The National Association of Estate Agents has denied that it has done a U-turn on its licensing scheme.
But former NAEA chief executive Hugh Dunsmore-Hardy, an outspoken critic of the licensing scheme, said: “It’s the equivalent of a U-turn in a cul-de-sac. They should have had the guts to drop it completely.”
The scheme had had a deadline of the end of next month. By that time, ‘ordinary’ NAEA members who either did not wish to, or could not, proceed to licensing would have had the right to display the NAEA logo on their firm’s marketing literature, including letterheads, withdrawn.
A number of members had been up in arms about the scheme, complaining that it would turn them into second-class members, and that in marketing and PR, the public would have been encouraged only to use an NAEA licensed agent.
Members’ protests led to the apparent climb-down.
Now the deadline has been removed together with the restriction on displaying logos.
In informing members, the NAEA clearly denied that it had caved in. It said that the scheme had been launched at a very successful event at the House of Commons last November.
“The scheme aims to differentiate clearly NAEA licensed members in the eyes of consumers and the Housing Minister, Grant Shapps, gave it his full support,” said the NAEA.
“The initial take-up has been very encouraging but the Association has been listening to members, who have asked for more time to meet the exacting licensing standards.
“The President of the NAEA, Mike Jones, together with the main Board, has agreed that Principal, Partner and Director NAEA members will be able to continue to use the standard logo, when advertising their firm, after the end of June and until they become licensed. The decision as to the new cut-off date will be reviewed on a regular basis.
Jones said: “The NAEA were firmly committed to licensing as a real way of demonstrating why consumers should only use an NAEA member. However, as a membership organisation we must also take into account the practical concerns of members.”
.jpg)
%20A%20property%20tale%20for%20our%20times.png)
Comments
I am totally against licensing.
Currently, we display the NAEA logo and I am responsible for the actions of staff whether they are members or not. The consumer is aware that we follow a code of practise across the whole company.
With licensing, I will have to remove the logo from company literature and almost hide the fact that we are members, unless I employ an NAEA member in every office. Its tough finding any good staff at the moment, but to add an additional criteria is impossible.
I sincerely hope that the scheme is withdrawn as otherwise, there seems little point in remaining a member of an organisation which, as a company, we can no longer publicly endorse.
Right. What else can we screw up?
I can't see how the NAEA could get away with licensing it's members and then tell the public not to use any other agent. Since when has it be deemed that only being a member of the NAEA is required to be an estate agent in a free market. Yes there are poor estate agents but so many of them are NAEA members. It may clean up their act (NAEA membership) but they have no right to tell the public that there the only ones that matter over other professionals business's. The NAEA has failed for generations to protect the public if one looks at the poor record.
We have enough legistlation. Licensing only gives the impression of being professional, while dishonesty is a mind set no matter how qualified one is. Look at all the lawyers, doctors, financial advisors and other professionals in prison. Not many estate agents!