Estate agent claiming fee for house they didnt sell

not_loaded

Thinking about it (a change for me) I feel that EA2 must have known the history of the client and deliberately kept quiet about it to grab their fee. They knew that they were not going to get a fee if they disclosed that the client had viewed and offered previously with EA1.

Trying to make something of the difference between ‘the woman’ and ‘the couple’ is almost certainly a waste of time. Maybe somebody legal would advise differently.

I’ve seen EAs insisting on these lists of previous viewers before, so they have no excuse for not knowing. Also, it must have been mentioned at some point by the couple. My guess is that the individual at EA2 knew and kept quiet, taking their cut of the commission as is the custom in these jobs. That individual may not even be working there any more, but the company is responsible for straight dealing.

I think you have to take action against EA2 to retrieve the fees they were not entitled to. The reason they’re not cooperating is they’re hoping it’ll go away.

The reason EA1 is insisting and threatening court is they know that 1) they’re due a fee, and 2) most people will pay up rather than risk going to court. It won’t be a court with judge and jury it’ll be the county court and they appear to have a good case.

I’d ask them to politely wait while you get their fee out of EA2. Point out they should cooperate with you rather than harass you.

dubsey

It may be that EA2 has been contacted by EA1 to say they are owed the fee and EA2 has told them tough. I have only known this once while I have been with this agent and EA2 basically said prove it, which we did. The problem with ours came up because the applicants hadn't yet sold so it wasn't a proceedable offer. By the time they had sold, the property was on with another agent, so they made the offer again through them.

EA2 tried to say it was a different person, that was when we contacted the vendor and asked them if it was the same person that viewed and offered through us. We didn't ask the vendor for the fee though, just the other agent. As far as I know, it's still with our legal dept being sorted.

vet8

jenny74 wrote: »

The way I see it from the info supplied is that EA1 introduced the buyer to you, so EA1 is probably legally entitled to a fee.

To be honest when EA2 arranged the viewing for the same person (abeit part of a couple now) it should have got your alarm bells ringing. You obviously knew it was the same person and seem to have buried your head in the sand. You should have addressed it at the time.

I think that is very harsh. We have had the EA doing all the viewings so I have seen none of the viewers at all and even if I had I am hopeless with faces and after a string of people coming round I would not have known if it was someone who had been around before or not unless I was told. We have not even been given names for all of the viewers.

It seems very odd to me that the couple did not tell EA2 that they had viewed and made an offer before. EA2 must have known it, it is their fault and not the sellers, they are trying to avoid giving the fee to EA1 so are hiding.

boris77

Bit of an update.

We have noW found out that the couple that made the offer put an offer in via EA1. This was rejected. At this point it turns out EA1 said there was nothing more they could do, no more negotiations.

The couple then had a look round a different house with EA2. They didn't like it. EA2 then suggested our house. The couple said no they had seen it, it was too much, not interested. EA2 talked them round in to seeing it again and managed to negotiate with the couple to the point that the bought the house.

Now I'd say the EA2 was the effective cause of sale due to convincing them to look again and negotiate the sale. EA1 failed to negotiate simply telling the couple there was nothing more they could do. As such EA1 owed nothing. What do people think, agree/disagree?

pawpurrs

In a perfect and fair world, yes you would be correct. But I am afraid if the buyer was introduced initially to the property by EA1 then they are entitiled to the commision, unless there is a clause in the contract with a timeframe normally six mths after disinstruction, however as I understand it EA1 was never disinstructed, the contract just changed from sole agency to multi agency.
I am afraid that EA is legally entitiled to the commision here, however EA2 has done all the work, but they should have passed the buyers back to EA1.

boris77

I thought the whole introduced thing had been quashed to a point by the Foxton's case. Moving it to the estate agent having to prove to be the effective cause of sale?

sonastin

Having read the Foxtons case, I think the "nothing more they can do" ought to clinch it. Have you tried writing to the ombudsman to get their verdict on who is entitled to the money?

not_loaded

boris77 wrote: »

…The couple said no they had seen it, it was too much, not interested. EA2 talked them round in to seeing it again and managed to negotiate with the couple to the point that the bought the house.
Now I'd say the EA2 was the effective cause of sale due to convincing them to look again and negotiate the sale. EA1 failed to negotiate…

Pretty poor selling representation by EA1, BUT they made the introduction.

There’s no contractual relationship between the two agents, so I suspect that as I mentioned above,
I think you have to take action against EA2 to retrieve the fees they were not entitled to. The reason they’re not cooperating is they’re hoping it’ll go away.

The reason EA1 is insisting and threatening court is they know that 1) they’re due a fee, and 2) most people will pay up rather than risk going to court. It won’t be a court with judge and jury it’ll be the county court and they appear to have a good case.

I’d ask them to politely wait while you get their fee out of EA2. Point out they should cooperate with you rather than harass you.

The reason for this is that EA1 can only proceed against YOU, as you signed a contract with them, not EA2.

This is not for you to stand back and watch as the two EAs fight it out. You signed contracts. You should talk to your conveyancing solicitor as EA2 have wrongly claimed their fee, presumably through the solicitor. See my #12 above.

sonastin

I disagree that EA2 are not entitled to their fee. They did all the work that is normally expected of an EA - showed a prospective buyer round the property, negotiated the sale, followed the sale through to completion - so they have more entitlement to the fee than EA1.

What a scrupulous EA would do is check if the buyer had been introduced by EA1 and then taken a step back so that the vendor isn't liable for both sets of fees. But how many scrupulous EAs are there really out there?!;)

Unfortunately it is too late to change it unless the OP has a time machine so I think the best bet is to get a verdict on whether EA1's actions are sufficient to count as an introduction.

not_loaded

You could well be right sonastin, which is why the OP should talk to his/her conveyancing solicitor.

Precisely what went on, and exactly what the contracts say, is what matters.