We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
estate agent
smudger1946
Posts: 645 Forumite
Warning.
I had two ESTATE agents (multi) selling home, one showed a lady round 5mths ago approx, lady said to small, other agent showed lady around 5mths later she decided to buy, i had dropped price by £10,000 by then, both agents had the revised price.
I sold through the second agent, now the original agent say i have to pay them there fee £4,600 because they introduced the lady to my home in the first place.
It is in there terms and conditions, which i didnt read, i think this is an unfair t&c.
They are going to pursue unless i pay in 7 days, i dont have that kind of money spare, i have paid the agent who sold property.
Any advice, which way do i jump?
I had two ESTATE agents (multi) selling home, one showed a lady round 5mths ago approx, lady said to small, other agent showed lady around 5mths later she decided to buy, i had dropped price by £10,000 by then, both agents had the revised price.
I sold through the second agent, now the original agent say i have to pay them there fee £4,600 because they introduced the lady to my home in the first place.
It is in there terms and conditions, which i didnt read, i think this is an unfair t&c.
They are going to pursue unless i pay in 7 days, i dont have that kind of money spare, i have paid the agent who sold property.
Any advice, which way do i jump?
0
Comments
-
'fraid you have to pay up.0
-
I'm afraid that agents regularly follow through and take people to court over this and they usually win. As you said - it is in the Ts&Cs. I've seen this one alot over the years.
You need to pay up. Sorry.
It would be worth trying to negotiate paying back over a few months if that helps spread the cost but I can not see them accepting much longer than that.
N790 -
If you haven't paid the second agent, you could try negotiating a reduction - maybe they could share the fee.0
-
This is why you read Ts and Cs BEFORE signing anything. You got yourself into it, so you're going to have to pay up.0
-
smudger1946 wrote: »Warning.
I had two ESTATE agents (multi) selling home, one showed a lady round 5mths ago approx, lady said to small, other agent showed lady around 5mths later she decided to buy, i had dropped price by £10,000 by then, both agents had the revised price.
I sold through the second agent, now the original agent say i have to pay them there fee £4,600 because they introduced the lady to my home in the first place.
It is in there terms and conditions, which i didnt read, i think this is an unfair t&c.
They are going to pursue unless i pay in 7 days, i dont have that kind of money spare, i have paid the agent who sold property.
Any advice, which way do i jump?
Why oh why oh why did you not read the terms and conditions?? Always read everything and anything before signing.
Sorry to break the news to you, but this is a bog standard t&c when using multiple agents, so I'm not sure if there's any loophole to get out of it.
Was the house marketed with both estate agents at the same time, or did you put it on with one, then take it off the market, then put it on with the other? If the latter, then you might be able to claim that the contract with the first estate agent was over, therefore no fee is payable.
Did you sign the terms and conditions? Was there a time limit on the contract with the estate agent.
I'd read through all the paperwork carefully and perhaps there's something written ambiguously that might be able to get you out of paying the 2nd agent.
i.e. our leasehold says "carpets or suitable alternative", so when the builder pointed out that wooden flooring wasn't allowed, and told me I might have to take it out and put carpet down, I pointed out that it fitted the category of "suitable alternative" , and he agreed that the wording of the lease was too vague and wouldn't stand up in court.Should've = Should HAVE (not 'of')
Would've = Would HAVE (not 'of')
No, I am not perfect, but yes I do judge people on their use of basic English language. If you didn't know the above, then learn it! (If English is your second language, then you are forgiven!)0 -
deja vu - i just replied to this in the other area.0
-
Thats quite a high fee isnt it? Was it a percentage?Its up to the seller to hammer out the terms I am afraid.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.1K Spending & Discounts
- 246.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.1K Life & Family
- 260.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards
