EA contract has 'ready, willing and able' clause - should I avoid?

Doozergirl

Carrot007 said:

lisyloo said:

Carrot007 said:

I fail to see why in the current marktet you would not just use an online fixed fee place. (and to be fair at any time in the past 10 years).

Unless of course you expect them to show people round which would be UNWELCOME around here anyway. (it would always put me off unelss the property was empty).

Depends on many factors including the target market.
i sold via a traditional agency where the elderly target market were probably not online and the EA already had a suitable buyer registered.

Which is a good reason in certain areas. Though under 71 these days I would expect to be online, how long ago was it?

Online agents are not a catch-all is my point.  

Some people need their hands holding, on both sides of a sale.  

I also hate being shown around by vendors and won't be the only one.  

Carrot007

Doozergirl said:

Carrot007 said:

lisyloo said:

Carrot007 said:

I fail to see why in the current marktet you would not just use an online fixed fee place. (and to be fair at any time in the past 10 years).

Unless of course you expect them to show people round which would be UNWELCOME around here anyway. (it would always put me off unelss the property was empty).

Depends on many factors including the target market.
i sold via a traditional agency where the elderly target market were probably not online and the EA already had a suitable buyer registered.

Which is a good reason in certain areas. Though under 71 these days I would expect to be online, how long ago was it?

Online agents are not a catch-all is my point.  

Some people need their hands holding, on both sides of a sale.  

I also hate being shown around by vendors and won't be the only one.  

Aye, people can be different. But it would be vendor or agent waits outside for me. Why ask someone hwo knows nothing about the house?

FWIW my online one (can;t remember 6 years ago was not PB) held the hands on the 1st timer fairly well. So they are not all bad. And many offline agents do nothing (I have been there), online will organsise somwone to do the showing around locally for you for extr aif they are decent anyway).

pinkteapot

Lonza said:

Should I ask for this to be removed? Some advice sites (e.g. Which?) say you shouldn't have such a clause; I can see why an EA would want to reclaim *some* payment if I had to pull out post-exchange (and i recognise this is hopefully unlikely anyway), and wouldn't mind a compromise of paying e.g. half a fee... And in fact the amount doesn't seem to be specified... But maybe I should ask for it to be taken out.

Assume you mean pre-exchange? 

If you pull out post-exchange, having to pay EA fees will be the least of your problems...

eddddy

Lonza said:

Thanks both.

I should also say that there is a separate 'ready, willing and able' clause (separate to the one in my OP), which suggests I would be liable for a fee even if contracts were *not* exchanged:

"A buyer is ready willing and able if they are prepared and are able to exchange unconditional contracts for the purchase of your property. If such a buyer is introduced by us in accordance with your instructions our fee will become due even if you subsequently withdraw from the sale and unconditional contracts for sale are not exchanged".

The problem is, that kind of clause can lead to arguments between the seller and the EA - about whether a buyer is "ready, willing and able".

For example, if a buyer says one of the following:

• "I'm ready, willing and able to exchange contracts, as long as you reduce the price by £20k for roof repairs"

• "I'm ready, willing and able to exchange contracts with a completion date in September 2022"

• "I'm ready, willing and able to exchange contracts as long as you let me fit a new kitchen before completion"

If you withdraw because you're not prepared to accept those terms - are you liable for a fee?

When I challenge EAs about this, they just say "Of course we wouldn't charge you in those kind of circumstances"  - but if it's not written into the contract, I've only got their word for that.

So that kind of clause can make things very messy.

spinspiral

I had estate agents strike out that clause- pointed out it completely negated the 'no sale no fee' business model and they got rid of it immediately, almost as if they were just seeing if they could get away with slipping that clause in. 

GDB2222

It’s ridiculous. You are not paying the agent to find a buyer. You are paying to sell your house. 

eddddy

GDB2222 said:

It’s ridiculous. You are not paying the agent to find a buyer. You are paying to sell your house. 

The situation that the EA is trying to cover is...

The EA finds a buyer, gets an offer accepted, progresses the sale to exchange of contracts - and maybe has done months of work.


Then the seller says on a whim - "I don't want to sell anymore".  The EA thinks they should get their fee in that clear-cut situation. 

But the problem is that a "ready, wiling and able buyer" clause is too vague, and the EA might use that clause to claim a fee in other less clear-cut situations.

steampowered

I would insist that the clause is removed. Payment on completion is normal. 

Robbo66 said:

I would be surprised if the agent removed the able and willing clause as you become liable for the agents fee once a property exchanges as they have then done the job you employed them to do. There maybe some charges to the agent should you pull out before exchange happens such as the cost of photos, EPCs and any extra advertising other than the normal channels but these would be in the EA contract you agree and sign

You could equally say that the EA has "done the job" if you remove the house from the market, or don't receive any acceptable offers. Yet in that scenario you'd never be expected to pay the EA's full fees! The whole EA business model is around getting paid on completion.

GDB2222

eddddy said:

GDB2222 said:

It’s ridiculous. You are not paying the agent to find a buyer. You are paying to sell your house. 

The situation that the EA is trying to cover is...

The EA finds a buyer, gets an offer accepted, progresses the sale to exchange of contracts - and maybe has done months of work.


Then the seller says on a whim - "I don't want to sell anymore".  The EA thinks they should get their fee in that clear-cut situation. 

But the problem is that a "ready, wiling and able buyer" clause is too vague, and the EA might use that clause to claim a fee in other less clear-cut situations.

I agree that that is what the EA is trying to cover. But, the seller is trying to move home, so he needs to tie up his sale with his onward purchase.

There's no point having a willing buyer, if there's nothing for the seller to buy. So, it's foolish to agree to pay the EA unless the sale actually proceeds. 

The time to think about this is before signing the contract, as the OP very wisely has done.