online estate agents

grifferz

UsernameAlreadyExists wrote: »

He doesn't like them as he said he prefers to get people to see the place and walk around it before dismissing it on the FP alone. I, on the otherhand, don't want to waste time viewing properties that I would dismiss from the FP alone!

So far every property I have viewed where the listing did not have a floorplan had a major issue with it which would have been obvious from a floorplan, e.g. sole bathroom accessible only through a bedroom, or very oddly-shaped rooms that you would struggle to fit a double bed in despite being described as double.

I understand why they would do that: there will be some percentage of prospective buyers who would be put off by the floorplan on the listing but yet will on viewing fall in love with some other feature of the property or else be talked around in some other way.

Yet however anecdotal my experience, I now cannot help being deeply suspicious of any listing that omits a floorplan.

BertieUK

grifferz wrote: »

So far every property I have viewed where the listing did not have a floorplan had a major issue with it which would have been obvious from a floorplan, e.g. sole bathroom accessible only through a bedroom, or very oddly-shaped rooms that you would struggle to fit a double bed in despite being described as double.

I understand why they would do that: there will be some percentage of prospective buyers who would be put off by the floorplan on the listing but yet will on viewing fall in love with some other feature of the property or else be talked around in some other way.

Yet however anecdotal my experience, I now cannot help being deeply suspicious of any listing that omits a floorplan.

I think that I would need to visit every property that I was interested in purchasing before dismissing it. As you say the shape of the rooms etc would be difficult sometimes to relay onto paper.

Now that we have Google Earth we can see the outside of the property, travel around the area before we do a physical view.

Hoof_Hearted

Googler, I understand that you are still battling hard to justify the high charges of high street agents as you are one of them, but online agents are selling more and more houses.

I note you quote the highest amount Housenetwork charges and not the lowest. Based on your figures, who would rather pay £4000 & Vat (£4,800) to a high street agent than £495 & Vat (£594) to HN? I make that 12% of the high street equivalent.

I do appreciate the free valuations that high street agents give, although these have to be taken with a pinch of salt. Too low, for a quick sale and commission in the bank or too high to get the property on the books.

Have a nice Christmas, Googler.

tim123456789

googler wrote: »

What value is there in the online EA giving feedback which is gathered over the phone, when they don't actually meet the viewer? What value is there in paying them to make the call, when you've met the viewer already?

After a poor response once I don't give feedback to the owner.

I'm quite happy to give it to the third party who introduced us, how they use that info is up to them

tim

BertieUK

googler wrote: »

So you're paying them to shuffle a few phone calls around; not to interact with the viewers, not to actively promote properties to the viewers, not to find out what the viewers and buyers actually want....?

What value is there in the online EA giving feedback which is gathered over the phone, when they don't actually meet the viewer? What value is there in paying them to make the call, when you've met the viewer already?

The third party can be looked upon as a mediator between the seller/buyer touching on issues that may otherwise not arise.

The attraction of on-line agents is the vast difference in the overall costings, so in order to give more oppertunity to the High Street Estate Agent what would you say would be a minimal fee that would be accepted percentage wise? Taking into consideration that the seller would be prepared to conduct viewings where needed.

Do they have a set scale or are costs negotiable for services provided.

googler

Hoof_Hearted wrote: »

Googler, I understand that you are still battling hard to justify the high charges of high street agents as you are one of them, but online agents are selling more and more houses.

I don't care what you do, occupation-wise. If you want to take issue with what I say, then do so, but don't cloud the issues with speculation on what my occupation might or might not be, by couching it in the form of a thinly-veiled insult. "Oh, look he/she's an estate agent!"

I note you quote the highest amount Housenetwork charges and not the lowest.

Why not? You've persisted with quoting comparisons based on your above-average selling price, which if I recall, was getting on for double the national average house price from the BBC figures.....

I do appreciate the free valuations that high street agents give, although these have to be taken with a pinch of salt. Too low, for a quick sale and commission in the bank or too high to get the property on the books.

Or, in the case of the online agent, 'anything at all', because it doesn't matter what they pitch it at, low or high, as they've already got most, if not all, of their fee in the bank before starting work. They're also in a worse position to make an accurate valuation, having no local presence and no local knowledge, so you should take their figures with more of a pinch of salt, surely?

How can you accuse the high-street EA of 'valuing low for an easy sale and commission in the bank", when you know full well that they won't actually get paid until the sale completes, and the sale could well be derailed by circumstances completely outwith their control?

And, as you can see from Ivana's example above, it makes no difference what they sell it at, as there's no benefit to them from getting a better price for the owner, and they'll make little or no attempt to improve the situation.

But you seem to miss my point about the valuations again; it's not an issue about valuing low or high. How can you complain about high-street agents charging more than mere online operations when you, and others, routinely expect more than two-thirds of their number to provide at least an hour's worth of free advice before hiring them, or even without hiring any of them, and when high-street operations are expected to spend time with viewers who don't turn up to view, buyers who don't buy, and all manner of other interaction with the general public that are routinely expected of them, but which the online operations are insulated from?

How many times have you seen the exhortation on these forums - "Get three or more local agents to give you a valuation before you hire one (or before you hire an online agent)" ???

Merry Xmas to you, too, sir (or madam)

leyonchung

Checkout Housenetwork, they are good enough.

Hoof_Hearted

googler wrote: »

Or, in the case of the online agent, 'anything at all', because it doesn't matter what they pitch it at, low or high, as they've already got most, if not all, of their small fee in the bank before starting work.

I think you left a word out there.....

googler

Hoof_Hearted wrote: »

I think you left a word out there.....

Is that all you can take issue with?

However, as you stated before, you sold at, as I recall, over double the average UK house price, according to the BBC - according to The Mail today, that average price is around £160k - considerably less than the BBC figure, which puts your sale over three times average, which, for you, will magnify the difference in fees - less so for others.

Hoof_Hearted

So the message is that if you have an expensive house use an online agent....