Payment Upfront/No commission Estate Agents

JimmyTheWig

Thanks mummybaker. That was my concern with using them.

MobileSaver

mummybaker wrote: »

If it helps to compare weve been on 3 weeks and had 3 viewings with the new agent. With the old one we were on 9mths and only 1 viewing. .

We've had the opposite with my girlfriend's house, only one viewing all year with a High Street agent. She'll be paying more in EA fees on her little terrace than I did on my 4 bed detached that sold for three times her price (I sold through House Network and got loads of viewings.)

Are you comparing like for like, is your house on at the same price with the new agent as the old online one?

From our experience we'd steer clear of a High Street Agent every time in the future unless they seriously rethink how they charge for their "service".

JimmyTheWig

I'd suggest she changes agent, MobileSaver!

Can you advertise a property on RightMove yourself? I.e. not use any agent? How much does it cost?

MobileSaver

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I'd suggest she changes agent, MobileSaver!

I suggested the same but her house is joint-owned with her ex and for a quiet life she agreed to using his preferred agent.

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Can you advertise a property on RightMove yourself? I.e. not use any agent? How much does it cost?

Not that I'm aware, you have to go through a Rightmove agent like House Network. Your question underlines the basic point thought which is that all that really matters for most people is that your property gets advertised on Righmove and so I'd recommend simply finding the cheapest way to achieve that - and that would rarely be with a High Street agent.

JimmyTheWig

Not necessarily the point, as the only point is to sell it, but the cheapest way to list it on RightMove if it _doesn't_ sell is via a high street agent - in which case it is free.

googler

MobileSaver wrote: »

From our experience we'd steer clear of a High Street Agent every time in the future unless they seriously rethink how they charge for their "service".

....and what would you suggest?

Payment by the hour?
Ongoing Monthly Payments?

Or commission on only a successful sale, as is the norm at present?

Discuss.

grey_gym_sock

i thought the basic idea of an online estate agent is that you expect to do most of the work yourself. you're buying access to rightmove and similar sites, and perhaps some photos and a board outside your house, but you do the rest.

high street estate agents will always be more expensive. but you might prefer to pay them to do some of the work for you. and they will generally sell more quickly, given they can use rightmove etc as well as offline methods.

clairibel

ognum wrote: »

all the agents are doing is giving you an advertisement portal and maybe a visit booker.

After that its down to your Aunt, how capable is she at negotiation, doing viewings, chasing the sale along and generally doing the other stuff that agents do?

I thought it was the norm to do your own viewings, thats what we have always done with our local EA's and thats why i'm now questioning why pay so much for a EA sale when we are the ones actively selling it to the prospective buyer.

JimmyTheWig

MobileSaver wrote: »

From our experience we'd steer clear of a High Street Agent every time in the future unless they seriously rethink how they charge for their "service".

googler wrote: »

....and what would you suggest?

Payment by the hour?
Ongoing Monthly Payments?

Or commission on only a successful sale, as is the norm at present?

Discuss.

I think they should get a higher commission than present on completion of a successful sale, but only on a price above a certain amount.
Would give them the incentive to (a) sell your house and (b) sell it for a good price.
Any idiot could sell a house worth £300k for £200k, with no effort. So why would an agent get 1.5% of £200k for doing that?

So for a house worth £300k they should instead get, for example, 9% of the selling price above £250k.
So if it sold for £300k they'd get 9% of £50k (£300k-£250k) which is £4.5k. Which is the same as 1.5% of £300k.

But they wouldn't then hassle to you sell for cheap once they've got you on their books.

googler

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

So for a house worth £300k they should instead get, for example, 9% of the selling price above £250k.
So if it sold for £300k they'd get 9% of £50k (£300k-£250k) which is £4.5k. Which is the same as 1.5% of £300k.

What about houses which sell below £250k ...???

Tell us how you would determine fees at selling prices of

£50,000
£100,000
£150,000
etc in £50,000 increments, up to £250k, and whether or not you think the 9% rule should apply to all sales over £250k.

Why 9%? Why not 10%?