Estate agent greedy for his commission - 92 year old mother

Guest101

Susieee wrote: »

Hello again everybody.

I took on everyone's kind advice and took my mother to the estate agents office. She walked into the office with me very confidently and we gave the letter to the agent. My mother signed the document in front of both myself and the manager/owner of the agency.

We left the letter there and I told him that there was NO WAY my mother wanted to sell. When he asked her she said the same, albeit it very quietly and timidly - as you would expect. She was very scared. He acknowledged receipt of the letter by way of email - I had to ask numerous times.

However, the manager has stated that there will be no way that my mother has a cooling off period as a lot of marketing has been done and they have answered calls, sent out emails to their database, etc etc. He even showed me some of the brochures they have been handing out to potential buyers...

They have even carried out a floor plan and better photography of the property yesterday. I was not with my mother at the time and she let them in, willingly. The old photos were not good because THEY WERE TAKEN IN THE DARK!!!

Today we have come back from another GP who has said there is a case for doing more tests and will be referring my mother for more specialised tests. I am so glad that this is going forward as I am sure there is some help out there.

As a last resort the agent has offered to cancel the contract if we are willing to pay some part of the commission which he says 'will be 30-50% of the expected commission.

Not only do myself or my mother not have a spare £8,000 lying around but think his actions are abhorrent and unreasonable. What kind of agent is this? I really want to name them on here so the world can see how shameful they are acting. I have asked the agent to put his demands on an email and send them to me.

I am also going to complain to the Property Ombudsman even though the agent would not confirm whether they were a member or not.

This has been a sickening experience so far and I am really considering getting a solicitor involved.

Here's an idea, just do nothing.


Unless they sue you for their commission its done with now.


So just stop letting them in!

davidmcn

Susieee wrote: »

As a last resort the agent has offered to cancel the contract if we are willing to pay some part of the commission which he says 'will be 30-50% of the expected commission.

Have I missed something? If they haven't sold the property why would they be entitled to any commission? Just serve notice to end the contract and don't sell the house.

AdrianC

Susieee wrote: »

As a last resort the agent has offered to cancel the contract if we are willing to pay some part of the commission which he says 'will be 30-50% of the expected commission.

What "commission"? They haven't sold the place...

Surrey_EA

Susieee wrote: »

As a last resort the agent has offered to cancel the contract if we are willing to pay some part of the commission which he says 'will be 30-50% of the expected commission.

I've never ever heard of anyone making a claim like this.

Either there are EAs out there who are completely and utterly nuts, and far worse than any I've come across in over 20 years, and I've come across more than most.

Or this whole story has been made up.

fairy_lights

Do they have a facebook page you can publicly shame them on? Or go to your local paper.

Mickygg

This all sounds very odd. You have not sold so EA are due nothing, unless the contract signed says otherwise of course.

I agree name and shame them to help others not to fall into their games.

If the contract does say (which I would very much doubt) that if you pull the house from the market then money is due to the EA there is a simple solution.....tell the EA if they really are enforcing that clause then you want to raise the house price to £1.5m. You'll get no viewings and then when out of the tie in period, ask for house to be removed from market.

worried_jim

Time to name and shame.

bouicca21

If this is for real it's definitely time to look up the response in Arkell v
Pressdram - and to use it.

bouicca21

Of course a more considered response would ask why they incurred costs during the statutory 14 day cooling off period, pointing out yet again that the waiver of such a period in their contract is illegal.

Person_one

Andypandyboy wrote: »

I imagine it was not at all uncommon when this lady was in her teens. No contraception and the world was just entering a world war as she would have been 15 in 1939. Maybe waving her first love off to war?

Maybe not that unusual to get pregnant, but I would have thought very unusual for a 15 year old (single?) mother to raise the child herself.

Not that its relevant to the thread, I suppose, but I'd have thought the OP might have clarified...