x

Mal McCallion

2145 Profile Views

About Me

my expertise in the industry

Mal's Recent Activity

Genuine consumer protection. Great to see.

From: Mal McCallion 06 April 2016 07:08 AM

About time too. Take a note now of your competitors' quoted volumes of reviews and see if any suddenly disappear. Also, check whether their headline numbers of new 'reviews' coming on in the next few weeks are markedly less than they have been, compared with recent weeks ...

From: Mal McCallion 08 March 2016 07:54 AM

This is so important. Reviews sites can be the first place that your next clients are looking and, if they're in any way corrupt, the consumer could be fooled into thinking your rubbish competitor, with dozens of 5-star reviews faked from their desk - or from India or elsewhere - is better than you. Also, however honest you are in getting reviews for your agency, if you're using a site that doesn't check each one properly - or, worse, will remove genuine ones in order to force any business to pay to get them back, or accept payment for your competitors' 1-star reviews to be 'disappeared' - then your reviews are likely to be seen as fake in the eyes of your future clients too, by association. Whenever this is discovered - and, through this investigation, I hope that it will be - whatever history of reviews you may have built up on such a site could easily be wiped away. Forcing review sites to adhere to a code of conduct, to be open about their checking processes, rejection rate (1 in 6 submissions to raterAgent.co.uk, our review site, are not published as they are agents faking it) and fees is crucial for consumers and for the businesses that use them.

From: Mal McCallion 12 February 2016 07:34 AM

Blimey, missed this - all because of the word 'most'! Martin, you've publicly confirmed above that allAgents treats reviews of paying ('Transparent') agents in a different way to those who don't. Shouldn't every review be treated the same? Whether or not raterAgent can claim to be 'most' trustworthy, we're going to get on with doing what we do, which is check every submission that comes in with a human being and publish the number of fakes we reject (1 in 6 currently). If that doesn't make us the 'most' trustworthy - because allAgents won't do the same, so we can't compare - it's certainly something uniquely transparent. And we're not going to be bullied out of the way … :)

From: Mal McCallion 17 September 2015 15:33 PM

Wow,that headline is incredibly misleading. The word objected to is 'most', not 'trustworthy'. If we'd used the 'Carlsberg' approach, 'Probably...' in front of 'the most trustworthy', apparently there would have been no issue! On a serious note, the ASA ruled that is is the silence of our competitors is, in their view, what makes the comparative word 'most' unable to be used. If you're interested, have a read for yourselves: https://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2015/9/One-Moment-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_303131.aspx#.VfjuWBFViko Why has the story been spun this way? I'm sure people will make up their own minds. What's clear is that we're making a significant impact in a long-established and very cosy area of our industry and we're not going to stop because it's uncomfortable for others. If anyone wants to discuss this with me, I'd love to talk about it. Email mal@rateragent.co.uk or call 0777 9099 782. Trustworthiness and transparency - what raterAgent is all about. Cheers, Mal

From: Mal McCallion 16 September 2015 05:53 AM

We see freely-given, everyday brilliance on raterAgent all the time and it's heartening to know that even Which is grudgingly acknowledging it. Wonder if they'd really hoped for a rather different set of headlines when they started out on the research, though ...?!

From: Mal McCallion 17 August 2015 20:09 PM

Hi all, thanks for the comments. As Jon Tarrey says above, used correctly these reviews can help quality agents enormously - and that's why we're here. We created raterAgent because we felt that more needed to be done to help good agents get a transparent and honest series of reviews of their services, without worrying about '1-star bombs' from jealous competitors, or those self-same competitors being able to 5-star themselves up. We believe that core elements of the service - replying to reviews, adding logos, amending details - should not be charged for and, on raterAgent, they will always be free. In essence, we reckon that if every seller or landlord can access trustworthy information regarding each agent's services, engage with all of them if they like, they'll make better decisions on which ones to use - which will help those providing a great service to rightly become more successful. That depends, as Jordan says, on our vigilance at raterAgent in catching these cheats - and that's something that we are hugely passionate about and take great pride in. Thanks again - any direct questions or comments do get in touch at mal@rateragent.co.uk. Cheers all, Mal

From: Mal McCallion 22 June 2015 14:08 PM

Well done Nat & team, looks great. Congrats.

From: Mal McCallion 06 May 2015 11:28 AM

Breaking News