The National Trading Standards Estate Agency Team is reviewing guidelines for estate agents, and preliminary discussions may include how OnTheMarket's early bird' listing concept fits in with agents' responsibilities.
Estate Agent Today understands the NTSEAT decided this autumn to review advice and guidelines previously issued by the old Office of Fair Trading with a view to re-issuing them to agents and related professionals.
It has asked experts to give their comments ahead of a possible re-issue in early spring 2015.
Estate Agent Today also understands that some of the input from experts will include consideration whether the idea promoted by Agents' Mutual's new portal OnTheMarket - that it may carry property listings up to 48 hours ahead of other portals - can be reconciled with agents' general responsibilities to act in the interests of their vendor clients.
In 2012 when some OFT guidelines were last reviewed, this early bird' concept was not available on any of the then-existing portals.
But now Agents' Mutual is floating the idea and high-end agency Strutt & Parker - a founder of the new portal - has described an offer of early bird' listing for new properties, 48 hours ahead of other portals as one of OnTheMarket's four main selling points.
The input to the review is thought to consider whether agents not using OnTheMarket, and so unable to take advantage of this eartly bird facility, are failing in their responsibility to vendors by not listing as quickly as possible.
By contrast, another element of the expert input to the review is understood to include consideration of whether agents have a responsibility to their vendor clients to put property details on all available portals at the same time.
If this was insisted upon by NTSEAT, it effectively eliminates the early bird idea which OnTheMarket wants to use as a unique selling point, because every portal would receive details at the same time.
It is also likely that the NTSEAT review will receive submissions asking how early bird listing can be reconciled with the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the Business Protection from Misleading Marketing Regulations 2008.
.jpg)
Comments
If I have to spell it out then it's already lost on you, I'm afraid...
Wtf are you taking about pee bee
"A very silly agent would sign up to such restrictive terms." Maybe... maybe not - but it would be an even more silly marketing numpty would post such derogatory statements on an Estate Agents Forum, 'sign' it with his website address, and then expect any of those FOUR THOUSAND PLUS "silly" Agents to come running for help to supposedly win more instructions...
...wouldn't it
How are they OTM a better market alternative... They have 0 market branding and in the eye of the vendor offer nothing different yet... Yet they are expecting agents to choose.. A very silly agent would sign up to such restrictive terms. Zoopla and rm are the brands 90% sellers know and trust... I see this a fat white elephant
Just a thought.
What is the OTM's USP
Years ago, as a member of the Chartered Institute of Marketing I attended many regional meetings and remember that Smiths Crisps were always held up as an example, wrongly as it turned out, of a brand one should never challenge. Then along came Golden Wonder followed by Walkers with their USP of flavours. What ever happened to Smiths
Not bad at all James, well argued, the only thing we have to allow for is the unexpected!
Ha, you ducked my question "expert"!!!
Having spent a while reading comments/articles on this debacle, I was undecided for a long period, mainly due to a lack of knowledge on the subject.
For me, it has now become really quite clear. I can't see OTM becoming the overnight success it's going to need to be. The problem is, it needs to satisfy two completely different markets; the consumer & the agents. And these are intertwined.
As agents, nobody wants to pay extortionate fees and we want as many leads as possible. Simple idea, but this hinges on the needs of the consumer to draw those leads.
As a consumer, you want user friendly access with a simple path through your search and you'll go to a recognizable brand. Rightmove draws a large score through both boxes. Zoopla is very similar and also ticks both.
Now I look at things in a very simplistic way but the reason for a start up business is either there is a gap in the market to exploit or you've got something NEW that's going to revolutionize the market.
I don't see how OTM meet either criteria for the consumers
Again it may be pleasing for agents to see those lower fees and to feel they have more control of their advertising but from a consumer perspective it makes no sense - The two big guns have nailed it already.
Yes Z did break into the market at a later point, but can that realistically happen again
I fear this would be like someone taking on Coke (R) and Pepsi (Z) in the cola market.... In to the wind springs to mind
@Ray
Ray, if you offer or imply a portal is part of your marketing and you fail to tell clients that you will be leaving the main or a secondary portal, leaving the client locked into your agreement post joining Agents Mutual then yiu fall fowl on omision and should allow clients to leave your tie in if being on RM or Z is of importance to them in their eyes.
Its not for agents to compromise clients wishes in the way their home is marketed. If marketing is altered then you have potentially broken your own tie in period and must let clients go elsewhere.
Its like having a phone contract and your service provider taking away your 4g and replacing with a dial up internet. Alike agents have to maintain the service that was entered into.
Until AMs OTM is able to be consumer known as any portal your leaving any tied in consumers must be told 1. Why you are leaving. Ie to save RM or Z bigh costs. Plus honestly told that OTM has little consumer brand awareness.
@Ray and Elizabeth
If an agent has advertised as part of their sevices that XY and Z portals will be used a d this forms part of the reason why the vendor chose an agent. Then these services have to be provided. Equally if an agent gained business by offering another solution such as advertising in a paper. On the back of a bus etc then to break a transactional offering would mean the client should have rights to take their business elsewhere leaving the agent to operate how they wish.
Agents and clients have rights. You can not offer consumers a deal then withdraw part of the offering during a tie in period. To do so would be a breach that Trading Standards would most of the time support the consumer on.
If an agent thinks a tie in period is a safeguard to holding instructions when contract matter changes. It ISN'T
@Elizabeth. Check with your local Trading Standards officer. If you contractually agree things that matter with consumers. You have to provide what is agreed. Your actions chance getting you in very hot water for breaching clients best interests under CPRs and the estate agents act.
:-) :-)
Agents have the right to advertise where they like. They also have the right to delay exposing the vendors property to a big chunk of the market for whatever reason.
Vendors have the right to instruct whichever agent they like. They often find it difficult to choose. I think this will ease their decision.
Mr Shinerock,
I do not agree with your interpretations.
Basically a person has a freedom of choice as to whom he instructs to act for him and the advertised methods they employ to provide the service.
I will now look forward to what January holds.
PeeBee,
Of course. They can choose.
What are you talking about We have not dropped another portal. We are joining a new portal.
Hey PeeBee, nice to see you my man :-)
Ray an agent has a duty of care to act in the best interests of their client and to openly declare any conflict of interest they may have. This general principal is already widely applied within estate agency, the case of AM is a new one but the principal will be applied to them to, sooner or later. It is self evident that by entering into a restrictive agreement with AM the agent has significantly compromised their ability to make appropriate marketing decisions in their clients interests, surely you must agree that the creation of AM is not about what's best for clients
It's not just joining a portal though is it Mark. It's entering into an agreement to drop another bigger portal to save costs and take control
Absoflippin'lutely, Ray - couldn't agree with you more.
Would you, in the same vein - spirit of Goodwill and all that... ;) - potentially agree that SOMETIMES, those clients MIGHT be influenced by the Agent's choice of portal
Why is it that some people do not understand the following
'Has everyone forgotten that an agent is an agent and is not obligated to use ANY portal. Clients instruct the AGENT and the clients can choose the one that suits them'
Aren't R a cartel for only allowing agent listings on the biggest property portal on the internet at the expense of private listers
@GB
well said
@Mark
The industry has rules from the dated 79 Estate Agents Act, CPRs, BPRs and many other regulations. They are in place and agents who dont show compliance are open to action or fines.
Companies like AM are introducing their own rules which in parts favour agents pockets over consumer redress.
At government consultations I have never seen AM or OTM or Zoopla or RM representation. I would be extemely cautious about joining a cartel where the agenda doesnt comply with consumers who agents serve best interest.
We're instructed to sell houses, not list houses on property portals.
When the OFT disbanded policing of regulation went to TS and money laundering to HMRC.
The restraints AM are placing on agents is anti CPR consumer protection regulations. Not acting in the best interest of clients by delaying uploads and by AM making agents blacklist a portal could carry action by TS on agents.
Managers and negotiators could also come under TS policing when MDs of bigger independent agencies foolishly adopt rules from AM who have obviously not considered the reason why they were instructed in the first place. I am neither a fan oc rightmove or zoopla.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
If you think "The National Trading Standards Estate Agency Team is reviewing guidelines for estate agents, and preliminary discussions may include how OnTheMarkets early bird listing concept fits in with agents responsibilities." is REPORTING NEWS rather than making an editorial comment then you are seriously thick or deluded.
@MarkWalker - I have no problem with who you choose to advertise. It is only your clients you need to justify this. My concern is your accusation of bias. I don't see any evidence of this and for a media publication I think it's a serious accusation. As @RobDavies says, there is a duty to report these things.
If you think "The National Trading Standards Estate Agency Team is reviewing guidelines for estate agents, and preliminary discussions may include how OnTheMarkets early bird listing concept fits in with agents responsibilities." is REPORTING NEWS rather than making an editorial comment then you are seriously thick or deluded.
Begins with R and has had a monopoly position for many years.
What's the other credible portal you speak of
How is it anti-Agents' Mutual They're just reporting the news. As I've said many times before, if there are more stories about AM with a negative slant is that EAT's fault. What do you want them to do, make up stories championing AM/OTM just to balance things out
If they want to be a major player, they have to expect scrutiny. All the other big portals and major agencies do. It's not all going to be sweetness and light, they are going to face criticism and will be held to account if they do things wrong or don't stick to their promises. That's the way of the world. That's the way it should be.
Because every story put on here about Agents Mutual has a negative slant. And look who advertises on these pages...
There is currently only one credible portal and we will be on them as well as On The Market. Why would you have a problem with that
Early bird listings are solely to the benefit of AM. Will a good neg not call applicants who registered through another portal Of course not. It's self serving to make OTM seem better - and how ill it be policed It's totally at odds with RM's real time uploads and clearly designed to undermine this. Frankly, OTM would be better placed to offer a cost effect service as an additional or alternative portal. These restrictive business practises are simply wrong. If Z take a huge battering, don't rule our the possibility of direct vendor listings. As it is, all OTM have really achieved is a ringing endorsement which has strengthened RM's position and which will in all likelihood result in increased pricing. Agents not happy returning to Zoopla wount be welcomed with open arms - they will find increased costs there too.
A major cog, though. And, if all the Agents' Mutual people keep dropping Zoopla, there is an argument that Rightmove will only go from strength to strength in 2015. Some people seem to have their heads in the sand when it comes to the impact of Rightmove. They are huge. They are a major brand. Yes, estate agents can cope without them, but it'd be naive to dismiss their place in the property world.
@Observer - If it was your house, would you want to be on all the major portals to get maximum eyeballs What do your clients say when you tell them where you are putting YOUR listings
@RayEvans - as an agent you should do what is BEST for clients. Do you really believe that the best website to sell their property will be AM + one rather than all of the others in January and February {{This is why I believe you are failing in your duty as fiduciary agent}}
@MarkWalker - How is this story biased It seems neutral and factual to me. Do you believe this story should not have been run
Currently there is only 1 credible portal. And even from them we get no more leads than we did 6 years ago, but their fees have gone up well over inflation year-on-year.
But things evolve. I'm sure there are still agents out there who are generating leads through their own means. Good luck to them. But there is such furious debate whenever the portals are mentioned because it is, whether you like it or not, the single biggest issue in the property industry at the moment. That's why it generates so many comments and, at times, such heated discussion.
But surely it's churlish to not afford the portals the credit they deserve as a very major marketing tool in an increasingly digital world. Imperfect, and arguably not the be all and end all, but portals are very important in generating leads for many estate agents.
Yet another sign of the Nanny state we live in. How can it be the duty of Trading Standards to tell us when and where we advertise our properties. As long as we do not mislead clients by saying we advertise on certain Portals when we don't, surely the whole idea of competition is that individual agents have different approaches to how they sell property and clients choose their agent on that basis. How can delaying the display of a property on one website by 48 hours be such a no no when it will be displayed during that time on another major Portal. I tell my clients that I advertise properties in the local paper, but this week I haven't put an ad in as it's so close to Christmas. Am I to be prosecuted for that, as it's not in the best interest of my clients.
I appreciate a need to protect clients from unscrupulous practices, but it takes the biscuit when we get told how to run our businesses.
Thank you Ray Evans. I understand that everyone is invested in the portal debate for different reasons but what seems to be continually forgotten is that agents existed for many years without portals and believe it or not there are still agents out there that generate the majority of their leads through other means...
Has everyone forgotten that an agent is an agent and is not obligated to use ANY portal. Clients instruct the AGENT and the clients can choose the one that suits them. Green Top Milkman is right, portals are just one part of marketing and selling
P.S. Mr Shinerock, and others, should have to start paying for banging their own personal drum on this site!
What's the problem
As long as the agent tells the client what he or she is doing it doesn't matter. You'd think that RM is the be all and end all of residential property marketing. It's just one cog in the marketing wheel and is set to become a smaller one as 2015 progresses.
Estate agents are strange. They're the only so-called profession or business group to bend over backwards to support the hand that bites them and fall over themselves to give people valuable advice for nothing. Quite weird when you think about it.
How is joining a property portal putting our clients' needs beneath our own
I think the real problem is that AM is going to get quite a lot of support, I admit I didn't think it would but I underestimated how many agents would go for it. In my mind though AM is a reflection of the opinion that some agents have that their clients needs are secondary to their own which is in my view fundamentally wrong. It won't be long now and we will see the outcome
What ter rubbish - this site is so obviously having its strings pulled by Zoopla it's completely lost all credibility
I love all this getting hot under the collar about something that hasn't happened and may or may not happen.
And oh look, another anti-Agents Mutual article next door to Z advertising.
I see members of buy to let forums - mostly landlords - are saying en masse that they will not list properties for let or for sale with any agent who is not on RM or Z. They say they want maximum exposure for their properties and the fees that agents pay to portals are of no concern to them.
It won't take long for that attitude to filter down to residential clients once the full impact of AM's one portal rule is understood/exposed by non AM agents.
I agree completely Simon.
How can it be in the clients best interests to 1) delay uploading to the UK's no.1 portal for buyers and 2) deny completely an uploading to the UK's no.2 portal for buyers
Holding back an instruction from General release until pre-qualified buyers get a pre-view is a valid and effective msrketing technique. Generally releasing a property on only one portal is not and its sole purpose is to establish an advantage for that portal against the interests of the client.
How can early bird listing in any way be in the clients interest It's purpose is solely part of AM's main objectives which are to remove Zoopla as the no.2 portal, undermine RM's dominance via early bird listings and marginalise online agents.
AM is anti-client interests and a PR disaster waiting to happen.