Should an Estate Agent market a house they know is not worth the asking price?

timmyt

Estate_Agent wrote: »

We've all seen houses on the market where we think 'surely it's not worth that'. In my few short weeks as an EA I have noticed that more often than not it is the vendor insisting we put it on 'as that's what it's worth'. I'm not suggesting either that there aren't EA's who don't give a higher valuation in order to secure an instruction.

But should we do it? I have two almost identical properties a street apart from each other. One is on for £20 000 more. Guess which one we have viewings and offers on? But the vendor of the higher priced property insists it is worth the money.

The problem is, buyers see the higher priced property in the press or property portals and call to enquire about it. We then have an extra name on our database who invariably goes to look at the cheaper property and prefers it. But we can also talk to the buyer about all the other properties we have that may fit them. So it is benefitting our other vendors, but not the initial vendor.

Thoughts?

happens all the time, either greedy agents, or agents whose clients say they want it at a higher rate, and the agent either agrees or says we'll do it for a set period.

over valuing for the instruction is a tactic of some nationals...ok some locals too...but i hear it ny nationals more, and then they fail to get the instruction and reduce and end up less than the local.

<sebb>

timmyt wrote: »

happens all the time, either greedy agents, or agents whose clients say they want it at a higher rate, and the agent either agrees or says we'll do it for a set period.

over valuing for the instruction is a tactic of some nationals...ok some locals too...but i hear it ny nationals more, and then they fail to get the instruction and reduce and end up less than the local.

Did you even read the OP?? The Estate Agent is asking what to do when the client wont listen to the EA and wants a higher value than the EA recommends. This is nothing to do with national vs local estate agents!!

timmyt

i can pass comment, good grief censor boy

<sebb>

timmyt wrote: »

i can pass comment, good grief censor boy

*sigh*

Yes, you can. But it would help if your posts were relevant. Yours wasn't. The post was about what to do if the vendor wouldnt listen to the EA and thought there house was worth more. It was nothing to do with EAs overvaluing properties for their own personal gain. And was certaintly not an excuse for you to vent your over generalised view of national vs local companies.

Oh and I'm a girl btw

mbga9pgf

Estate_Agent wrote: »

Would it give us a bad reputation if we refuse to take the property on at the vendors price?

It might get you a reputation with time wasting sellers. If your conversion rate is sky-high though, surely that would be a good marketing point for potential customers?

Sellers arent stupid. They know they need to price realistically to sell.

Other route would be to suggest to potential buyers they will be in the market for low offers. i would even get a couple of friends you know to go in, view and put a low offer in.

ways and means.

MissMotivation

mbga9pgf wrote: »

It might get you a reputation with time wasting sellers. If your conversion rate is sky-high though, surely that would be a good marketing point for potential customers?

Sellers arent stupid. They know they need to price realistically to sell.

Other route would be to suggest to potential buyers they will be in the market for low offers. i would even get a couple of friends you know to go in, view and put a low offer in.

ways and means.

And they accuse EA's of being sneaky!

Estate_Agent

Thanks Mbga, but I want to remain ethical. And use I|know that's an oxymoron as I'm an EA. Also since becoming an EA recently I seem to have misplaced all my friends...

I would comfortably say that 10% of our stock is overvalued by at least 10%. And it is the vendor valuing their property at that price, not us. It seems nonsensical to me to waste time on a property that a buyer knows is worth too much because they've done their homework.

But should we take it on anyway in order to boost our database numbers? And then walk the tightrope of 'their houses are overpriced' and 'they couldn't sell my house' comments.

Estate_Agent

MissMotivation wrote: »

And they accuse EA's of being sneaky!

Thanks for coming to my rescue!

CloudCuckooLand

If you are getting 10% of properties overpriced by 10%, that's starting to be statistically significant, and could be part of the explanation for Rightmove etc Price stats heading upwards when there is not the "positive feeling" out there in the real world.

Which is not going to be upsetting to EAs, because just as there are bubble-headed sellers, so there are also bubble-headed buyers who believe their "target market" is special, so they must pay whatever is asked before they lose a property...

So, for an honest reflection of the market, you should not take inflated properties onto your books. After all, you'll have no sellers insisting that you price it a long way below your appraisal value, so there's no balancing mechanism in the stats.

harrup

CloudCuckooLand wrote: »

So, for an honest reflection of the market, you should not take inflated properties onto your books. After all, you'll have no sellers insisting that you price it a long way below your appraisal value, so there's no balancing mechanism in the stats.

I'm intruiged by this statement.

Selling or buying houses is not a precise science - therefore there is really no "expert opinion" in what a house is worth.

At best, even an experienced EA can only guestimate what a house is worth. True, it's an educated guess...but no more than that.

A vendor would be as foolish to accept an EA's " price verdict" as die hard gospel as they would be to inist on a totally idiotic sales value. But 20 K more than the EA suggests? Might just sell at that price....or at least provide the seller with some feedback