I believe I have evidence of an estate agent creating fake bids

AdrianC

Salemicus said:

> If the EA was in cahoots with the vendor, would this be illegal?

Of course the EA and the vendor are "in cahoots." Whose agent do you think he is?

From several pages back...
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/78153718/#Comment_78153718

AdrianC said:

Lonely_willow said:
There is a good chance the vendor and agent had a working relationship...

OF COURSE they did. The vendor hired the EA to sell the house. They were quite literally paying them to achieve the best price possible, because EA fees are a %age of the sale price...

Your £32k extra paid the EA several hundred quid extra.

That's kinda how the whole thing works.

Jeepers_Creepers

'In cahoots': In most contexts, it describes the conspiring activity of people up to no good.

NameUnavailable

I shouldn't respond further on this thread as I've already been accused of 'trolling', but as an ex estate agent I can say without doubt that I never saw any malpractice amongst the companies or colleagues I worked with. Our focus was simply matching buyers to properties, negotiating a deal then moving on to the next one.

I can also reveal that any kind of underhand side deals, gazumping etc., were always the work of less than honest vendors. As the agent and bearer of bad news, of course we'd get the blame!

fiwen30

Lonely_willow said:

I should also add he didnt just show me the bidding book. At the time he told me the name of the other bidder on the property. I said to him I do not believe him unless I actually saw the screen and kept repeating it. I think he got frustrated and said here come see for yourself.

Honestly, I’m more concerned about the fact that you stood in an EA office and kept harassing the agent, spouting off your demand over and over like a toddler. True, they shouldn’t have shown you the document for security reasons, but anyone coming into a place of work and intimidating the staff like that should count themselves lucky that the police weren’t called for them.

AdrianC

Jeepers_Creepers said:

'In cahoots': In most contexts, it describes the conspiring activity of people up to no good.

Which, from the OP's perspective, the vendor paying the EA to sell the property appears to be.

greatcrested

AdrianC said:

Jeepers_Creepers said:

'In cahoots': In most contexts, it describes the conspiring activity of people up to no good.

Which, from the OP's perspective, the vendor paying the EA to sell the property appears to be.

Are you seriously suggesting money changed (or was going to change) hands between the vendor and the EA!!!!!?

Jeepers_Creepers

AdrianC said:

Jeepers_Creepers said:

'In cahoots': In most contexts, it describes the conspiring activity of people up to no good.

Which, from the OP's perspective, the vendor paying the EA to sell the property appears to be.

I don't think that is what's being alleged, or suspected. 'Only' shill-bidding.

Thrugelmir

Jeepers_Creepers said:

AdrianC said:

Jeepers_Creepers said:

'In cahoots': In most contexts, it describes the conspiring activity of people up to no good.

Which, from the OP's perspective, the vendor paying the EA to sell the property appears to be.

I don't think that is what's being alleged, or suspected. 'Only' shill-bidding.

Why not simply decline the offer then?  If the only remaining bidder for your property drops out of the running, then you are stuffed anyway. 

MickyMart

If they have committed fraud, made a paper record of it then shown it to the victim they deserve to go to jail for gross stupidity. 

NameUnavailable

MickyMart said:

If they have committed fraud, made a paper record of it then shown it to the victim they deserve to go to jail for gross stupidity. 

Do you think a fraudster would be that stupid? Would they record the actual name of their partner in crime or do you think they might perhaps use some made up name instead? Hmmmmmm