Mary Portas: Secret Shopper (Ch 4)

pimento

googler wrote: »

How many 'plus points' does your home have that you couldn't list or explain to any agent selling it?

The thing is, would you believe them if told by an estate agent?

ruggedtoast

Something they chief EA tried to say but didnt really get his point across, was that agents are meant to earn their money closing the sale when things start to go wrong.

My last experience of this was that the EAs I was stuck with were worse than useless. I am not sure if the vendors actually were as incompetently deviant, two faced, greedy, inept, dishonest and arrogant as they seemed to be as represented by their agents, but in any case their agents did them no favours at all and cost them a sale.

googler

pimento wrote: »

The thing is, would you believe them if told by an estate agent?

If an EA tells you a fact about the house, and it's not true, they're liable to prosecution under Property Misdescriptions Act

If a householder tells you an untruth about their house when showing it to you, there's no legislation to cover this, and you as the buyer have no comeback.

Why would you be more inclined to believe the householder?

clairehi

I was disappointed by this show - I thought it didnt take much of an indepth look at the whole sales process. as FT Buyer points out, there is a lot more to it than what is written on the "details" and what the EA knows about the property. anyone can look on a map and see if the house is next to a motorway !!!!!!, and we all just tune out the cliches about "deceptively spacious".

one simple point, and a major problem with viewings in my experience as both a seller and buyer is that its virtually impossible for buyers to book an accompanied viewing at a convenient time, as estate agents won't do evening or weekend appointments.

The other area where I think there is major room for improvement is customer service after an offer has been accepted, and managing a chain situation to minimise delays. IME most of them are rubbish at progress-chasing. its all very well saying that spiky hair boy has "sold" the property ie an offer has been accepted but that is a very long way from actual completion.

ruggedtoast

clairehi wrote: »

I was disappointed by this show - I thought it didnt take much of an indepth look at the whole sales process. as FT Buyer points out, there is a lot more to it than what is written on the "details" and what the EA knows about the property. anyone can look on a map and see if the house is next to a motorway !!!!!!, and we all just tune out the cliches about "deceptively spacious".

one simple point, and a major problem with viewings in my experience as both a seller and buyer is that its virtually impossible for buyers to book an accompanied viewing at a convenient time, as estate agents won't do evening or weekend appointments.

The other area where I think there is major room for improvement is customer service after an offer has been accepted, and managing a chain situation to minimise delays. IME most of them are rubbish at progress-chasing. its all very well saying that spiky hair boy has "sold" the property ie an offer has been accepted but that is a very long way from actual completion.

The programme also would have benefitted from looking at somewhere out of London. Houses in central London do, for the most part "sell themselves" because there is so little supply and so much demand.

If that ever changes then I wouldnt bet on fat tie river island suit mans longevity to be honest.

Errata

googler wrote: »

This morning's search brought up a quote or two from the agency... the programme suggests that all the agents got was one hour's training in the early stages;

"Simon Gerrard, managing director of London agents Martyn Gerrard, which featured in the programme, said that 98% of what he had said was not used.

He said that key points were ignored, including the fact that 70% of staff at his eight offices were either NAEA or ARLA qualified, and the remaining 30% in training."

http://www.estateagenttoday.co.uk/news_features/Mary-Portas-programme-on-agents-slammed-as-a-circus

Well he would say that wouldn't he. The dozy pillock should have realised he wouldn't have editorial control !

pimento

googler wrote: »

If an EA tells you a fact about the house, and it's not true, they're liable to prosecution under Property Misdescriptions Act

If a householder tells you an untruth about their house when showing it to you, there's no legislation to cover this, and you as the buyer have no comeback.

Why would you be more inclined to believe the householder?

I see your point but I'd much rather show a potential buyr round myself, not because I want to lie to them but I reckon I'd do a better job at selling it. They say the first rule of selling is "Know your oranges" and nobody knows your property better than you, you live in it.

clairehi

ps did anyone else notice that the EA said the basement flat shown was "share of freehold" which they said was a good thing. is this actually a good thing? I thought that freehold flats were a bit of a legal minefield, and could be difficult to get a mortgage on?

woohoo_postingid

To be fair, I thought that salesman with the stupid hair was actually ok by the end of the programme. At the beginning I thought he was a complete n0b but he was the only one who was really into the new regime and he had a genuine desire to be a success.

Still needs a haircut though !

BitterAndTwisted

clairehi wrote: »

ps did anyone else notice that the EA said the basement flat shown was "share of freehold" which they said was a good thing. is this actually a good thing? I thought that freehold flats were a bit of a legal minefield, and could be difficult to get a mortgage on?

A leasehold flat with a share of the freehold is a good thing. A very, very good thing indeed. Except when the leaseholders can't agree on what repairs and maintenance need to be done and for how much. I've never heard of a "freehold flat" as that sounds like a contradiction to me.