House Sale dilema
Discussion
I have sold my house to an investment buyer - no problem there. The problem is with the original estate agent - signed a 12 weeks sole agency agreement 3/6/05 - who sent the wife of the same investment buyer round June last year, she made an offer and I refused it because I had promised it to another couple. They however failed to get a mortgage. The estate agent then sold it to another couple last October who have also failed to get a mortgage. I had to keep calling them for updates on both couples. I finally offered it for sale via another agent last week as I was peeved with agent 1. They sold it to the original investment buyer. Estate agent 1 are now saying that they introduced the investment buyer originally so they are the ones who should be getting the commision. They actually sent the wife of the current buyer round to view and it was she who made the offer. It's her husband that has made the offer. They both have seperate portfolio's. Any PHer know where I stand. Estate agent 2 say ignore them as they do not have a leg to stand on as it was Mrs who offered. Help!!
Thanks in advance
Dave
406TM
Thanks in advance
Dave
406TM
Dave
This happened to me recently. In my case the original estate agent agreed to not go for his commission though as the time delay between him showing a customer round and the same customer buying my house through a second estate agent was such a long period of time (6 months IIRC) that they agreed it was not part of the same sale if you see what I mean - i.e. it was a new sales cysle and could not be counted as their sale anymore. Your estate agent seems less willing to see it as this.
The way I dealt with it was to get the estate agents to sort it out. I told them I was not paying 2 lots of commission so they should decide who it went to.... that might be a good way to do it or just pay the second agent and tell the first that the time between them showing your buyer round and buyer actually buying was so long that it could not constitute theor sale
Hope this helps.
This happened to me recently. In my case the original estate agent agreed to not go for his commission though as the time delay between him showing a customer round and the same customer buying my house through a second estate agent was such a long period of time (6 months IIRC) that they agreed it was not part of the same sale if you see what I mean - i.e. it was a new sales cysle and could not be counted as their sale anymore. Your estate agent seems less willing to see it as this.
The way I dealt with it was to get the estate agents to sort it out. I told them I was not paying 2 lots of commission so they should decide who it went to.... that might be a good way to do it or just pay the second agent and tell the first that the time between them showing your buyer round and buyer actually buying was so long that it could not constitute theor sale
Hope this helps.
Had a similar situation as a buyer (wasn't really my problem but got dragged into it as I "kind" of caused it 
)
Basically, saw a house via 1 agent, made a couple of offers which were rejected.
Bit later, found some more cash and spotted the same house for sale at a 2nd agent, so made an offer through them, which was accepted.
Obviously agent 2 is over the moon, as they get their commission for zero effort.
Then it transpires that the orginal agent was still actually marketing the house on a dual-agency basis (which #2 neglected to mention) and, quite rightly IMO wanted the whole fee from the vendor as they'd "found" me originally as a sole agent and were still acting for them.
As far as I could see, #1 was in the right and #2 didn't have a leg to stand on. Not sure who got what in the end but I did advise the vendor not to put up with any argument and simply put up one fee and let the agents fight over it.
) Basically, saw a house via 1 agent, made a couple of offers which were rejected.
Bit later, found some more cash and spotted the same house for sale at a 2nd agent, so made an offer through them, which was accepted.
Obviously agent 2 is over the moon, as they get their commission for zero effort.
Then it transpires that the orginal agent was still actually marketing the house on a dual-agency basis (which #2 neglected to mention) and, quite rightly IMO wanted the whole fee from the vendor as they'd "found" me originally as a sole agent and were still acting for them.
As far as I could see, #1 was in the right and #2 didn't have a leg to stand on. Not sure who got what in the end but I did advise the vendor not to put up with any argument and simply put up one fee and let the agents fight over it.
I would check the contract of sale you had with the first agent. Does it mention any time period after the end of your contract when they are still entitled to a fee? As you state the buyer is actually a different person on this occasion and although related, they have seperate portfolios. They cannot reasonably expect to get the fee if the contract had ended some time ago and a new agent been appointed before the new offer was made.
I once employed a guy through an agency who had previously been introduced by another agency some 11 months previously. The first agency tried it on aand said we owed them their fee also but we told them to Foxtrot Oscar if they ever wanted to work with us again. They let it drop when we argued that the guy's experience was totally different the second time around and they had not reintroduced him in the last 2 months after we asked them for new candidates.
I once employed a guy through an agency who had previously been introduced by another agency some 11 months previously. The first agency tried it on aand said we owed them their fee also but we told them to Foxtrot Oscar if they ever wanted to work with us again. They let it drop when we argued that the guy's experience was totally different the second time around and they had not reintroduced him in the last 2 months after we asked them for new candidates.
UPDATE
I had Er In Doors draft me a letter - Below - and their reply after that
Mrs 406tm wrote
Dear Sirs,
I would like to draw your attention to the contract I had with your company as sole agents for the sale of the property: XX XXXXXXXX. This states quite clearly the contract runs for 12 weeks and was dated 3rd June 2005. Therefore the contract as sole agents ceased as of 26th August 2005.
Although you introduced Mrs B shortly after the start of the contract I was unfortunately unable to accept her offer. I accepted an offer from Mr. & Mrs. K who it transpired was unable to effect a mortgage, although an assurance, they had in principle been approved for a mortgage, was given to me.
After much hanging around and having no idea what was going on, due to the total lack of communication by Mr. P, at my insistence the property was put back on the market with your company, at this time although no longer obliged to do so I still had you as sole agents. You introduced and I accepted an offer from Mr. & Mrs. D in early October 2005, with an assurance they had in principle been approved for a mortgage.
Once again I was left totally in the dark by Mr. P to the point where you Mr. C spent a considerable amount of time on the phone to me on one particular day apologising for the total lack of help and communication being offered to me.
At the end of January this year in total desperation I put the property on with another agent in the hope I might secure a sale. MR. B was introduced to me by Your Move and I have accepted his offer. Mr and Mrs B have separate investment portfolios therefore they are not one and the same.
I feel I have been more than fair and patient with your company and have absolutely no intentions of paying you a penny for what can only be described as an appalling service, also the 12 week contract ceased 6 months ago and I am selling to MR. B not Mrs.
I wish to have no further communication with your company and a copy of this letter has been sent to my solicitor.
Reply from the original estate agent
Thank you for your letter dated 7th February. Having reviewed the contents and the file in full, I am able to confirm we will not be pursuing you for the liability of our fee on this occasion.
They were trying on but failed to get the better of Mrs 406tm
Result for the working man
Dave
406TM
I had Er In Doors draft me a letter - Below - and their reply after that
Mrs 406tm wrote
Dear Sirs,
I would like to draw your attention to the contract I had with your company as sole agents for the sale of the property: XX XXXXXXXX. This states quite clearly the contract runs for 12 weeks and was dated 3rd June 2005. Therefore the contract as sole agents ceased as of 26th August 2005.
Although you introduced Mrs B shortly after the start of the contract I was unfortunately unable to accept her offer. I accepted an offer from Mr. & Mrs. K who it transpired was unable to effect a mortgage, although an assurance, they had in principle been approved for a mortgage, was given to me.
After much hanging around and having no idea what was going on, due to the total lack of communication by Mr. P, at my insistence the property was put back on the market with your company, at this time although no longer obliged to do so I still had you as sole agents. You introduced and I accepted an offer from Mr. & Mrs. D in early October 2005, with an assurance they had in principle been approved for a mortgage.
Once again I was left totally in the dark by Mr. P to the point where you Mr. C spent a considerable amount of time on the phone to me on one particular day apologising for the total lack of help and communication being offered to me.
At the end of January this year in total desperation I put the property on with another agent in the hope I might secure a sale. MR. B was introduced to me by Your Move and I have accepted his offer. Mr and Mrs B have separate investment portfolios therefore they are not one and the same.
I feel I have been more than fair and patient with your company and have absolutely no intentions of paying you a penny for what can only be described as an appalling service, also the 12 week contract ceased 6 months ago and I am selling to MR. B not Mrs.
I wish to have no further communication with your company and a copy of this letter has been sent to my solicitor.
Reply from the original estate agent
Thank you for your letter dated 7th February. Having reviewed the contents and the file in full, I am able to confirm we will not be pursuing you for the liability of our fee on this occasion.
They were trying on but failed to get the better of Mrs 406tm
Result for the working man
Dave
406TM
406tm said:
They were trying on but failed to get the better of Mrs 406tm
406tm said:
Result for the working man
I'm new around here,and don't wish to ruffle feathers and all that, but it looks like it was a result for the working woman to me.
ETA Either way, well done.
>> Edited by scotal on Tuesday 14th February 15:27
406tm said:
Thank you for your letter dated 7th February. Having reviewed the contents and the file in full, I am able to confirm we will not be pursuing you for the liability of our fee on this occasion.
That's big of them
, not actually admitting you were right but just saying they weren't bothering to pursue you for the money.GreenV8S said:
Thank you for your letter dated 7th February. Having reviewed the contents and the file in full, I am able to confirm we will not be pursuing you for the liability of our fee on this occasion.
That's big of them
That is the nearest I will get to them admitting that they did not have a leg to stand on. Gonna cost me big time at the weekend
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff