Stung by Sole Agency Agreement - Am I stuffed?

Robbo66

Two court rulings that found in favour of the seller
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-6036943/Now-homeowners-wont-pay-double-commission-thanks-landmark-ruling.html
and
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff70860d03e7f57ea6490

basically the judge in both cases rules that for an estate agent to claim commission it had to be involved in the sale, not just the introduction.

pinkshoes

Tibu3105 said:

2.  Yes they did send me a list of viewers including the buyer but without any reference to the sole agency agreement.  TBH I really didn't connect the 2 until I received the email this week.

Did you give this list to EA2? (you should have btw...)

If you gave this list to EA2, then EA2 should have referred the buyer back to EA1 as they were the ones who introduced the buyer in the first place. By not doing so, they have caused problems, and I would say that either EA1 are due the fee (and not EA2) or they should share the fee.

If you didn't give the list to EA2, then you will probably need evidence from the buyer that they tried to pursue this through EA1 but got no response.

jonnydeppiwish!

Robbo66 said:

Two court rulings that found in favour of the seller
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-6036943/Now-homeowners-wont-pay-double-commission-thanks-landmark-ruling.html
and
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff70860d03e7f57ea6490

basically the judge in both cases rules that for an estate agent to claim commission it had to be involved in the sale, not just the introduction.

I think are very pertinent in this case, specifically the being involved in the sale.

Tibu3105

pinkshoes said:

Tibu3105 said:

2.  Yes they did send me a list of viewers including the buyer but without any reference to the sole agency agreement.  TBH I really didn't connect the 2 until I received the email this week.

Did you give this list to EA2? (you should have btw...)

If you gave this list to EA2, then EA2 should have referred the buyer back to EA1 as they were the ones who introduced the buyer in the first place. By not doing so, they have caused problems, and I would say that either EA1 are due the fee (and not EA2) or they should share the fee.

If you didn't give the list to EA2, then you will probably need evidence from the buyer that they tried to pursue this through EA1 but got no response.

Delayed thanks for the reply.   So no I didn't because I didn't realise I needed to.  I do have an email from the buyer stating they did not respond and in the meantime time they saw the house advertised with EA2 which prompted them to give up chasing EA1.

Following my complaint to EA1 who have now provided their final response, I've now referred this matter to the Property Redress Scheme which is where they are a member.  In the meantime, the debt collector is still chasing me following EA1's instructions that the dispute is a separate matter to the commission which they say is still due immediately.  Does anyone know if this is correct?

Thanks again for any advice.

T

p.s. the 2 cases are very relevant so thanks for those too.

Robbo66

Tibu3105 said:

pinkshoes said:

Tibu3105 said:

2.  Yes they did send me a list of viewers including the buyer but without any reference to the sole agency agreement.  TBH I really didn't connect the 2 until I received the email this week.

Did you give this list to EA2? (you should have btw...)

If you gave this list to EA2, then EA2 should have referred the buyer back to EA1 as they were the ones who introduced the buyer in the first place. By not doing so, they have caused problems, and I would say that either EA1 are due the fee (and not EA2) or they should share the fee.

If you didn't give the list to EA2, then you will probably need evidence from the buyer that they tried to pursue this through EA1 but got no response.

Delayed thanks for the reply.   So no I didn't because I didn't realise I needed to.  I do have an email from the buyer stating they did not respond and in the meantime time they saw the house advertised with EA2 which prompted them to give up chasing EA1.

Following my complaint to EA1 who have now provided their final response, I've now referred this matter to the Property Redress Scheme which is where they are a member.  In the meantime, the debt collector is still chasing me following EA1's instructions that the dispute is a separate matter to the commission which they say is still due immediately.  Does anyone know if this is correct?

Thanks again for any advice.

T

p.s. the 2 cases are very relevant so thanks for those too.

This is incorrect, as you have disputed the debt and it has been referred to the redress scheme the agent should be telling the debt collector to put things on hold till its been ruled on, hopefully in your favour. Get back on to the agents and tell them to call the debt collector off