Agent 1 vs Agent 2: Commission

Mutton_Geoff

JoJo1978 wrote: »

Trad estate agents will often self regulate so that they avoid a situation where the vendor pays double

Unless they are part of Countrywide PLC.

Jahoker

saajan_12 wrote: »

Handwritten amendments to a contract are fine, only when two clauses directly contradict eachother (eg the 'Joint selling service heading' v the 'sole' tickbox) then the ambiguity would usually be resolved in favour of the party that did not draft the contract / amendments.

If it is a sole selling contract then you automatically owe agent 2 the fee. However even under a joint selling contract, if agent 2 'introduced' the buyer that led to a sale, they would be due the fee.

My understanding of a joint selling service is that when instructing the company to market the property there must be a discussion of the terms by which the joint sellers will operate (winner takes all, 50/50 etc) which is underpinned by specific terms, terms written in the agreement after the discussion has taken place - not the terms of a Sole Selling Service which could never satisfy that of a Joint Selling Service.

On the point of the introduction, the buyers are telling me they held conversations with PB days before apparently viewing the house indirectly with Agent2. The advert with PB was a premium advert, Agent2 was not a premium advert, the buyers are stating they were introduced to the property via this PB advertisement and then expressed verbally a wish to view this property once their chain was further cemented.

Looking at the terminology, an introduction need not be a physical viewing, but can also be any other form of media advertisement that alerts the buyer to the availability of a house for purchase.

We'll be seeking some legal representation on the nuances of this, as I refute (as does the buyer, for which this actually makes no difference to - they're not pot invested) the way in which Agent2 has timelined their activity, in fact the buyers have stated in writing their chain of events and have stated Agent2 are not being truthful.

As a settlement, I would be happy with the principle of paying Agent2 50% of the commission as a maximum, but I will otherwise be speaking to a property lawyer and the TPO.