Changing agents- I believe old agents provided a fraudulent "Introductions list" !

eddddy

wannahouse said:

@eddddy "
If the old agent is dishonest, and includes people on the list they shouldn't - that's unfair on the new agent. But the seller doesn't really suffer."

Yes, the vendor DOES SUFFER from the dishonesty, as not only would we have to pay commission for the same to the current agent, we would also have to pay the first agents commission also, being stung twice!

No.  As I explained in a previous post - if somebody appears on the list, you don't pay the second agent.

You only pay the first agent.

See: https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81471971#Comment_81471971

Grumpy_chap

wannahouse said:

It is a name with no contact details so it doesnt breach any GDPR rules

I am asking out of curiosity, how does that work in the case of common names?  If the list includes "Mr Smith", for example.

wannahouse said:

Yes, the vendor DOES SUFFER from the dishonesty, as not only would we have to pay commission for the same to the current agent, we would also have to pay the first agents commission also, being stung twice!

I remain unconvinced that you would actually suffer in practical terms. 
There might be a theoretical case, and a more real case if the old contract was, say end 2024, then you removed from market before returning Easter 2025, then changing Agent from summer 2025.
However, how likely is it really that anyone who may have been introduced to your property in 2019 might plausibly still be in the market for a property like yours in 2025?  Anyone who was interested but did not proceed will not have put their life on pause hoping that your property will eventually return to market.

RHemmings

Grumpy_chap said:

wannahouse said:

It is a name with no contact details so it doesnt breach any GDPR rules

I am asking out of curiosity, how does that work in the case of common names?  If the list includes "Mr Smith", for example.

wannahouse said:

Yes, the vendor DOES SUFFER from the dishonesty, as not only would we have to pay commission for the same to the current agent, we would also have to pay the first agents commission also, being stung twice!

I remain unconvinced that you would actually suffer in practical terms. 
There might be a theoretical case, and a more real case if the old contract was, say end 2024, then you removed from market before returning Easter 2025, then changing Agent from summer 2025.
However, how likely is it really that anyone who may have been introduced to your property in 2019 might plausibly still be in the market for a property like yours in 2025?  Anyone who was interested but did not proceed will not have put their life on pause hoping that your property will eventually return to market.

Even if the OP would win any case at the ombudsman, having the first agent demand commission, and possibly sue them, is still likely to be aggravating and inconvenient. 

Personally I think that if the OP makes it known they are aware of TPOS, and TPOS's definition of an 'effective introduction', that the EA will back down. Could easily be wrong, though. 

wannahouse

Grumpy_chap said:

wannahouse said:

It is a name with no contact details so it doesnt breach any GDPR rules

I am asking out of curiosity, how does that work in the case of common names?  If the list includes "Mr Smith", for example.

wannahouse said:

Yes, the vendor DOES SUFFER from the dishonesty, as not only would we have to pay commission for the same to the current agent, we would also have to pay the first agents commission also, being stung twice!

I remain unconvinced that you would actually suffer in practical terms. 
There might be a theoretical case, and a more real case if the old contract was, say end 2024, then you removed from market before returning Easter 2025, then changing Agent from summer 2025.
However, how likely is it really that anyone who may have been introduced to your property in 2019 might plausibly still be in the market for a property like yours in 2025?  Anyone who was interested but did not proceed will not have put their life on pause hoping that your property will eventually return to market.

Its mainly investors looking to buy it seems at the moment, and because of the Grenfell disaster, apart from new flats, much of the flat market has been on hold since late 2019 because it has been difficult to sell until developer remediation agreements were signed etc, because new buyers didnt want to be be saddled with remediation costs and banks would not lend until it was clear who would be paying so the market there has come to much of a stand still, but for fire sales to cash buyers since then...
The Govt finally got its act together and got the market moving again with the developer remediation plan they had to sign up to, so people are finally able to start selling again, even if the remediations havent yet gone ahead..