Here is an urgent update on the proposed change to the Estate Agents Act designed to allow new entrants such as supermarkets and private sale websites into the market who can operate outside the scope of the legislation.
The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) yesterday confirmed to EAT that the consultation WILL close today.
This is despite EAT telling the department that the very large majority of the industry had only heard of the proposed change and the consultation two days ago, when we broke the story.
However, all responses up until midnight tonight will be considered, the department said.
The department appears to be on an unusually swift timetable. A spokesman said that it hopes to publish its response to the consultation early next month.
It is clearly very important that anyone who has not yet made their views known does so today.
Please feel free to copy EAT’s editor in on your responses (rosalind.renshaw@gmail.com) and tell us how you are approaching the consultation.
For example, Beresfords in Essex has rallied all 163 members of staff to send in their objections.
Responses should be emailed by no later than midnight tonight to marcelle.janssis@bis.gsi.gov.
The consultation is: link here
Comments
as Peter Bolton king now comes up with a monthly press release as part of his new job, Vince Cable has to come up with legislation, rushing through a bit of a change that no-one really cares about is the Lib Dems only opprtunity to have something to show for their hapless brush with power.
We were all supposedly doomed when the insurance companies bought into Agency in 1986 only to prosper from buying our agencies back.
The folk who really didn't ought to be agents can set up a website and offer online advertising, and the less capable still can go and work for Tescos and the new Rightmove offering which is bound to follow and in the same way as some folk only shop at Aldi or Lidl they will attract a certain customer base. Waitrose Sainsburys and M&S all have customers who appreciate service and are prepared to pay for it.
Let the dust settle carry on doing a fair and honest job and there is simply nothing to worry about other than sticking a cross against your local conservative candidate at the next election.
No I am not a Tory but have not forgotten what Yvette Cooper, Blair, Brown Balls and co did to our industry.
'Mr A Vendor'
I could answer every one of your questions, but I am tired of this conversation and have a lot of viewings to make!
As a round a-bout answer...
Why don't sellers and buyers do their own conveyancing? It is possible. I have had a number of clients that have done their own conveyancing - it is probably easier than selling the actual house yourself (in terms of not having to fight your way on to a property portal!)
The reason is because solicitors or licensed conveyancers are qualified to do the job and well resepected in their field
This is what estate agents should be.
Also, I am not quite sure why you are directing these questions at me - why would you bother to do all of this yourself, when an online agent (see my name) can generally do everything you are mentioning for a few hundred pounds?
If there was no such thing as online agents, then I would agree with you whole heartedly, because, at the end of the day is about 'value for money'
If conveyancers started charging £3000 for their service, then of course more people would do the conveyancing themselves. But they don't. So people don't
And that is, fundamentally, where high street estate agents go wrong. High street estate agents could have wiped us online agents out in an instant if they have all simultaneously dropped their fees to a flat £1000. But they didn't. And they won't. Possibly until it is too late...
Value for money guys, value for money...
Kerpow! said Batman, there it is, from the horses mouth. The route to internet is already there...Gumtree.
No EAA act changes needed.
But our Mr V wants to get onto Rightmove as a private seller. He doesn't want to go on Gumtree.
He wants the fact that EA's have paid, paid, and paid again to get Rightmove where it is, supported Rightmove with 'total' advertising in the early days, and basically got Rightmove to where it is wthrough Estate Agents help efforts and money. Mr V wants all this trundled over by legislation changes so he can advertise privately on that portal.
The meek will inherit the earth, but only as long as that's ok with everyone else.
Does the owner have £1000 worth of digital SLR? no my photograper does.
EA's overvalue to get instructions i can research the comparables just as well as you. I agree if you are saying an agent should be made to refund the difference between valuation and achieved price below an agreed tolerance or offer rebates if not sold within an mutually agreed timeframe.
So if the buyers and sellers lie the agent offers no protection. I can walk into an agent i say i live at such and such an address I own my property outright its worth X I am looking to up/downisze, so a mortgage will be no problem. You and every other agent will show me every property I ask to see. Do all agents offer compensation for sales that fall though?
No I would not be an estate agent i would be a FSBO and have to abide by the rules of the PMA. I can read and interpret them as well as you can.
No the intermediary pays the portals, I pay the intermediary a monthly or one off advertising fee. If 1000's do this they cover the portal fee easily
If the intermediary is a supermarket perhaps they will create as they already have an online presence.
Are Rightmove OK with that idea you have there Mr Vendor?
Do you think Rightmove might have a wee wobble on that idea Mr V?
As soon as you get your property on RM as a FSBO RM will have 14,000 agents with 60/70 properties each (ave) pull the plug.
There you will be on your lonesome.
This is a once thing again, if either Zoopla or RM commit to NO FSBO ever!
FSBO via passive routes yes......potential buyers leave there contact details with the intermediary who pass them on the vendor just like gumtree. Only via Rightmove. They do no arrange viewings the vendor does, The only service they provide is access to portals and prevent my private contact details becoming public.
Sorry, last post in response to 'Mr A Vendor'
"I can measure my home just as well as an any EA,
Why does the agent need to take photographs, I can get a real photographer to take photos."
Yes, you can, but does the owner have £1000 worth of digital SLR cameras and £2000 worth of virtual tour kit, along with 10/15/20 years of knowledge when advising what price to put the property on the market for?? This is where estate agency needs to improve - most high street agents don't bother with virtual tours, for example, which is why FSBO's think they might as well do it themselves. It requires a shift in the customer service levels provided by the estate agents to make people realise that they need estate agents to have the best chance of securing the best buyer and best price for their home.
"Why does the agent need to value. They always over value to get instructions anyway."
My point about being qualified includes being liable for valuations provided and punished if shown to be deliberately overvaluing.
"I am happpy for anyone to come and view my house, I have taken precautions to not show where i keep my valuables and think i can handle myslef if i need to". Excellent - that's fine. Do you know what position they are in or who they are doing their mortgage through. Do you have an idea of which lenders are processing applications slowly at the moment or can you tell if they will actually sell their house as 'easily' as they have told you they will, or can you trust other sellers in the chain to give you the FULL chain details and what stage they are at - In 15 years and literally thousands of transactions, I have never known estate agents to lie to each other about their cilents position - I have known buyers and sellers lie to estate agents about their position when they are trying to buy a property though...
"Why if I do and agree to all the above should i not be allowed access to rightmove via a passive intermediary, who will provide the service of taking all these details getting them on to the portals and pass on the contacts to me so that i dont have to give out my personal contact details."
Surely if you did, you would then be an estate agent and have to adhere to EAA act. You would also have to ay all the fees to advertise on Rightmove (circa £1000 per month). Surely, if this were the case, then you would just use an agent who can access Rightmove and just pay a few hundred quid (if you used an online estate agent?)
Hi Ray
I agree. At last a proper discussion without just hammering (online) agents, or falling out with each other...Turns out that we all pretty much actually agree, so don't know why the in-fighting...As I have said, we should be working together...
From these discussions, hopefully some high street EA's will now recognise the true 'online estate agents' as estate agents. And hopefully, we can work together to achieve what we are all after. In my view, that is:
A professional and trustworthy industry, that is fair to all parties, but acts in the best interests of their clients to achieve the best possible outcome and for a fair fee.
Professional, meaning qualified (to a higher degree than the bloody NAEA(!))
Trusthworthy, meaning compulsory licensing of estate agents
Fair, meaning accurate valuations(!) (with punishments for those that deliberately overvalue)
Best interests of the client, meaning achieving the best price
Fair Fee, meaning just that - and that doesn't have to be no sale, no fee - not only do I believe that 'no sale, no fee' is not fair on the owner, but it is not fair on the agent who does all the work for absolutely nothing. (Which is why we charge up front for the work that we do...)
None of the above will happen with the proposed changes. It will just make the industry (dare I say, even more) tarnished and unprofessional...
They're my thoughts anyway...
FSBO via passive routes?
Surely this is about putting buyer and seller in direct contact, that is the point. Seller will need to display contact details, or am I reading this wrong? As soon as the passive party is involved in arranging viewings, etc, they become an EA.
Who will be responsible to HMRC for MLA regs?
Who will be paying for DC Licences?
Owners I suppose!
This is too rushed. Not enough thought gone into it.
"My view is that every property must be valued, measured up and photographed by a 'qualified' estate agent, so that the consumer knows that the property details are accurate. "
Online agent. I am not sure i agree
Why is it not sufficient that the PMA applies to FSBO individuals selling there homes.....remember falling to mention an electricity pylon next door to the property and taking pictures so that it is not shown is ok!
Making the PMA applicable to FSBO might encourage more people to sell via an Agent for fear of getting it worng. Those who believe they have the ability can go FSBO.
Some Vendors may rightly argue.
I can measure my home just as well as an any EA,
Why does the agent need to take photographs, I can get a real photographer to take photos.
Why does the agent need to value. They always over value to get instructions anyway. If i want to market my property at £1M or £1 what diffeence does it make, a property is only worth what someone is prepared to pay or the bank is prepared to lend.
I am happpy for anyone to come and view my house, I have taken precautions to not show where i keep my valuables and think i can handle myslef if i need to
Why if I do and agree to all the above should i not be allowed access to rightmove via a passive intermediary, who will provide the service of taking all these details getting them on to the portals and pass on the contacts to me so that i dont have to give out my personal contact details.
P.S.
Although adressed to Online Agent my prevous comment includes many other contributors today
Hello Online Agent.!
What a refreshing change this informed discussion has been.
One thing is certain - estate agency will change a lot in the next few years so everyone will have to adapt?
1. There is a place for regulated traditional and online agents. Both can work together complimenting one another. ie a traditional agent may be on portal A and have a window next to the busy shopping mall, whilst their associate may provide greater exposure on other portals being a master of online marketing.
2. Both online and traditional charge fees. If supermarkets come in and the Act changes, supermarkets may offer 0% fees seeing value in having a branded board present for say 12 weeks and face no regulation. This could destroy both online and traditional agents for which neither can compete with £zero fees when a full set of portals may cost an agent £2k pcm
3. The proposal allows the agent filter out whereby agents daily have protocol to safeguard innocent homesellers from bogus buyers in guise with other intentions to enter a home. Simply a 'passive' model cutting out the agent and their fees offers NO well being or safety to lone sellers. A lady at Trading Standards told me there is a rise in 'passive' systems such as Gumtree, ebay etc linking car sellers with buyers and that some sites create the door way in whereby car sellers are increasingly being robbed and attacked.
4. All the models are based on a UK data feed that is now 15 years old and single source. Next generation technology is now in the UK which allows all agent model types to cross share listings to gain their clients greater exposure to more buyers through a hub. As such agents be they web based or traditional can offer clients greater exposure via agents pooling resources together. Offer sellers more and agents can get fees up. in return show more offerers a property and sellers can get their sale agreed price up (often).
5. The upset seems that all bodies covering traditional models where invited 18 months ago to take part in consultations, yet its only online models that have been asked into round table meetings in recent months.
I think is a case that the BIS department has asked only a sector of recent for views overriding views including the traditional sector some 18 months ago.
On a matter that effects mass UK employment in an already hit sector as ministers seem to care more about social housing than res sales which if helped could release funds back into the economy.
And also few have given thought the the well being that bogus buyers having good reason to enter innocent peoples homes would be created.
There is better technology to move the industry forward that can earn agents better fees whilst benefitting sellers to achieve greater exposure via more agents and better prices.
Even the FSBO technology is mainly based on now dated feed schemas. My work means that I see many other estate agency models from around the world. The UK can be so much better.
We should take innovation forward, but not by potentially culling ALL agent models by allowing supermarkets to offer 0% models just to fight the next supermarket by extra community awareness via FS boards being up.
If the EAA79 Act is amended as it stands today the only ones to gain will be supermarkets who can afford to offer 0% fees, yet they can't afford £5k fines that their FSBO clients could make them responsible for.
Happy Chappy
I don't think this poses any more problems for online agents than it does for high street agents. If this is passed and Tesco, for example, are allowed to put a board up outside a house and then advertise that house for sale on their Tescoproperty.co.uk (or whatever it is) and then not allow estate agents to access this site, then it poses a risk for all forms of estate agency...It could also pose a problem to Rightmove and all the other portals as well...
No, passive intermidiaries shouldn't be allowed to advertise on the portals.
My view is that every property must be valued, measured up and photographed by a 'qualified' estate agent, so that the consumer knows that the property details are accurate.
What the qualification would be, is the difficult one for me...!?
FBA well done i could not agree with you more if you describe yourself as an EA then you should falll under the jurisdiction of the EA act.
"None of us online estate agents want these changes to the EAA either. Read my previous post as to how involved we are in this consulation."
As i said yesterday this represents a bigger threat to online agents and perhaps portals than it does to traditional estate agents.
so yes there should be three tiers
"1. Traditional Agent (regulated)
2 Online Agent (regulated)
3 Passive Intermediaries (unregulated)
No need to change the act.
As for passive intermediaries, I see this as a 3rd idea, and clearly not Estate Agency in any form, Hence I believe it should be a criminal offence for a passive intermediary (like Tesco/Spicers) to pass themselves off as an EA"
Yes i agree completely now we are getting somewhere if you all buy into this line of objection..Now you need to define what a passive intermediary is. Should they be allowed access to advertise on the existing portals for instance??
Sorry for the grammar and spelling mistakes I pressed "Submit" before reading back my text and cannot amend.
This system have been in place in France for ages and have developed over the couple of years. More private sales have gone through however these sites will never replace estate agents and their role.
+ my issue is this model working in England is the way EA contract work in England. It seems to me that most EA sign exclusive mandates with their clients and some even include a clause in case the sale goes through directly (or am I wrong?)
If this is the case I don't see how this can work.
The way it happens in France: the vendor contact several agencies, gets the property valued, sign with at least a couple of agents (yep there is no rightmove type monopole in France and therefore it is necessary) and then they can decide to put the property on a private sale website.
They would not decide to put a price tag on their property taken out of thin air.
Anyway reading the proposal things are far from being clear: "The proposal is that businesses, such as online sites, that act simply as “passive
intermediaries” offering a limited, low-risk service to buyers and sellers, whether or not
they charge a fee, should be outside the scope of the EAA. (...)
Therefore if such businesses offer
personalised advice to buyers or sellers or handle money belonging to clients, they should
remain within the scope of the EAA."
Well if they charge (and Tesco will not do it for free) they will handle money belonging to their client. Could someone clarify?
Thanks
Maya
Was me, sorry
'W'
Agreed...but fortunately (or unfortunately for the government), we're not in favour of the change...
'f'
Good post. Nice to see someone actually ask considered questions, rather than just belittle 'online' estate agents. Thank you...
It is the government that are showing bias towards this change, and probably towards online models (and us, to be fair). What they didn't realise is that we would answer their questions promoting more regulation for estate agents! I am guessing they expected us to answer by saying that we wanted this change and that, but we didn't, so maybe they will think again about these proposed changes because of our comments and answers on the consultation...(fingers crossed anyway!)
I have no idea if the Suzy Lamplugh trust was consulted to be honest. I agree, that with passive intermediaries there are potential dangers. As estate agents, of course, we vet every single buyer (and seller, for that matter)
We don’t deal with empty properties – we can’t accompany viewings, so there is no point dealing with them…
Three tiers - i'm not sure. If it did happen, then how would you define an online agent and a high street agent? Sounds obvious, but trust me, there would be grey areas and 'loopholes'…Creating 3 tiers would mean a change to the EAA act as well, because at the moment we are either estate agents, or we are not. And we are...
By the way, we do have ‘men on the ground’ in offices across the country and on the payroll – they are NOT outsourced individuals, so they can offer local advice on market conditions. I don’t have an army of them, but I have enough to cover England & Wales.
Completely agree on your final comments on passive intermediaries
We are in general agreement, but that is because, after all, we are ALL estate agents...
Online Agent on 2012-08-10 12:52:23
" The government WANT this change. They are desparate for it and they couldn't believe that we didn't want this change when they conducted a telephone interview with us at the start of the year. That is one of the reasons, I guess, that they haven't consulted high street agents "
How biased is that? The Govt only consults for opinion from those they think will be in favour of the change ....
I agree with Ray there, Online Agent, bias? for whom?
In any event, if an Online Agent is truly an Agent, visiting the owner at the property to be sold, offering advice with local knowledge, ensuring epc compliance etc, I have no problem whatsoever. It is in areas of the country where the 'Online Agent' has no-one on the ground I would have issues. But I must stress, that is only my opinion.
May I enquire of you Online Agent (as you seem to be in the know) was the Suzy Lamplugh Trust consulted as to their feelings? Passive intermediaries may set up very dangerous situations for the public, I'm sure the trust would have a view and should have been consulted.
May I also enquire (just one of my curiosities) about key security for empty property via an 'online agent'? I recently had an empty property that was broken into by squatters who were setting up a cannabis farm during the period between exchange and completion. As the 'local' agent I was able to assist in the removal of these people. I just wonder what an online agent 200 or more miles away could do to help the owner/buyer in such a situation.
There are many, many reasons why there should be distinct and obvious differentiation between Online Agents and High Street Agents, and like you, I believe both can exist, but unlike you (I think) I believe there should be clear guidance for the public on what they sign up for. there could be 3 tiers.
1. Traditional Agent (regulated)
2 Online Agent (regulated)
3 Passive Intermediaries (unregulated)
No need to change the act.
As for passive intermediaries, I see this as a 3rd idea, and clearly not Estate Agency in any form, Hence I believe it should be a criminal offence for a passive intermediary (like Tesco/Spicers) to pass themselves off as an EA if this goes through.
Sorry if we misunderstood each other
See my other comments on this, that I mentioned on my post to Ray Evans, here...
http://www.estateagenttoday.co.uk/news_features/Why-werent-we-told-Angry-agents-demand-answers
'Ray Evans'
Hi Ray
If you read my comment on a previous post (I think on a previous story), you will see that that is my point! It is completely biased. The government WANT this change. They are desparate for it and they couldn't believe that we didn't want this change when they conducted a telephone interview with us at the start of the year.
That is one of the reasons, I guess, that they haven't consulted high street agents - part of the reason for my final comment - not insulting or self interested...
Re, the final comment: You only have to look on these boards over the last few years to see the absolute caning that 'online estate agents' have received from many high street estate agents across the board - we have been told it will never happen and online estate agents are just cheap fee merchants that will never take off...
There are only a few, yourself included, that have recognised for a few years now that chage is afoot and that 'online estate agents' can provide an alternative to the market. All I have ever said is that we are estate agents, just like you guys, but that has always been dismissed by the majority of high street agents
Now it actually is happening by the looks of things, and, as ESTATE AGENTS, we don't want the changes any more than the next estate agent. So, maybe now, high street agents and online agents have a common interest...?
What I want is for estate agents to start working with us because we are the ones (by the looks of things) that the government is turning to, to consult about these changes...
@ Online Agent on 2012-08-10 11:54:53
"....... I know for a fact that ALL the biggest 'online estate agents' have been consulted about this over the LAST FEW MONTHS......"
No bias in the 'consulting' process then?
"Why haven't you 'high street agents' been consulted? Perhaps it's because the high street agents view wouldn't be very balanced, and maybe because it would be slightly narrow minded in as much as accepting that new models can enter the industry and survive?"
A rather insulting and self interest statement?
'Fun Boy Agent'
I have just googled 'online estate agent' as you suggested, and I see a page of estate agents that charge low fees. None of these are 'passive intermediaries'. We all offer a very good service where we SELL HOUSES (shock horror!) for a much fairer and competitive fee.
None of us online estate agents want these changes to the EAA either. Read my previous post as to how involved we are in this consulation.
I know for a fact that ALL the biggest 'online estate agents' have been consulted about this over the LAST FEW MONTHS and NONE of the biggest 'online estate agents', including us, want these changes.
Why haven't you 'high street agents' been consulted? Perhaps it's because the high street agents view wouldn't be very balanced, and maybe because it would be slightly narrow minded in as much as accepting that new models can enter the industry and survive?
There is a very simple solution to this.
Make it a criminal offence to represent yourself or your company as an 'AGENT' or 'ESTATE AGENT' in any 'online' property advertising if you are not an agent.If you are a 'PASSIVE INTERMEDIARY' it should be a criminal offence to pass yourself off as an Estate Agent.
If the proposal is to encourage and increase what they are calling “passive intermediaries” offering a limited, low-risk service to buyers and sellers, whether or not they charge a fee, and asking should be outside the scope of the EAA the answers is simple. If an advertiser or firm are operating outside the EAA 1979 yet pass themselves off as Estate Agents there should be penalty. Not a slapped wrist but a big fine, say minimum £20,000 or a jail term for the director/sole traders.
If the aim is truly to help businesses to innovate and grow and allow new business models to emerge while ensuring that consumer protection is not unduly compromised. The key and emphasis here should be on the word 'NEW'. If it is new and truly new, it will not be estate agency, it will be something else, like a dating service
A clear way of preventing misunderstandings for the public would be to have a government approved document (like the epc) attached to any property advertised by a 'PASSIVE INTERMEDIARY' clearly stating that the advertiser is not accountable under the EAA 1979, can not offer advice and is not liable to redress under any government schemes whatsoever. This needs to be clear to members of the public at the outset.
Google the words "online estate agent" and you will see the extent of the problem already.
How can our custodians of law, liberty and safety (government) be so foolish as to not see the massive potential dangers here?
Effectively the future here presents a greater confusion for the consumer and a greater cost for the consumer to find trust in a purchase - I cite the french property market by example, whilst not exactly the same there are some long term potential parallels to consider. So bare with me..
The french vendor has had the private selling site for some time as well as the agent selling route and shared portals. The Agents typically charge 4 plus percent and publicly load the sale value onto the sale price whilst when selling privately that clearly doesn't happen. The impact is a distorted and fractured market that has panned out to present no one major portal player in the market place but a myriad of portals and quite often the same property at different prices.
Suppoosedly savvy and knowledgeable buyer will gravitate to the private seller site and everyone else to the agent, (iexcluding the proactive returns from the agent).
My point - currently a buyer in the UK has one primary portal and a handful of secondary portals with agent listings and can be secure in the comfort of what they see is accurate given the current regulations and handled in an answerable capacity.
The cost is manageable today but the cost of trust/professional house purchase sale will inevitably increase beyond the costs of today given the reduced numbers of volume using the service. SURELY not in the consumers interest! Decisions made on this front need to consider the long term impact rather than the immediate impact (albeit potentially dire for the profession).
The fact that we have been left in the dark means this is going to happen, time to re-assess....
We have looked into this and suspect you may well be right?
We are busy trying to get others in the industry to hopefully help us, ie, Estate Agency Trainers and Award Organisations. And also replying to the 11 questions on the very well hidden consultation from bis.gsi
Anyone who feels the same? Please make your thoughts know before it is too late!
Does anyone know if one (or more) of the 'big-wigs' at 'The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS)' is on the Board of Directors of a company (such as Tesco) who will benefit from this change in the EA Act?
I agree with Roy O'Connell it smells of a conspiracy!!!!
It's time for the NFoPP to show some teeth and get stuck into this attack on experienced Agents trying to give good customer service through their professionalism and depth of knowledge.
We could not agree more and always try to help, when we can. It's not just Estate Agency, although that is what is affecting us most, but we feel where will this spiralling lack of care and respect really end? Talk about Data Protection - Just another stupid joke we are all made to abide by and then, if you look carefully, how much confidential information can be easily viewed online? It seems more than ever that the real powers that be respect only one thing, the only thing left which gains respect or effort is purely money and, imo, nothing else is sacred anymore. It's very sad indeed.
As one of the leading online agents in the UK, we have been kept well informed of all this sort of thing by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and asked for our comment over the last few months.
We were also big contributors to the OFT report in 2010, which I guess is why we were asked to contribute again.
It has also been suggested by the department that we will be included in any 'round table meetings' that result off the back of this report.
For what it's worth, I believe that estate agency should be MORE regulated and MORE qualifications should be required to become an estate agent, to measure up property and to deal with offers, for example - this is, after all, the biggest transaction that anyone will ever make.
Estate agents should be viewed in the same light as surveyors, accountants and solicitors - but this will only happen if we become recognised as a 'professional' industry by the public and media, and this will only come if we have to be qualified to do the job that we do.
However, I also think that high street estate agency in its current form, is outdated and doesn't offer value for, hence I think online estate agency, or variations of this, are the future...
I do believe that there is a market for most of us, however, I do think there will be evolution in estate agency over the next few years...
Hopefully, (even though the vast majority of you believe that we are the scourge of estate agency(!)), you can see that I am not just an 'online agent', but simply an estate agent with a view that is similar to the vast majority of good estate agents on the future of the industry.
It seems as though the government have picked on us to provide comment on the future of estate agency and we will be fighting the corner of the estate agents and NOT the 'online' model. After all, we are estate agents, just like you...
So, sleep safe at night in the knowledge that you have a 'man on the inside' ;-)
Has the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills given any indication about how the public would be protected from the 14 year old bedroom warriors with computers? There is a vast army of people that keep emailing me with news from my bank about changes to my account (banks I do not bank with), most of these not in the UK.
Sacammers delight.
There will be tears.
http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/consumer-issues/docs/p/12-931-proposal-amend-estate-agents-act-1979.pdf
*** If You Want To Object & Make Your Opinions Known, THE ABOVE is where you will find the consultation. We truly believe it has been hidden well, convenient perhaps?? ***
"unusually swift timetable"..........not really........Tesco pushed ahead with the mortgage plans this week so they will naturally wish to increase their potential pool of clients...........conspiracy theory!
You are now getting the kicking that conveyancers have been having from lenders for ages. Really should be working together sometimes.
This is just awful and very de-motivating. It's not as if there is too much to be happy about in any event. Clearly the powers that be have much more to gain than the years we have all being paying subscriptions for absolutely nothing! Any foul play we have experienced is batted from NAEA, TPO & OFT, each suggest it falls under the umbrella of one of the others!! There is no real redress left for the side of the agent. However, if a totally unjustified complaint is made, boy do you have to prove your innocence, big time. As for Sole Agency Contracts, ours are approved by a QC, and still cannot be enforced. The whole thing just stinks, we won't be the last industry to suffer, we are certainly sure of that.
I'm with you guy's, why is it they felt they could handle these discussions without letting us in on what was afoot, they have proved they are not capable of dealing with such important matters and shown that we are, in their eyes worthless of their time and acknowledgement, as for the tpo why do we bother with them, if this goes through what incentive is there for us to be part of a body that we pay so they can sit in a job and punish us if we are in the wrong.
We alone prove we are professionals, they just give us a logo for the window and our headed, the lot of them should be ashamed at how contemptuous they have been toward our profession and future.
Quite right Mr Evans.
NFoPP? Peter Bolton King now of the RICS? Why are we not feeling like we are valued, defended, and respected as independent Estate Agents. Surely the point of being members of large organisations is to feel that we are supported?
Can we have comments and action from the RICS and NFoPP - NOW - today - together with a proper resume of their part in these "consultations"!
Good grief - what are we paying them for?