Sole Selling Agreement

Mutton_Geoff

I can't believe some agents would stoop so low to get a fee that may very well be not entitled to

Try reading the thread linked to in my comment above. It will make your eyes water, particularly when you realise that Countrywide are the UK's largest EA firm and own hundreds of "brands" across the country. At least when I wake up each morning I can thank my stars I'm not an estate agent ;-)

Debt_Free_Chick

danivtec wrote: »

My agreement states

"Fees will only be charged if a purchaser is introduced directly or indirectly by us, or by any other agent during the period of our sole agency, and that purchaser enters into a binding contract to purchase the property"

Furthermore

"We will be sole agents for a period of 16 weeks from the date of this agreement......the sole agency will continue thereafter unless terminated by either party giving 14 days notice"

I therefore would ask, if someone was introduced to my property after 16 weeks and i now changed my agent and this person brought my property with a new agent, would the first agent be in their right to claim a fee?(Contract was signed in June 2007)

The key thing here is the termination of the sole agency. So "if someone was introduced to my property after 16 weeks and i now changed my agent and this person brought my property with a new agent, would the first agent be in their right to claim a fee?" possibly, yes, if the buyer was introduced before the sole agency was properly terminated. Note, you have to give notice.

So your best bet is to give notice and get the current EA to confirm the date on which the SA terminated. Then appoint a new EA - or talk to them now, but make it clear that they will not be appointed until you confirm the date to them in writing.

Bear in mind that someone who saw the property with the existing EA 6 weeks ago might then go to the new EA in 6 weeks time ... so you can't prevent the problem surfacing!

What's wrong with your current EA? Can't you talk to them?

Mutton_Geoff

The way Countrywide defended their claim against me was with similar wording to yours. Looking at your example ...

Fees will only be charged if a purchaser is introduced directly or indirectly by us, or by any other agent during the period of our sole agency, and that purchaser enters into a binding contract to purchase the property"

Remove the comma'd section about other agents during the sole agency period and you end up with:

Fees will only be charged if a purchaser is introduced directly or indirectly by us and that purchaser enters into a binding contract to purchase the property"

It is a clause without time limit. If at any time in the future, the person introduced to your property by that agent (and that can include as little as seeing their board at your property, or viewing it in the window) then their fee will be charged. The judge in my case determined that such a clause is without an expiry period. Be very careful. I've just sold another property and I spent almost two hours editing the estate agents contract before I signed it to clarify such ambiguous clauses.

I know it's hard to believe, I didn't until I ended up in court and was horrified to learn of Countrywide's determined policy to pursue their commissions despite their agents incompetence (in my case the agent had received an offer for my property but never even told me about the viewing let alone pass on the offer. Repeated calls to their office by the prospective purchaser, a local business with a handful of properties, went unanswered. It was only when the prospect saw the new agents board did he realise the place was still for sale and made the offer through the new agent who then passed this on to me).

courtjester

One of the big problems if you go to court is the lack of understanding /interest that many judges (particularly in the small claims court) have in the technicalities of these types of cases - the law around estate agents is extremely grey and has not been updated since 1979 - all the rules and regs relate to an era long past (when the internet and the direction of consumer legilsation didnt' exist). Even the OFT can't offer a clear guide to how old laws apply to modern circumstances and technologies.

jimc_2

Mutton_Geoff wrote: »

Countrywide's determined policy to pursue their commissions despite their agents incompetence (in my case the agent had received an offer for my property but never even told me about the viewing let alone pass on the offer. Repeated calls to their office by the prospective purchaser, a local business with a handful of properties, went unanswered.

Whoa! Hold on! That's illegal!

Estate Agents have very few regulations or controls, but one is a statutory duty to pass on ALL offers. That's because some crooked agents have been known to abuse their position by holding on to the property for an 'inside' deal with a mate (or even themselves!) at a low price by not mentioning offers and saying "the price is too high". What you describe could get the Agent BANNED from trading! If they sued you, why not complain about them to the local Trading Standards Officer? At the very least it'll embarrass them.

(Don't hold your breath about closing them down though. A reporter friend who investigated this told me that the OFT received over 4000 complaints about agents acting illegally last year but only a grand total of 5 were actually banned. So much for the law!)

Having said that, it's still worth everyone with similar experiences complaining to the local TSO to try to bring some balance against the underhand or sloppy practices of some Agents who STILL try to claim a fee even if they did nothing to get the sale.

At the very least it is good to bring the complaint to the attention of your local newspaper once you've made it (but not the one that carries their adverts! Wonder why that one is unlikely to be reported?)