Can an Estate Agent do this regarding a contract?

stilltrying2

googler wrote: »

So, after the phone call,

(a) You were expecting the agent to send you a contract, but, although you'd "decided to use the first agent once more, (verbally by telephone)" you didn't think you'd actually instructed them to go ahead at this point.

NO, whenever I have instructed an EA before, they always make sure that a contract is signed between them and us. I simply do not understand why this time they chose not to allow us that pleasure. Thats all.

googler wrote: »

(b) The agent, on the other hand, WAS under the impression you'd definitely asked them to market the property (by implication under the same terms as before, since there'd apparently been no discussion at this time of a new contract or any revision of their terms of business).

NO, we had asked them to market the property for us, BUT, as I keep stressing and as is normal in every case that I know of or have been involved in, a contract is sent for approval to be signed. Again, I simply do not understand why this time they chose not to allow us that pleasure. Thats all.

googler wrote: »

If I were the agent, I wouldn't have done anything without a new contract, but as I see it, the problem all stems from the two of you being poles apart as above in the initial phone call, and the apparent difference in expectation you both had at the conclusion of it. ).

NO, what DID happen is that an EA has taken it upon themselves NOT to offer us any contract in writing for some reason (there is not an old contract, it finished, ended and was cancelled) and simply chosen to re invent without our agreement.

SavingSteve

stilltrying2

Doozergirl wrote: »

I don't understand what all the stressing is for. You just ask for a new contract. If you didn't tell them you wanted different terms then you can't blame them for simply going on the same terms as before.

As someone has already said, they aren't legal bods either, they are EAs. They've not written out a new contract simply because they haven't felt that they needed to. That would be ignorance on their part, not a calculated decision to annoy you.

Instead of wording your disapproval all you need to do is negotiate the deal that you failed to do when you reinstated them. You are as much responsible for the perceived mess as they are - in fact, I'd say you're entirely responsible for winding yourself up. why wait for the contract to hit the mat if you knew what the wording would be and didn't like it? They're not psychic. You have to communicate with people for them to know what you want - do that instead of worrying about it in the middle of the night and asking people on the internet whether the EA has broken the law - do want a relationship with these people or a fight?

Sorry to be frank but there is barely an issue here at all; just deal with it like the business transaction that it is and get new terms or walk away - like you should have done during the initial phonecall before the board even went up again.

This is what we do not get, why does everyone here believe that an EA can install a contract of their choosing without full and prior agreement, plus signatures??? It is bizarre in our opinion that no one seems to think it is a totally impossible thing to do. Thats all, no fight, no arguement, its more about the ignorance (as you say) and lunacy that an EA could possibly impose any kind of legal contract without signatures and agreement being in place, as is the norm.

As said, we have contacted the EA, we expect a response tomorrow and will then see what transpires from there.

Doozergirl

I am starting to despair for your EA.

Why would someone not assume that you were happy on the original terms - which stuck with for nearly four months previously? It's not wrong, not malicious - almost common sense in fact. This is not a brand new relationship - there is an element of goodwill involved here. If I were making that call to the agent, the first words out of my mouth would be 'I'm sorry, I would like to use your services again but I was unhappy with the terms of the agreement which I should have renegotiated at the time but would like to do now'

Honestly, I can't believe that neither you, nor I :wall: have anything better to do than think about this.

Get the terms you want or walk away. That is it. Honestly, your life must be either fantastic or permanently full of despair if this is what you concern yourself with. If you are going to lay blame at their feet then you should not be using them.

Doozergirl

stilltrying2 wrote: »

This is what we do not get, why does everyone here believe that an EA can install a contract of their choosing without full and prior agreement, plus signatures???

Because they have had full and prior agreement, plus signatures before. Why do you believe that the EA is suffering from lunacy by not asking for you to sign for a second time?

Please don't answer. It's a rhetorical question.

david29dpo

If you wish to take the agent to the highest court in the land, then please do so. No one on here can possibly answer your question to your satisfaction, or to the letter of the complicated law on contracts. I am not being rude but simply tell the agent what your require or go elsewhere and forget it.

stilltrying2

As expected, the EA has rung back and told us that we are tied to their reinvented contract.

They have NOT offered us any contract, we were NOT a customer of theirs as all contact and contract with them had been terminated over 8 months ago and we, as is normal, expected a new contract to be assigned and discussed.

They even said that sole selling rights is the norm with EA, which we know from other dealings is NOT the case.

I verbally insisted to them that we do not accept what THEY have done and demanded they remove it from their books with immediate effect (it will also go in writing). Contact will also be made to the EA statutory bodies regarding the matter, at this time no names will be mentioned as this is not a vendetta, simply in our opinion a one off case of bad practice.

stilltrying2

david29dpo wrote: »

If you wish to take the agent to the highest court in the land, then please do so. No one on here can possibly answer your question to your satisfaction, or to the letter of the complicated law on contracts. I am not being rude but simply tell the agent what your require or go elsewhere and forget it.

As you will see from my post above, they were not prpared to take our wishes into account at all, they insisted that we were indeed commited to their agency.

googler

Are the EAs members of the OEA or NAEA? If not, the OEA or NAEA are unlikely to be be interested in any protests to them....

Also, the OEA code of practice specifies that you MUST go through the EAs complaints procedure (if they have one) BEFORE the OEA will take any interest in your case.

stilltrying2

googler wrote: »

Are the EAs members of the OEA or NAEA? If not, the OEA or NAEA are unlikely to be be interested in any protests to them....

Also, the OEA code of practice specifies that you MUST go through the EAs complaints procedure (if they have one) BEFORE the OEA will take any interest in your case.

Yes, they are members of the NAEA and have contacted them regarding the matter, to which they simply said, "it didnt sound right that the EA should do this" and advised us to contact the Ombudsmen. We did and they were not willing to talk about anything that was a legal matter unless it was already a complaint in process and advised us to call the Citizans Advice. Duly the CA have been contacted and an appointment made to discuss this issue.
As said, before, this is not a vendetta against the EA, they simply had to send us a contract that would be legally current, sole agency and with the "Sole Sellers Rights" removed but refused.
Presently, we will not point the finger, we are simply trying to find out our rights in such circumstances for when the EA replies to our letter of today regarding removal from their agencies books. After todays telephone conversation with them, we are sure they will insist that the contract they have implimented without due consultation nor approval will be valid.

Time will tell as always.