Estate Agents Fees

chickmug

keith969 wrote: »

On valuations - I think they should be chargeable. After all I have to pay the lender for the valuation they carry out on a place I want to buy, so why not pay for a valuation on the place I want to sell? Perhaps if valuations were carried out more professionally by an independent body (i.e. not the EA, where there really is a conflict of interest), there would only be the need for 1 valuation and the whole mess of buyers valuations coming out at less than their offer price (due to overoptimistic EA valuations) would go away?

Why should I subsidise other sellers who turn out to be timewasters?

I like this as it is something that would make a heck of a difference.

Too many EAs especially Nationals are on targets for everything they do, each new instruction, each price reduction, each solicitor referral, each HIPs referral, finance cuts, insurance cuts, -- have I missed anything? I am sure I have!!!!

I would love the industry to be forced to get to a more simplified set up, tighter control to stop all this and just get back to a good basic service and cut the 'greed' temptaions out?

googler

keith969 wrote: »

Sorry googler, but I simply don't agree with this.

On valuations - I think they should be chargeable. After all I have to pay the lender for the valuation they carry out on a place I want to buy, so why not pay for a valuation on the place I want to sell? Perhaps if valuations were carried out more professionally by an independent body (i.e. not the EA, where there really is a conflict of interest), there would only be the need for 1 valuation and the whole mess of buyers valuations coming out at less than their offer price (due to overoptimistic EA valuations) would go away?

Why should I subsidise other sellers who turn out to be timewasters?

The first agent to start charging for valuations where all the agents traditionally don't charge for them will be committing business suicide. Nobody will put their head above the parapet like this. If anyone did, how would you suggest they promote the positive side of charging for valuations as a benefit to the customer?

Don't we have the situation where effectively the valuations are being carried out by independents already? The HIP and the Home Report carry a surveyor's valuation, don't they?

Why is there a conflict of interest in an EA providing a valuation?

You could extend your "why should I subsidise...." question to any other business. Such as;

You buy a car. In terms of the material cost of YOUR car, you were probably overcharged. In terms of what the car maker has to charge to make a profit having paid for all the other parts of the business, that's a different matter. Part of what you paid for the car also pays for a whole raft of things that aren't related to YOUR car. Advertising, promotion, launches, demonstrator cars supplied to dealers and the press, distribution of promotional and maintenance material to dealerships, dealer training, etc etc. If you want to pay just for your car, and your car alone, you can't do it. The car maker has to get the extra overheads from you to keep the rest of the business running. Yes, why should you subsidise the dealer maintenance network, when you get yours serviced by Arkwright & Son, in their state-of-the-art shop underneath the local railway arches......?

Catbells

Doozergirl wrote: »

If you deal with a premium agent then the bills start to get split up .....London Agents do seem to be more expensive than the provincials and less keen to negotiate.

Thanks Doozergirl. Why should this be the case?

keith969

googler wrote: »

The first agent to start charging for valuations where all the agents traditionally don't charge for them will be committing business suicide. Nobody will put their head above the parapet like this. If anyone did, how would you suggest they promote the positive side of charging for valuations as a benefit to the customer?

Not if it was a legal requirement - if the HIP had to include an independent valuation by law then it would happen. Nobody much likes HIPs but that didn't stop them happening. Vendors could see the benefits of knowing that after accepting an offer their buyer would not try and drop the price. Buyers could see the benefits as they would better know what to offer in the first place and not have to pay for a survey and maybe try and renegotiate later.

googler wrote: »

Don't we have the situation where effectively the valuations are being carried out by independents already? The HIP and the Home Report carry a surveyor's valuation, don't they?

No, at least not in the HIPs I have seen.

googler wrote: »

Why is there a conflict of interest in an EA providing a valuation?

Because the EA is acting for the seller. And the lender's surveyor is acting for the lender. There is anecdotal evidence that some EAs overvalue properties because that's what their clients want, and that some lenders surveyors undervalue properties, because that's what their clients want. Maybe conflict of interest is a bad choice of words, but you can see what I am getting at.

googler

I thought in England & Wales the HIPs had a surveyor's valuation, in the same way as the Scottish Home Report does, but evidently I picked it up wrong.

In Scotland, an RICS surveyor carries out a survey prior to the property going on the market, and as part of this, provides his market valuation. Anecdotals suggest that for run-of-the-mill properties, this figure forms a 'ceiling' figure in terms of buyers' offers for the property, and no amount of overvaluing by the EA will get offers over it.

There's anecdotal evidence that many owners have an inflated opinion of what their house is worth, and will automatically pick the agent that quotes a figure nearest to their wish. Is this the agent's fault, or the owner's?

Yes, it's not a conflict of interest, more a case of a conflict in direction.

bryanb

keith969 wrote: »

Why should I subsidise other sellers who turn out to be timewasters?

Presumably on a similar basis to your car (or other) insurance where those who don't claim subsidise those who do. Any other way would put the provider out of business.

googler

Nice extension to the car analogy....

googler

Catbells wrote: »

Thanks Doozergirl. Why should this be the case?

Higher running costs in the capital for EAs leads to higher fees for their clients, maybe?

cashndash

interestingly I asked the Housenetwork guy how they could do it so cheaply, he said, because you have paid us to do the work we have done (ie photos, floor plan etc).

the next time we pay them is on completion, when they have done the rest of the job. If we change our mind or don't sell for ages, they are not trying to recoup any costs.

googler

If you don't sell for ages, what do they do to enable you to sell quicker?