Countrywide's outgoing chief executive Grenville Turner says he is reinforcing the supervision of working practices of estate agents within the group.
In an interview with FT Adviser - a publication which has been campaigning against what it has calls unethical activities by agents, such as favouring buyers who also use an agency's mortgage partner - Turner says Countrywide's agents must not misunderstand their job.
He says they must not assess the affordability of potential purchasers in such a way that it appears a condition for putting offers forward.
Mr Turner said it had proved necessary to reinforce guidelines as certain issues with estate agents' behaviour had been highlighted in the marketplace recently.
Its up to us to keep reinforcing guidelines in the light of recent claims from brokers and that our members never misunderstand the rules over what is and is not right. It's good business practice and it is not enough to say that our estate agents are whiter-than-white - we have to prove they are demonstrably whiter-than-white.
EAT has recently reported a number of issues involving agents allegedly insisting that buyers use the internal mortgage adviser at a Countrywide agency.
The most recent involved a client seeking to buy a home through the Beresford Adams agency. At the time Countrywide Financial Services said it treated all customers the same irrespective which lender their mortgage comes from and if their mortgage is not through our brokerage, it does not change or impact how we treat offers to our vendors.
.jpg)
Comments
No matter what price an agent "achieves" for a sale they nearly always have to run the valuer's gauntlet and that's where many offers fall down. It's not always fair or just but it's a reality check!
My other favourite... " I'm sorry Mr Vendor that you are leaving us for a rival agent because we have produced no viewings in all that time."
$h1t the bed, hold the front page.... we have a really interested buyer who wants to view straight away. Now bend over.
Hound - you said "I'm guessing from your post, you are one of those 'corporate boys'..."
Well - here's a snip from an old 'Times' article (2007):
"...says estate agent Gerry Langford, of Taylors Countrywide."
You sniffed that one out - you are a credit to your breed! ;o)
Agree with this. Its always been FS FS FS all the way.
If you have unfair 26 week sole selling rights you are not too bothered what price to start at day 1, what motivation for staff and sale to vendors, we are such shocking agemnts we need half a year to sell!
Your theory, Gerry, falls down on the fact that a corporate agent is only able to market the property to the exact same pool of buyers that an independent agent can. You do not have a magic list of buyers willing /foolish / able enough to pay more for the same property.
Well said Wardy.
I'm also going to disagree with you Gerry, an agents brief is to provide a potential client with advice on value at a figure that will attract interest from prospective buyers. We all know that if a property goes to the market at too high a price it will just sit there!
It's very easy for prospective buyers to find out what's sold recently in an area, and for what price, and of course a surveyor doing a mortgage report will do exactly the same, so if by some stroke of luck a sale is agreed at way over the odds, it will only be downvalued.
I'm guessing from your post, you are one of those 'corporate boys' who do exactly what I was referring to, and of course, we all know the real reason for it, we've all seen properties we've lost to overvaluing go on the market and then come down in price in a couple of weeks. I think the 'corporate boys' call it 'managing expectations'!
I'll just quote the example I gave again, the present owner bought at 135,000 only 18 months ago and other than redecoration, has made no changes to the property, there have also been two broadly similar properties sold in the same street since then at similar figures. The 'valuations' from Countrywide and Spicerhaart were 30-35k over that figure. I'd be interested to hear your justification for this specific example Mr Langford.
I disagree with you Gerry,
If your marketing price at the upper end of the scale (which is just corporate speak for too high) then you are missing the opportunity to do exactly you you said. ''to encourage potential buyers, in the right numbers, to view the property''
Sticking a finger in the air, telling buyers that they'll take an offer is not a professional way to go about your business and will end up costing your vendors more.
This will always happen when you have listing negs getting the majority of their wages from listing and not necessarily selling. The top brass at CW have always been so far removed from what happens on the coal face. If I was still a neg there, I would be printing this article off and taking to my next financial services performance review.
Rubbish! Countrywide are a mortgage provider who happen to sell houses. I worked for them 10 years ago, nothing was more important than getting people in front of the FS guy. Anyone taking a mortgage with them would be in the 'hot box', those not would just be on the system. They'll never change.
An estate agent's brief isn't to value a property. His brief is to discuss with his customer a marketing plan, agree a fee and the initial price at which to test the market. The pricing of the property will necessarily be towards the upper end of the scale while, at the same time, not being off-putting to the punters. Our job is to encourage potential buyers, in the right numbers, to view the property, and find out what they will be prepared to pay for it. The highest offer from the best buyer is exactly the figure that the house is worth - it can't be worth a penny more. Would anybody not agree with me Who, then, is to say who is right and who is wrong in this case; the Independent agents might have achieved a quick sale at a lower price while the 'corporate boys' might have been able to agree a sale at an appreciably higher amount. Any vendor needs to ask himself what his aims are - does he want to get a quick sale at a basic price, or, does he want to take a slight chance, be prepared to pay his agent a little more money, and probably sell his place for a lot more money. The difference between a good sale and a bad sale can be, you tell me, 10/15/20...50 thousand pounds
Well I think we will all be looking to see where these ethical practices are employed with Countryside. From my experience, they would need to retrain the majority of their staff to trade ethically, which sadly like most corporates (not just in estate agency), it is only about profits - nothing else - pure and simple.
Perhaps while they are at it, they can re-train their valuers not to over value just to get the instruction, I went out to one yesterday, present owner bought the property in question just 18 months ago at 135,000, and had several valuations, three independents, all around 145-150, but the two corporate boys, one Spicerhaart and one Countrywide, both told him 165-170!
The owner is fortunately an intelligent man, who immediately saw through the tactic, his response, 'I nearly fell of my chair!, and then I did fall off my chair when they told me their fees!'
Thats a bit like President Assad saying that he's going to "reinforce the good treatment of political prisoners" better to just have said nothing Grenville