estate agents are conmen

maninthestreet

Is it normal now for EAs to charge up-front fees to sell the house and for taking pictures??

Surrey_EA

maninthestreet wrote: »

Is it normal now for EAs to charge up-front fees to sell the house and for taking pictures??

Not in my experience. We occasionally charge upfront for photos, but that would only be when we were sending a professional photographer. With the greatest of respect, it is unlikely a pro photographer would be needed for a house at this price level.

princeofpounds

Is it normal now for EAs to charge up-front fees to sell the house and for taking pictures??

No, but a minority out there will generally try to include some kind of fees simply for marketing.


It's not always wrong (as Surrey_EA says, it is more justifiable where there really is a significant upfront investment by the EA in materials etc.) but in a situation like this it really distorts the incentives.

MrsFingersCrossed

Sams, was it an online agent? As far as I know they are the only ones who charge an upfront fee, except occasionally for grand homes with glossy brochures and perhaps a niche marketing strategy previously agreed.

Did you get several high street agents round to value the house before choosing the one to go with?

If I was in your position I would cut my losses and take the house off the market. Then I'd paint some rooms white, de-clutter madly and re-market it at a realistic price, AFTER getting several valuations from local high street agents to guide you. They normally charge a percentage of the selling price, (I would aim to pay no more than 1%) and their costs are paid from the proceeds of the sale, with no upfront costs. Good luck.

Digsby

Surely, if there are no more fees involved, you may as well keep it on the market at that price until either a) it sells, or b) you can afford to lower the price. There's no benefit to your taking it off the market, unless you decide you don't want to deal with this EA any more.

King_Slayer

OP,
If you cannot afford to sell for less you have two options:

Leave the property on the market at the current price, but due to the poor service experienced with the EA so far, be prepared to show intended buyers around the house etc.

Or

Take the house off the market until price/demand increases (if you can wait).

Whatever decision you make put the £500 spent down to experience. In future always shop around before choosing an EA. Also obtain an up to date valuation, that would gauge whether £95k is an unrealistic asking pricec. However the house is worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it. Good luck with whatever you decide.

Surrey_EA

Digsby wrote: »

Surely, if there are no more fees involved, you may as well keep it on the market at that price until either a) it sells, or b) you can afford to lower the price. There's no benefit to your taking it off the market, unless you decide you don't want to deal with this EA any more.

Having your property sat on the websites month after month without selling does not do the possibility of selling any good in my view. It makes it look like there's a problem with the house.

As many here will know there are a variety of ways to tell how long a property has been available for these days, and buyers tend to think they're in a stronger negotiating position when a property has been listed for many months, compared to one that is newer to the market.

C_Mababejive

Estate agents are there to make money for themselves pure and simple. Your house is the vehicle by which they will make money and you the seller are merely incidental bystanders to the proceedings.

This is why we need more competition in the market and more diy house selling websites.

To purge the country of parasites in smart cars.

Of course there are also some very good honest EAs.

timbo58

I'd concur with the earlier post that 8 viewings in 2 weeks seems to say the price is not unrealistic -unless of course the EA is deliberately telling potential buyers that you are open to offers (when you are not presumably?).

I don't think the EA has done anything legally incorrect or 'actionable' to be fair -it seems to be 'de rigeur' nowadays to find someone else to blame for all of life 'downs' (never get blamed for the 'ups' though do they?!) and the cries of 'con/ripoff/scam' are so numerous as to make real dishonesty look commonplace when it really isn't.

I don't think it was fair to charge fees upfront and to charge for photography per se anyway, however those were the terms you agreed with them before selling, so you accepted them and would presumably think them OK if you had sold at the asking price?

Personally I'd leave the property on sale and refuse to budge on the price and let them send the money arranging viewings.
Either the viewings will dry up or you'll sell eventually.

Annie1960

maninthestreet wrote: »

Is it normal now for EAs to charge up-front fees to sell the house and for taking pictures??

Most EAs do not ask for any money up front.

There is a big national chain that trades under a number of different names that does this in my area. In order to get away with this, they also give you a very over-inflated valuation, and tie you into a long contract, so vendors are stuck and have to keep reducing the price when it doesn't sell.

When I was looking for a property, I viewed a number that were completely over-priced (many of them subsequently sold for £70,000 to £100,000 less eventually). These properties take ages to sell as buyers are not going to pay silly prices. Eventually, many of the vendors take them off the market and start again with a new EA. I have no idea what made these vendors think their property is worth so much more than other similar ones on the same road. I missed out on quite a few as the vendors seemed perfectly deluded about what they believed they could get.

There is another thread around here somewhere linking to a radio programme on 3 Counties Radio discussing this EA chain and their practices.

In this case, however, the OP has stated the EA did not do the valuation. The question is where did the value of £95,000 come from? It seems like the vendor came up with this figure themselves, so they have no case against the EA.