably the best choice. We're in no rush to sell as there's an early repayment charge on the mortgage until January anyway!
It's in their interest to undervalue it then sell it at the market price. I wouldn't want to incentivise that behaviour.
I've had an agent suggest this to me and their initial valuation was lower than the other two I asked. That came as no surprise.
Brand new houses nearly always cost more. The builders deliberately price this way with prices also rising as the development matures.
Just because a new house costs more doesn't mean yours is worth that too, else why wouldn't someone just go and buy a new one fitted to their own spec?
Can't believe I just defended an estate agent - but there it is. Go to Purple Bricks etc
If It's an easy sale then Purple Bricks could be worth a try but personally as a buyer generally I'd be put off buying a house that is being sold through an online only website / "agent".
If things start to go pear shaped in the chain having a good agent as an intermediary can mean the difference between the sale completing or not. We've recently sold our house with a ridiculously tight turn around time and the sale would never have completed without the agents hard work in chasing the chain to get everything done on time.
Which is why my last line was "as long as the estate agent doesn't under value it which is easy enough to check".
The OP states that it's an "agreed valuation" i.e. agreed by both parties; he doesn't have to agree to a lower valuation of the property and clearly has a good idea of what it's actually worth.
Incentivising the estate agent to push for a higher price is better than the estate agent trying to get you to accept a lower price for a quick turnaround?
I said.........my house would be £20,000 cheaper than the current new price. Surely a decent enough saving over new!?
Whilst I agree that agents are generally not good (and some are downright corrupt) I'd advise some caution with Purple Bricks.
I bought a property recently via Purple Bricks, and the vendor told me she was very unhappy with their service.
I wasn't in a chain, and was ready to purchase so they applied a fair amount of pressure on her to accept my (low) offer just to get it completed and finished up.
This included turning down viewings after I made my offer, and arriving very late to others.
As a buyer, I'll certainly look for their listings again as I feel the way they operate gives the advantage to the buyer rather than the vendor.
There's an estate agent local to us who started the winning practice of making the buyer pay the fees. I have no idea how that has worked for them but they started it during an insane period a few years ago when our postcode suddenly became the dog's proverbials and house prices went mental.
We've had agents round for valuations on our home over the past two weeks and all of them charge 1% + VAT.
I think my general concern is that if they can get the higher price, they should do it for the agreed percentage, not some nefarious incremental amount.
Not all sellers are like you and me Dave i.e. reasonably au fait with financial processes and what constitutes sharp practice. My guess is that some sellers are effectively being manipulated into paying more commission for what is a market price sale.
When we sold my dads place I worked out how much extra commission they earn for every extra thousand £ the hous sells for
£250k = £2,500 com
If they sell &255k I get an extra £5k but all they get is £50 so for them it’s better to sell fast for less.
Just go to th with a plan and bonus scheme, see who bites.
That's the theory and it's a good one. Except in all my property transactions it's been me that did all the legwork and the agents just sat there like the puddings most of them are. You'd think the fact they don't get their money until completion would motivate them to help but it doesn't seem too.
There must be some good ones out there but they are vastly outnumbered by the dodgy and the inept. It's a profession that is long overdue an adjustment in its numbers.
A group of agents in one village were recently reprimanded for forming a cartel and agreeing fixed fee among themselves so I don’t doubt it goes on elsewhere
Is there anything stopping you advertising the house yourself and then employing a lawyer and independent surveyors etc. to do the necessary, thereby bypassing the need for an estate agent?
Forgive my ignorance, I have never bought a house in the UK. From what I know and have heard, estate agents really do seem to parasites. Is it just by convention that everyone uses them?
Here in Mexico estate agents charge between 3% and 5% which I simply refuse to pay. Last house we sold ourselves and all we needed was a lawyer to sort out contracts and deeds.
There is a new-buyer's premium (purchasing a house off plan, with choices of interiors, layouts etc) which you will invariably lose - if you sell within a few years.
You may question that, but it is the way the market works - when there is new building in the same area.
Not necessarily in certain towns, a property that sold for £340k new in my area of Northampton (Dec 13) sold for £365k in Jan of this year.
Just to add, I used an agent to sell my house last year which charged 0.75% plus VAT, cleverly known as "Less Than 1%"
But house prices increased nearly 16% between Dec 13 and Jan 17, so it should have sold this year for nearly £395, so it's lost £30k by not being new any more
In a perfect world yes I agree. But can't imagine every house price gained 16% in that same period, regardless of whether it was new or 50 years old.
Fair point.
Who sets the sale price? :)
In Northampton prices have generally risen by 20%+ in the last 3-4 years. I've spent a lot of time on Right Move recently and it seems to be across the board.
I think the title of the thread sums it all up nicely.
Honestly in most circumstances I can't see how an agent can help. My in-laws accepted an offer the other week on their house, offered on another house and all was fine for a week until their buyer had to pull out due to him losing his buyer. The best agent in the world couldn't force a sale through.
In cases where people are not confident in presenting their home, taking good photos, or arranging viewings, an agent is definitely the way to go, but for many they're not required and it certainly wouldn't put me off buying the right house.
Firstly I think It's better not to show people round your own house and instead go out and let someone else do it. Potential buyers feel more comfortable when the vendor isn't home and are more likely to ask questions about anything that concerns them.
But the main benefit is when a good agent has back room staff who work on keeping the chain together and working as an intermediatory between buyer and seller. If issues start to arise It can be a really bad idea for seller and buyer to have direct contact as things get fractious very quickly.
Recently we missed out on a house partly because the top of chain wasn't using an agent and the direct relationship between buyer and seller broke down very quickly when a couple of issues came up.
In the end we found another house but it only went through because the agent kept in contact with the chain and realised that our buyers mortgage offer would run out in 3 weeks (they'd forgotten) and as they were self employed they wouldn't get another one. With the agents help we managed to rush through the sale / purchase in 3 weeks.
Yes some things you can do yourself but you get what you pay for and if things start going wrong it gets very stressful and my impression is that using an online "agent" can cause a lot o f issues.
Yep I agree with this. A good estate agent is totally worth their fee - you just need to make sure that's what you have - a good estate agent
Estate agents have a bad reputation but good ones are worth paying for. You need to keep them incentivised and at the value you are talking about there’s not much in it for them and you are more likely to get the juniors in the office dealing with it if you don’t go the purple bricks route. Everyone wants top dollar when they sell so by increasing the % over a certain threshold ensures both parties are happy, the agents are incentivised and they are more likely to push the property to prospective buyers. This does assume the house has been prepared for sale - cleaned and made presentable. The amount of people who don’t get that spending a few hundred to touch up some paint, put fresh flowers out and clean the place can actually result in not being knocked for thousands is unbelievable.
Back to the OP -
There is no requirement to aggressively compete with other Agents - why drive down the costs and still get the same share of the trade? Neither is it unethical.
Their tender might appear shady, but it is up to you to decide if it is a good deal or not - nothing wrong with that??
Remember - you don't need to use a very local agent, unless you perceive that you are going to have to draw heavily on their time for showings etc.
If it's a property that will sell itself I'd go with an online agent. When we sold I had the Purple Bricks guy round, as nice as he was, it wasn't suitable for us as it would take some marketing.
The title of this thread could mean it'll run for a long time.
Maybe not quite so long as a Rolex thread though.
Whichever agent gives you stickers and then lets you keep them is the way to go.
Seriously,I've not heard good things of Purple Bricks.
Agents can and do work only for themselves and,as I think has been mentioned already,can push a sale to the possible detriment or inconvenience of the seller who,after all,will be paying their bill so that the agent can pocket the fee.
Personal recommendation at the local level may be a better way forward than an internet forum.
Good luck.
What about Sarah Beeny's agency?
Tepilo.
https://www.tepilo.com/?matchtype=e&...FWK17QodspkH9w
Has the added advantage that she is SMOKIN' HOT!!!!!
I started a thread a while ago about online agents, YOPA were recommended on there. I've seen a few local for sale with them.
We even moved in April and a house near our old house was on with purple bricks before we moved, I drove past this weekend and it's only just changed to SOLD. i think online ones you pay a flat fee are better suited to high demand areas, which that area is not.
I've only ever seen one Tepilo for sale sign.
We went bricks and mortar agent and it was sold to the first person they sent round.
Need to make sure that you get listed on Rightmove.
Most house searching is done on the internet:
Area
Schools
Commuting distance
Type of house
Number of bedrooms
Garage
Garden.
Then - google earth, google street view, and finally - a physical visit to the area.
Rightmove is the first stop for most people
I wish we could get 1.5% estate agent fees on a property we'd like to sell in France. 4-10% seems to be the norm
Why allow these parasites to feed off you ?
It does not sound like the house is going to be difficult or tricky to sell.
It sounds like there is an anti-competitive cartel in operation which is illegal anyway.
I can't see how how anything here is 'dodgy' as they've told you exactly what the terms are - you may not like them but you know what the deal is. I do think though that agents shouldn't be extra incentivised to get the best deal, it should be their job anyway.
Personally I wouldn't touch Purple Bricks (they were on Watchdog not long back), for every story of 'we only paid X to sell with them' there seems to be loads more about how completely useless they are. I guess though it comes down to you get what you pay for and for some people price is everything.
I'd go back to the best agent and say 'we'll put it on with you for 1%, take it or leave it, if not we'll go on with someone else'. Different part of the country admittedly, but down here agents would rather have the property on their books and the chance of earning 2.5k than not.
No it isn't.
What you are suggesting is that if one agency is charging 1.0% - then one of the others MUST undercut it to be 'competitive'. Then next week, to get the business - Agency No 1 reduces to 0.8%?
Sooner or later they have to level off at a non-profit-making level??? That is plain nuts.
That would indeed be correct if the 2.5% was a reasonably representative percentage. But the fact that all 3 local estate agent charge the same, and 2.5 times more than a majority the others throughout the country including a few miles away from those 3 suggests something untoward.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Sorry - where is the 2.5% coming from? I've not seen that in the thread.
If others which are more "competitive" are only a few miles away - I would say there is competition. How 'local' must the 'competition' be?
Perhaps business rates or the cost of the service supplied is different in your scenario?
Sorry, 1.5%. The point remains.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Oooh! "the point remains'.
So - go wild Engage the one "a few miles away" - They'll have satnav and will still find the house.........
If you don't see that as competitive - then I don't know what you expect.
3 estate agents in a town. All 3 charge 50% more than everyone else. Collusion it may not be but it would deserve a local enquiry. Maybe not a police one, cartel is a big word and it may be difficult in any case to prove any wrongdoing. But the local newspaper could have a look, unless of course they buy enough advertising. But as you say competition could have a field day. And there is always social media...
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Where I live the agents are all around 1%, yet a town 20 miles away they all charge 1.5% so would that deserve a local enquiry too? No it wouldn't, it's what they can and do charge, different market. Not saying it's right or wrong but it's reality.
Estate agents can’t win, can they? Blamed by everyone for overvaluing and now they’re undervaluing this place. You guys having your place valued by Schrodinger’s estates?
There is a stereotype estate agents give to certain vendors who love their house very much. It’s the best of the street, the view is better than the neighbours so is worth the extra etc etc. “I would have £X for my house. I think it’s worth that much”.
I can’t speak to the collusion aspect as that’s quite the allegation but as for the 10% it isn’t dodgy. You’re negotiating and they’ve made an a counter offer to you in relation to fees. You aren’t obliged to accept it and can counter their counter, but remember they do negotiate 5-6 days per week for a living so if they are worth their weight will be quite good at it.
As an aside, people mostly tend to lose money on new builds when selling within a short period of time after buying so may be worth thinking about what you would be happy to accept instead of what you think it’s worth and their fees. A good agent will almost always get you more than an online agent.
Posting Permissions
