Estate agent removing all listings from Zoopla then putting them on

ReadingTim

Salesman uses sales tactics shocker....

Kayalana99

It might cost them to post a property so many not why all E/A's do it? Plus maybe they just don't need to?

If someone is taking the time to re-add properties to make them look fresher that says they aren't selling the properties they have.

moneyistooshorttomention

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Why is it wrong? I can see it as a way of reviving interest in the property and getting new buyers to notice it. If it is not worth the asking price it won't get that price, no matter how long it has been on the market. And if it's the house you want at a price you want to pay, then why does it matter how long it has been on the market? You might not have been in a position to buy it last week.

A house being on the market for quite some time might or might not "mean" something. Quite often though - it does seem to "mean" something. We all know that many houses involve some "compromise" or other and some quite a few.

But the ones I can think of, for instance, round here that are like this are respectively:

- was vastly overpriced to start with (divorcing couple both wanting £££) and old-fashioned and needing a lot of maintenance work. The price eventually came down literally years later and it has recently been bought. Looking at the new owners - they don't strike me as the type to be bothered by old-fashioned/etc.

- one I was hauled around by local EA (when I hadn't indicated any wish to view it and they don't basically do viewings in this area) has loads of problems (quite a few potential boundary disputes/a very troublesome back garden/conveniently located for late-night troublemaking chavs to "have a go"/bang by a river and yes...it has had flooding problems already/probable damp?

- on a plot of land that looks a bit "precarious" to me and has a variety of access issues

...and so it goes on....

seven-day-weekend

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

A house being on the market for quite some time might or might not "mean" something. Quite often though - it does seem to "mean" something. We all know that many houses involve some "compromise" or other and some quite a few.

But the ones I can think of, for instance, round here that are like this are respectively:

- was vastly overpriced to start with (divorcing couple both wanting £££) and old-fashioned and needing a lot of maintenance work. The price eventually came down literally years later and it has recently been bought. Looking at the new owners - they don't strike me as the type to be bothered by old-fashioned/etc.

- one I was hauled around by local EA (when I hadn't indicated any wish to view it and they don't basically do viewings in this area) has loads of problems (quite a few potential boundary disputes/a very troublesome back garden/conveniently located for late-night troublemaking chavs to "have a go"/bang by a river and yes...it has had flooding problems already/probable damp?

- on a plot of land that looks a bit "precarious" to me and has a variety of access issues

...and so it goes on....

Yes, I agree with all that, but I still don't think it is wrong of the EA to try to sell it, that is their job. It will have those problems no matter how long or short a time it is on the market.

Geoff1963

It is a negotiating tactic to persuade someone that an opportunity is time-limited, so they make a decision without proper consideration. "Just come on the market", suggests you were lucky enough to see this bargain first, and would be foolish to let it go.

moneyistooshorttomention

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Yes, I agree with all that, but I still don't think it is wrong of the EA to try to sell it, that is their job. It will have those problems no matter how long or short a time it is on the market.

But the thing is that the true amount of time that a property has been on the market is a "red flag" to take particular care to check that property is okay and doesnt have some huge hidden problem situation - as one can see that a lot of other would-be buyers havent gone for it and there is a good chance at least one would-be buyer has had a survey on it and found it wasnt worth buying.

So - one knows to take extra care when checking out the property oneself to see if there are any major problems.

Even in my current (much slower-moving) area "obviously wantable" houses will go within weeks and one can usually tell from the details which ones they are at the time they first appear on the market. My own had been on the market for a few months at the time I bought it - even that was an indicator that there was more of a problem to it than just the amount of work I could see it needed doing. That few months "wait to be sold" was an indicator (as it turned out in the event) of problem neighbours (pretty much sorted now - but boy weren't they...:cool:).

So - goodness knows what a "few years wait to be sold" indicates sometimes:cool:

Davesnave

Most people looking seriously to buy will know what's been available for some time and won't be fooled. They'll just note tactics like this, probably see them as desperation measures and give the agent double scrutiny in the future.

It's the same when a house that's been marketed for ages is photographed from a completely different angle and that's used as a fresh lead photo. People just giggle when they realise and say, "Oh, that old chestnut!"

It's largely self-defeating, but agents can hardly be blamed for trying to gain maximum exposure for their properties, if the situation allows.

moneyistooshorttomention

As you say - "that old chestnut" and I tend to groan at re-marketing and the way photos are taken.

The house I mentioned earlier that the EA hauled me over to see was clearly a "hope to get a gullible incomer to buy this one" house. The photos looked great and it looked really tempting and I definitely fancied the look of it - but I'd sussed enough about it not to even have put it on my list of properties to view.

That was the one with umpteen possible boundary disputes, darn awkward back garden, near to "local yobs creating at night" and bang handy to get flooded by the river.

Davesnave

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

The house I mentioned earlier that the EA hauled me over to see was clearly a "hope to get a gullible incomer to buy this one" house.

We had none of that from the EAs 'over there.' There were a couple like that, but having our own transport, they just gave us the keys, rather than put themselves out.

In one, we found a spring coming up in the newly decorated kitchen, and at another I was dive-bombed by angry geese and fell into the pond margins. These were not properties we cared to return to for a second look!:rotfl:

There were also a couple of places where we were met so that we could have their disadvantages highlighted. There were different reasons involved, but sometimes, it can even be 'inconvenient' if someone shows interest in a property....;)

'Over here,' a similar thing happened when we checked-out a very badly advertised ag-tied house in a drive-by. The farmer threatened to call the police, saying we were casing the place. We just laughed, as we knew the real reason why the listing was so inept.

Just occasionally, agents will go out of their way not to sell a house.....at least not to the 'wrong' people!