Any issues with this estate agent contract?

yourlocalcheesemonger

eddddy said:

The estate agent is a member of the Property Ombudsman Scheme - but there are a few things in the contract that don't comply with the Ombudsman's mandatory code of practice. Plus a few generally dodgy things.





This sounds a bit dodgy. 

In what circumstances do they "Do any additional professional work", which isn't included in their standard estate agency fee?  (Are they trying to charge for some extras which other estate agents would include in their standard fee?)

What does "Assistance with the client's onward purchase" mean? All (good) estate agents should be contacting the estate agents up the chain to progress the sale. They don't charge extra for that.

At the very least, say that they must notify you in writing before doing anything that will incur extra costs.






That definition of "introduction" doesn't correspond with the Ombudsman's definition - specifically the addition of the "indirectly" bit.

I would say that you want to stick with the Ombudsman's definition - to avoid arguments. For example, you move to another estate agent, who sells your house to "Mr Peters" and this estate agent claims that they introduced "Mr Peters", because Mr Peters saw their for sale sign.




 

That doesn't comply with the Ombudsman's Code of Practice - if they say the exclusive period is 10 weeks, you should be able to give 2 weeks notice after 8 weeks.





The agent is being very naughty here.... They are suggesting that the above is from THE ESTATE AGENTS (Provision of information) REGULATIONS 1991.

But they've added a bit that isn't in the regulations, and you should have it removed.

The bit saying "or who received particulars or marketing material of any type from Fox Grant or any subagent" shouldn't be there.

It's not compliant with the Property Ombudsman's Code of Practice, and it's not in the regulations. 

Additionally, the Ombudsman puts a 6 months / 2 year time limit - which should also be in this contract.

Thanks. I'll ask them to specify the "additional professional work" from SPECIFICATION and remove the "indirectly" part from the PURCHASER clause. And also ask them to change to sole agency rights to avoid the latter issues you brought up.

eddddy

km1500 said:

....and you could find yourself 'homeless'. Don't touch it with a barge pole

@yourlocalcheesemonger (and others reading this thread) - just to cut through the puff...

There is no way in the world that a "ready, willing and able purchaser" clause in an estate agent's contract can result in you being made homeless.


(Obviously, you can voluntarily choose to sell your house, when you have nowhere to move to... but that would be a bit daft!)

eddddy

FWIW, the real problems with "Ready, Willing and Able purchaser" clauses are the arguments it can cause. For example....

• Your buyer is messing you about with silly demands, unacceptable exchange date requirements, unacceptable completion date requirements, etc, etc...
  
  
• You get fed-up with the buyer, and decide that you want to accept another offer (through another estate agent) or re-market the property with another estate agent. So you withdraw from selling to that buyer.

So then...

• The estate agent argues that the buyer was "ready, willing and able" - but you've withdrawn. So the agent wants their fee
• 
  
• You argue that the buyer wasn't "ready, willing and able" - because they were still arguing about terms

km1500

Another example....

your buyer is behaving perfectly reasonably it is the person you are buying from that is messing you around

eventually they confess that they are having second thoughts about selling their property and withdraw it from the market, or maybe their purchase has fallen through

you are three months into conveyancing and your purchasers are biting at the bit - they are certainly Ready Willing and Able to proceed

you have two choices - either continue the sale of your property and try to move into some kind of temporary accommodation whilst you look for somewhere to buy,  or remarket your property while you look but pay the estate agent their full fees plus vat and start all over again.

eddddy

km1500 said:

eventually they confess that they are having second thoughts about selling their property and withdraw it from the market, or maybe their purchase has fallen through

you are three months into conveyancing and your purchasers are biting at the bit - they are certainly Ready Willing and Able to proceed

you have two choices - either continue the sale of your property and try to move into some kind of temporary accommodation whilst you look for somewhere to buy,  or remarket your property while you look but pay the estate agent their full fees plus vat and start all over again.

No - that's not correct.

If your onward purchase falls through... your "ready willing and able purchaser" has to wait until you've found another place to buy.

You're not withdrawing from your sale, so you don't have to pay a fee to the estate agent at that point.

(Maybe your purchaser gets fed up waiting and withdraws, but you don't have to pay a fee if your purchaser withdraws.)

km1500

unfortunately that is not true - if you refused to exchange because your sale had fallen through you would be liable for your agent's fees.

But I am happy for us to agree to disagree, and for anyone reading this thread to ignore my warnings.

eddddy

km1500 said:

unfortunately that is not true - if you refused to exchange because your sale had fallen through you would be liable for your agent's fees.

You're not refusing to exchange contracts. You're waiting until you're ready to exchange contracts. That's how chains work.  You have to wait until everyone in the chain is ready to exchange contracts.


If your first purchase falls through, your buyer (and everyone else in the chain) has to wait until you're ready to exchange contracts on your second purchase, and so on.

And when you finally exchange contracts, the fee becomes payable to the estate agent, and it is paid on completion.


I'm sorry to keep coming back to challenge you on what you're saying, but people read these threads for advice, and what you are saying about a "ready, willing and able purchaser" is not correct.

eddddy

km1500 said:

unfortunately that is not true - if you refused to exchange because your sale had fallen through you would be liable for your agent's fees.

You're not refusing to exchange contracts. You're waiting until you're ready to exchange contracts. That's how chains work.  You have to wait until everyone in the chain is ready to exchange contracts.


If your first purchase falls through, your buyer (and everyone else in the chain) has to wait until you're ready to exchange contracts on your second purchase, and so on.

And when you finally exchange contracts, the fee becomes payable to the estate agent, and it is paid on completion.


I'm sorry to keep coming back to challenge you on what you're saying, but people read these threads for advice, and what you are saying about a "ready, willing and able purchaser" is not correct.



In simple terms, the purpose of a "ready, willing and able purchaser" clause is to make the seller pay the estate agent's fee, if the seller withdraws from an agreed sale before exchange of contracts,

GDB2222

I don’t want to pay the agent unless I actually sell the property. So, them finding a buyer is not good enough, and I would never sign a contract that requires me to pay unless at least contracts are exchanged. YMMV. 

km1500

"I'm sorry to keep coming back to challenge you on what you're saying..."

No need to apologise, there will always be differing opinions on here and if nothing else future readers may get food for thought and ask questions of their agent.