Estate Agent got very snarky...

Orpheo

dubsey wrote: »

It's true we do make money from the buyers using our in-house advisor for their mortgage. It's also true that we are HEAVILY targeted on how many people get sat in front of the mortgage guy, also true that sales staff get sent off to be re-trained if they continually fail to meet targets.

But - also true that we get massively screamed at by vendors when a sale goes wrong because we find out after the sale has started that, actually the buyer can't get a mortgage. Normally we will ask to see some sort of proof that you can get the mortgage, so either speak to our guy and he can clarify that, yes, providing everything you've said is true (nothing comes up on a credit check) you will get a mortgage, or bring in a current AIP (you'd be shocked how many people produce AIP's that are well over a year old) or show a bank statement that covers the cash amount.

I have seen threads on here that swing both ways, - my sale fell through because my buyer couldn't get their mortgage - why didn't your agent check them financially first? Then on the other hand, when you're a buyer, the EA is being unreasonable by asking the question. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

If you tell agents that you will be happy to show you're proof of funds IF you choose to offer on something they have, they should accept that, if they don't they are definately one to be avoided if at all possible. In that instance, if they have the property you really want, let them book the appointment with the mortgage advisor, turn up with your AIP and just say, apparently I need to show you this as my mortgage is all sorted.

This post is not meant to sound harsh, so apologies if it does!

Your obligations to the vendor are not important to me as a buyer, not important to me at all. By all means offer your mortgage advice "service" and good luck in snaring the hapless individuals. There is no excuse for rudeness and anger when someone has the character to say no. There is no reason to believe that a mortgage brokered through an EA is any stronger than a mortgage obtained elsewhere. When I have dealt with EAs both as a buyer and seller the EAs have somehow managed to confirm that mortgage finance is in place, so what are they doing correctly that you aren't?

Readers, it is one thing proving to the EA that you have finance in place, but DO NOT turn up to an appointment with the EA's financial adviser with your acceptance in principle to prove that your mortgage is sorted. By turning up to the appointment they have hooked you in and they will try to sell to you.

House selling is a ludicrous business. The party doing the selling is considered the customer and the party parting with the money is treated with contempt.

My father, bless him, used to really buy into a salesperson's treacle; he would think that they were his "mate." Every time. That ended when a used car salesman stole his car and £1000 cash.

Fly_Baby

dubsey wrote: »

It's true we do make money from the buyers using our in-house advisor for their mortgage. It's also true that we are HEAVILY targeted on how many people get sat in front of the mortgage guy, also true that sales staff get sent off to be re-trained if they continually fail to meet targets.

How exactly do you make money from the buyers using your in-house advisor? Is he not offering the best rates as IFAs should? Where are the buyers paying extra by using them?

I saw an advisor based in my local EA and he claimed that he does not work for this EA and is an independent advisor. Seemed a trustworthy enough guy. Did he lie?

When other posters say that they don't want to expose their details - does it mean that EA-based advisors discuss with the agents the buyer's personal details? Can they do that?

What harm is there to use them? This is a genuine question from an inexperienced FTB.

googler

C_Mababejive wrote: »

This is the kind of arrogance and bad manners which is endemic in the EA industry and the very reason why it needs to be dismantled and the business taken up by more responsible and ethical organisations.

Organisations like who/what?

Blacksheep1979

oh come on dubsey - there's a drastic difference between 'can I see a recent AIP' and 'You must see our inhouse mortgage guy if you want to be considered as a buyer'

dacouch

Fly_Baby wrote: »

How exactly do you make money from the buyers using your in-house advisor? Is he not offering the best rates as IFAs should? Where are the buyers paying extra by using them?

Arranging a mortgage may generate from Nil to say £500 in commission but creates a lot of work. The real money is in the very juicy commissions from life assurance etc policies they sell you attached to the mortgage and if they really luck out on selling you a pension or other financial products.

Your best bet is to see an IFA who can find the best product from the whole of the market

Money_Man

You were suprised by this action by your EA?

:rotfl:

MrBeeee

Orpheo wrote: »

At this she became quite angry and began ranting on about how she can't understand why I would make such a decision.

Why on Earth would anyone seek financial advice from someone who works for an EA that benefits if you buy a house? Why would I give them access to my whole financial position so that they can exploit it? Was this EA simply dim?

I sold recently, was a long and drawn out process with 3 sales falling through but on each occasion the call from the EA with the various offers went along the lines of 'they've offered this but we've done their mortgage and they can afford more'
As you point out there is a clear conflict of interest here.

As a side note the first agent we dealt with was sacked for having his fingers in the till, the next time I came across him he was working as a mortgage advisor for a different EA !

googler

Money_Man wrote: »

You were suprised by this action by your EA?

Not their EA.

EA acting for the seller, and the OP is a buyer.

Chris55_2

This is the point - there is a clear conflict of interest here. The Estate Agent is acting for the seller and not for the buyer. He is the seller's agent. As a buyer you can put some pressure on the seller via the agent as the agent will normally only make money when the sale completes... but how can you ever negotiate on price with a seller if the seller's agent has access to all your financial information - it makes no sense at all!

DVardysShadow

dubsey wrote: »

It's true we do make money from the buyers using our in-house advisor for their mortgage. It's also true that we are HEAVILY targeted on how many people get sat in front of the mortgage guy, also true that sales staff get sent off to be re-trained if they continually fail to meet targets.

But - also true that we get massively screamed at by vendors when a sale goes wrong because we find out after the sale has started that, actually the buyer can't get a mortgage. Normally we will ask to see some sort of proof that you can get the mortgage, so either speak to our guy and he can clarify that, yes, providing everything you've said is true (nothing comes up on a credit check) you will get a mortgage, or bring in a current AIP (you'd be shocked how many people produce AIP's that are well over a year old) or show a bank statement that covers the cash amount.

I have seen threads on here that swing both ways, - my sale fell through because my buyer couldn't get their mortgage - why didn't your agent check them financially first? Then on the other hand, when you're a buyer, the EA is being unreasonable by asking the question. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

If you tell agents that you will be happy to show you're proof of funds IF you choose to offer on something they have, they should accept that, if they don't they are definately one to be avoided if at all possible. In that instance, if they have the property you really want, let them book the appointment with the mortgage advisor, turn up with your AIP and just say, apparently I need to show you this as my mortgage is all sorted.

This post is not meant to sound harsh, so apologies if it does!

If you did not have an in house mortgage advisor, then the idea of proving out that buyers have funds might be a bit more credible. As it is, with an in house advisor, the conflict of interest is so blindingly obvious that you are n a position where you cannot ethically actually verify your buyer's funding.