x

Andrew Hill

Managing Director

4647 Profile Views

About Me

Leicester's Leading Online Letting Agent. On your doorstep throughout the East Midlands.

my expertise in the industry

More on this later...

Andrew's Recent Activity

Our shares sold at 0, I was worried I'd lost several thousand. I wasn't aware of the consolidation 😂 the shares were soon replaced at the higher value but fewer shares.

From: Andrew Hill 31 December 2019 10:45 AM

I disagree with the ASA on this one. The company was bought out of administration - the business therefore continues and should retain all benefits from the reputation generated by previous owners. Can you imagine if the ASA said "You can no longer sell X product because it was made by the company before the new director was hired"... Ridiculous. What's the point of acquisitions if you're not allowed to acquire the reputation of a company alongside other assets?

From: Andrew Hill 14 November 2019 17:30 PM

I disagree. Agents ripping off tenants (and vendors and buyers) is widespread. It wasn't just London agents who cause the problems. There's rogues up and down the country.

From: Andrew Hill 06 November 2019 13:33 PM

And I hope there's a banning order winging it's way over to them. Disgusting.

From: Andrew Hill 21 August 2019 13:59 PM

OTM will always fail to win our business now we've been forced to miss out on their offer. After all, we're not a bona-fide agency apparently...

From: Andrew Hill 19 March 2019 09:10 AM

Not sure what rock they live under but our local market is positively thriving, a little bit of uncertainty but nothing we can't handle.

From: Andrew Hill 23 February 2019 19:13 PM

I'm a diehard tory. And I'm both saddened and surprised that John Healey is the only mp out of 17 I wrote who that responded to my 7page letter regarding the state of the private rented sector.

From: Andrew Hill 21 February 2019 12:11 PM

When the smoke clears springs to mind...

From: Andrew Hill 21 February 2019 12:09 PM

The fact Trust pilot offer to remove reviews for a fee shows how little integrity they have. All agents recently hinted that they'd be willing to do the same but only if its a non-genuine paying customer.

From: Andrew Hill 07 February 2019 10:39 AM

I don't see the issue. Its nobody else's business what incentives we receive and what fees we charge except ours. The only fees clients should worry about are the ones they're paying.

From: Andrew Hill 29 January 2019 10:27 AM

It's a shame online agents like us, very well known in the Leicester Market, aren't deemed to be bona-fide companies to join their platform.

From: Andrew Hill 26 November 2018 18:40 PM

We do. :D But we're not one of those massive, national online agents. We're a local online agent

From: Andrew Hill 19 November 2018 22:29 PM

It's funny. We've never had anyone say "I wish you'd just let us do all of this online". Maybe tenants in Leicester and other people we deal with prefer a personal touch...

From: Andrew Hill 15 November 2018 08:13 AM

All of this agent infighting is unreal. Are we really an industry hell bent on accusing the other agents who follow a different model to us liars, cheats, con artists, etc? For what? Jealousy? Envy? Online agents may be the best thing since sliced bread. We are to the industry what Amazon is to retail, or the eBay of Auction only on a smaller scale. Its not our fault stuck-in-the-mud brick and mortar agents can't adapt to satisfy the market, just look at Countrywide compared to Purplebricks. Imagine if Tesco called all the online retailers liars because they were doing better than physical stores.

From: Andrew Hill 29 September 2018 16:33 PM

I don't think it'll be worth the cost, it's far too saturated already.

From: Andrew Hill 24 August 2018 10:17 AM

Imagine if Tesco took a customer to court because they found a microwave they like and bought it off Amazon instead. Are agents really that desperate to claw fees from consumers that they'll try and charge a vendor even when they didn't sell the property? What an absolute joke. This is exactly why the government are clamping down on our industry... Why do some estate agencies think they're mafia bosses? Are all Countrywide brands that desperate for their fee they'll sue you even if they fail to deliver?

From: Andrew Hill 27 July 2018 11:30 AM

Terrible company. We've heard so many stories of small, independent agents being taken advantage of by OnTheMarket.com - they only want the larger corporates, it appears. We've met several small agents OnTheMarket.com have broke contract with costing them thousands.

From: Andrew Hill 26 July 2018 09:16 AM

Will they scrap competing brands in every industry too? Why does the ombudsman think consumers are so dim they can't differentiate between three brands like they can supermarkets, opticians, banks, dentists, etc.? What we need is a centralised redress scheme register where it will detail the agent, their redress scheme and a link to the relevant complaint form. It isn't difficult. Why does the Ombudsman Services and the government think the people of the UK are that dim they need to intervene? By only allowing one redress scheme, there's likely to be a monopoly on the fees we need to pay and we will have no choice, at least when there are three to choose from, there's some competition and we're extended a bit of choice. What next? Get rid of the deposit protection schemes in favour of having just one?

From: Andrew Hill 18 July 2018 10:08 AM

“After consultations and advice from Cornwall trading standards Office..." and then goes on to say he hasn't received advice from the council... Absolute joke. To be honest, it's people like this that need closing down, their dishonesty to their customers and the industry in general is disgusting. It shouldn't be allowed, agents who deal in property should hold their clients in a higher regard than to lie to them. As much as we don't like Purple Bricks, the ASA should be respected, especially when the agent fails to substantiate his claims. It does make you question his level of service he provides to his clients and the sort of tenants he attracts to his properties if he can so callously say one thing and backpadel days later.

From: Andrew Hill 17 July 2018 08:57 AM

Surely, the government must cap ombudsman fees at the level in which The PRS charge to prevent unnecessary expenditure and monopolistic behaviours by the only ombudsman service that's left?

From: Andrew Hill 09 April 2018 09:33 AM

It's a lifetime relationship because the property stays on the market for a lifetime whilst vendors pay for a nice purple board ;)

From: Andrew Hill 27 March 2018 15:03 PM

Absolute joke. I wonder if a man glassed her for the same reasons if he'd be allowed to walk the streets... Yet the ASA harp on about "dangerous gender stereotypes"? Dangerous stereotype: Women are harmless and innocent even when they glass a man because he said no to her... If a man glassed a woman because they refused to go home with them... Well, it just shows how outdated the justice system is.

From: Andrew Hill 23 March 2018 18:10 PM

We could say the same about some high street agents... Nicholas Humphreys Burton on Trent branch isn't even registered with a property redress scheme let alone underselling... High Street Branches have it in their interests to undersell to keep numbers up. For us online agents, we can invest more time (and money) into nurturing our client relationships and marketing their properties achieving the best prices because of our lower overheads. From what our clients tell us, the extortionate high street agency model is dead.

From: Andrew Hill 23 March 2018 18:04 PM

Every time this comes up, all I can think about is how much. Ore it will cost compared to the current redress schemes. There's huge opportunity to make substantial profits if you're the only organisation allowed to operate as a redress scheme.

From: Andrew Hill 18 March 2018 00:12 AM

We're starting to offer short term letting services to landlords who decide longer term tenants simply aren't worth the headache the government is causing. Selective licencing, tenant fee ban, increased compliance fees... Money has to come from somewhere, we don't think it's fair to force landlords to pay for both sides of the coin when we provide a flawless service to tenants... This will change the moment they stop paying as we do the bare minimum to adhere to our obligations to the tenant as an agent. We joined this industry hoping to be able to put tenants first but clearly, the government has other ideas. As it stands, when Bristol landlords ask me how they are to cover the selective licensing fee of £1660, I'm going to advise them to pop an extra £100 on the rent. Most won't be able to afford it but that's the local authorities problem who forced them to be priced out of the market. In Nottingham, our landlord clients have already begun increasing rents to cover the cost of selective licensing fees (£600). Its great though, it means more profit for us and our landlords, £60 a month will pay for Nottingham's licencing fee within 10months. Every month a tenant pays the extra £60 beyond the tenth month is pure profit for the landlord and an extra £6 for us in management commission. It's a shame about the tenants' finances though, but as we can see, the government is really happy forcing tenants into social housing that hasn't yet been built as they force rents to soar.

From: Andrew Hill 24 February 2018 09:59 AM

I'm all for it but as a new letting agent, costs are starting to mount as they try to bring in new legislation that I question whether they're able to enforce.

From: Andrew Hill 18 February 2018 10:01 AM

Would one single redress scheme not then permit the exclusive redress scheme to become a monopoly, able to price smaller agents out of business?

From: Andrew Hill 06 February 2018 11:20 AM

I think it's 6 of one half a dozen of the other. It's getting silly now.

From: Andrew Hill 17 January 2018 12:56 PM

Breaking News