Estate Agent fee question
Discussion
Hi All,
Wanted the opinion of the forum on estate agent fees. In summary our house has gone on the market, the marketing materials have been done and it is live on the website. We have had one viewing through the agent. So far so good.
Today our neighbour was talking to my other half and it came up that we were moving. The neighbour said they may want to buy the house. They did not know it was on the market until they were told but have now seen it on the website. Despite that the agent was not involved at all I think the fee is still payable due to the clause below. What do you think?
"An introduction will also be deemed to have occurred where contracts are exchanged for the purchase of the property and any marketing activity has been generated by the agent including (but not limited to) the publication of details of the property on the agents website or any other sites upon which the agents properties are listed or advertised in local or national press."
Regards
Josh
Wanted the opinion of the forum on estate agent fees. In summary our house has gone on the market, the marketing materials have been done and it is live on the website. We have had one viewing through the agent. So far so good.
Today our neighbour was talking to my other half and it came up that we were moving. The neighbour said they may want to buy the house. They did not know it was on the market until they were told but have now seen it on the website. Despite that the agent was not involved at all I think the fee is still payable due to the clause below. What do you think?
"An introduction will also be deemed to have occurred where contracts are exchanged for the purchase of the property and any marketing activity has been generated by the agent including (but not limited to) the publication of details of the property on the agents website or any other sites upon which the agents properties are listed or advertised in local or national press."
Regards
Josh
Paul Dishman said:
I think you’d be very foolish to try and get out of paying the agent the fees you’ve agreed with them
Thanks. Appreciate the response. No intention of getting out of a fee but given it is not a small amount I did want to check I wasn't being foolish by at least asking the question.Thanks
Josh
If I remember correctly, the last time I put a house on the market, the contract had a clause which said the agent would be entitled to their percentage if the house sold up to 6 months after it was taken off the market. Fortunately, this was in the early 90’s and trying to sell a house was like pushing toothpaste back in the tube! When I did eventually move to where I am now, it was a new property and the developer paid the fees. Happy days!
I had similar situations when I owned and a recruitment business. Whatever their terms say they’d need to show that they were the ‘effective cause’ of the introduction to successfully argue their fee.
I’d take the house off the market and sell to your neighbours without involving the agent.
I’d take the house off the market and sell to your neighbours without involving the agent.
The clause would effectively amount to what’s called sole selling rights as opposed to sole agency which is different .
Sole selling rights effectively means however the buyer is introduced ( and that includes a private buyer introduced by the seller ) the agent gets their fee.
Sole agency means they get the fee unless the buyer was introduced privately.
The clause would suggest when the property goes live on the website the agent gets paid.
Sole selling rights effectively means however the buyer is introduced ( and that includes a private buyer introduced by the seller ) the agent gets their fee.
Sole agency means they get the fee unless the buyer was introduced privately.
The clause would suggest when the property goes live on the website the agent gets paid.
We are in the same position, except that the neighbours had said for years "If you ever intend selling, let us know..."
When we signed-up with the Estate Agent, the condition was any buyer who had expressed an interest prior to the agreement being signed, so the EA asked "Is there anyone who has expressed an interest before today?" and I said "Only Mr and Mrs X up the road, but they havent even put theirs on the market"
Forwards 4 weeks, Mr & Mrs X put their house on the market within a week od seeing ours was for sale, sold in another 7 days and we have agreed a price with Mr & Mrs X. The EA has graciously confirmed no fee is payable.
If, 1 day after signing-up with the EA a different neighbour had said they were interested, it would have cost us the 1% +VAT agreed with the EA.
When we signed-up with the Estate Agent, the condition was any buyer who had expressed an interest prior to the agreement being signed, so the EA asked "Is there anyone who has expressed an interest before today?" and I said "Only Mr and Mrs X up the road, but they havent even put theirs on the market"
Forwards 4 weeks, Mr & Mrs X put their house on the market within a week od seeing ours was for sale, sold in another 7 days and we have agreed a price with Mr & Mrs X. The EA has graciously confirmed no fee is payable.
If, 1 day after signing-up with the EA a different neighbour had said they were interested, it would have cost us the 1% +VAT agreed with the EA.
ClaphamBoxS said:
The clause would effectively amount to what’s called sole selling rights as opposed to sole agency which is different .
Sole selling rights effectively means however the buyer is introduced ( and that includes a private buyer introduced by the seller ) the agent gets their fee.
Sole agency means they get the fee unless the buyer was introduced privately.
The clause would suggest when the property goes live on the website the agent gets paid.
I’d never heard of ‘sole selling rights’ but just looked it up. I’d just say that I wouldn’t enter into such an agreement.Sole selling rights effectively means however the buyer is introduced ( and that includes a private buyer introduced by the seller ) the agent gets their fee.
Sole agency means they get the fee unless the buyer was introduced privately.
The clause would suggest when the property goes live on the website the agent gets paid.
Mr.Chips said:
If I remember correctly, the last time I put a house on the market, the contract had a clause which said the agent would be entitled to their percentage if the house sold up to 6 months after it was taken off the market. Fortunately, this was in the early 90’s and trying to sell a house was like pushing toothpaste back in the tube! When I did eventually move to where I am now, it was a new property and the developer paid the fees. Happy days!
‘The developer paid the fees’. No such thing as a free lunch! 
Hi all,
First thanks for all the comments. Much appreciated. I have re read the contract and at no point is "Sole Selling rights" named or defined. I did sign the agent as a sole agent but I am not locked to a minimum term with them i.e. I can terminate at 28 days notice.
However I do feel that as commented by others I would have to prove that the agents activity had nothing to do with the sale. My other half has been back to the neighbour tonight who now says that in fact they saw the photographer and then were checking Rightmove since then. SO the activity of the agent did lead to them having an interest.
I don't mind paying for fair work done, my last house took over a year to sell and the agent got the fee agreed, this time it looks like it will sell within 2 weeks of listing so I guess it evens out over time. I just wanted to check as if their activity had nothing to do with it then I might have pushed back on the fee.
I guess there is nothing stopping me having a "cheeky" discussion asking them for a 10% reduction
Thanks again
Josh
First thanks for all the comments. Much appreciated. I have re read the contract and at no point is "Sole Selling rights" named or defined. I did sign the agent as a sole agent but I am not locked to a minimum term with them i.e. I can terminate at 28 days notice.
However I do feel that as commented by others I would have to prove that the agents activity had nothing to do with the sale. My other half has been back to the neighbour tonight who now says that in fact they saw the photographer and then were checking Rightmove since then. SO the activity of the agent did lead to them having an interest.
I don't mind paying for fair work done, my last house took over a year to sell and the agent got the fee agreed, this time it looks like it will sell within 2 weeks of listing so I guess it evens out over time. I just wanted to check as if their activity had nothing to do with it then I might have pushed back on the fee.
I guess there is nothing stopping me having a "cheeky" discussion asking them for a 10% reduction
Thanks again
Josh
Had the same in the past except at this point the agent had done nothing except list it on Rightmove. No viewings. We disputed the fee, cant remember the contract but suspect it was similar. They said they would sue us, in the end we agreed to pay them a bit but not the full fee as they had done Jack s
t.
Selling to the neighbour turned out to be a bit tricky though as he tried to pull a fast one with the Radon gas stuff.
t.Selling to the neighbour turned out to be a bit tricky though as he tried to pull a fast one with the Radon gas stuff.
This is often used by agents where they are no longer appointed to sell a house but an eventual buyer was originally found by the agent.
Effectively it means that if someone views or registers an interest through an agent but does not buy until the house is no longer on their books, the fees are still due.
In the OP’s case it would probably be strictly applicable but whether the EA would have any knowledge that it was their listing that attracted the interest is another question.
Effectively it means that if someone views or registers an interest through an agent but does not buy until the house is no longer on their books, the fees are still due.
In the OP’s case it would probably be strictly applicable but whether the EA would have any knowledge that it was their listing that attracted the interest is another question.
josh bear said:
Today our neighbour was talking to my other half and it came up that we were moving. The neighbour said they may want to buy the house. They did not know it was on the market until they were told but have now seen it on the website. Despite that the agent was not involved at all I think the fee is still payable due to the clause below. What do you think?
I bought a house this way several years ago.... I was out for a walk and bumped into my nearest neighbour (7 acres away, so not a regular occurrence). He told me he'd put the house on with Hamptons the day before - I bought it and he paid the agreed (and substantial) fee, despite the fact it wasn't even on Hamptons website yet. No way out.thanks all,
Appreciate all the responses. Can draw this to a close now as things have moved on. Our neighbour gave us an offer last night, which was great and then rescinded it this afternoon.
Been 8 years since I have moved house and now I remember why I hate this process.
regards and thanks
Josh
Appreciate all the responses. Can draw this to a close now as things have moved on. Our neighbour gave us an offer last night, which was great and then rescinded it this afternoon.
Been 8 years since I have moved house and now I remember why I hate this process.
regards and thanks
Josh
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff