Estate Agent Demanding Fees After Sale Through Another Agent

[Rroff]

I may be naive here but I don't see anyone going to court over this?

I suppose if it went that way just about any financial offer from the OP like £1k or something would likely make it go away.

In this instance I can't really see it, but some estate agents seem quite predatory over stuff like this and have taken it to court with varying results.

At least from the information the OP has supplied I get the impression the agent involved, or at least the individual pursuing the claimed fees, is probably in financial difficulty and chancing it and probably doesn't want the costs and hassle of court.

So if Zopa and the original agent subscribe to TPO; then Zopa should be giving the fee to the original agent. If both or one don't subscribe to TPO, then it'll be court action with first agent having a clear case IMHO.

If you look at some of the "Foxtons vs" cases it isn't as simple as that with contention as to introduction vs how instrumental each agent was to the purchase and in dual fees cases it may also have some bearing as to whether the seller followed procedures and/or whether the agents followed procedures in respect to identifying those who've previously shown interest in the property. (Also whether it counts as a multi-agency instruction or not).

 

[jpaul]

how much are the fees reduced by with YOPA - vs original agent ?

still seems like the contract was agreed price/searches-complete/contents prior to the 6 months ie 28Nov, even if there was a fortuitous pause 18Jan (not acknowledged in later timeline)
pushing out monetary exchange to > 6 months.

 

[matt100]

how much are the fees reduced by with YOPA - vs original agent ?

still seems like the contract was agreed price/searches-complete/contents prior to the 6 months ie 28Nov, even if there was a fortuitous pause 18Jan (not acknowledged in later timeline)
pushing out monetary exchange to > 6 months.

If the legal definition of sale is exchange then IT.. DOESN'T.. MATTER!

 

[jpaul]

If the legal definition of sale is exchange then IT.. DOESN'T.. MATTER!

of course it is , but obviously yopa seems to advertise £999 versus ? 2% you could be paying elsewhere so ? £6K

it look conspiratorial as others had remarked in the thread - if he can provide explanation for the buying pause , might exonerate himself,
equally if searches etc were ongoing across the 6month boundary

 

[matt100]

Unless I'm misunderstanding you the point remains, it can look however it looks, in term of the OPs question about whether they're on the hook they either legally are or are not.

I deal with this fairly regularly, you can feel however you like about a contract dispute but it will have a clear outcome based on the definitions.

 

[Transform_IT]

The sale was off completely in August due to us not finding anywhere. The sale was at the early stages, no searches or legal work undertaoen and no fees to pay to our solicitor.

2-3 months later, my wife and I found a new property we liked. We decided to relist our house with Yopa due to learning of our previous agents dodgy dealings. My wife spoke to a friend who knew our original buyer, and they told her they stillnhadnt moved and had reserved a new house on a new development. It turns out the house wasn't ready for several months. My wife contacted the buyers and discussed our house and told them we would be resisting it as we had now found somewhere. They replied a day later asking who the agent was etc. They contacted the agent, came round. Made a revised offer, Yopa negotiated and a sale was agreed.

March 24th, 7 months after withdrawing with the original agent, exchange and completion happened.

 

[RedMogg]

The sale was off completely in August due to us not finding anywhere. The sale was at the early stages, no searches or legal work undertaoen and no fees to pay to our solicitor.

2-3 months later, my wife and I found a new property we liked. We decided to relist our house with Yopa due to learning of our previous agents dodgy dealings. My wife spoke to a friend who knew our original buyer, and they told her they stillnhadnt moved and had reserved a new house on a new development. It turns out the house wasn't ready for several months. My wife contacted the buyers and discussed our house and told them we would be resisting it as we had now found somewhere. They replied a day later asking who the agent was etc. They contacted the agent, came round. Made a revised offer, Yopa negotiated and a sale was agreed.

March 24th, 7 months after withdrawing with the original agent, exchange and completion happened.

I hope your £330+VAT includes a very straightforward "You have no breach of contract claim because reasons" cease & desist letter?

It should only take the one, on headed paper with their SRA details. The original estate agents would be foolish to push their luck after realising you've taken proper, paid legal advice (rather than asking a PC forum).

 

[Transform_IT]

I hope your £330+VAT includes a very straightforward "You have no breach of contract claim because reasons" cease & desist letter?

It should only take the one, on headed paper with their SRA details. The original estate agents would be foolish to push their luck after realising you've taken proper, paid legal advice (rather than asking a PC forum).

I spoke to my solicitor and asked for an appointment and they replied with the following:

One hour should be sufficient to review matters and provide initial advice.

However, please note at this stage it may not be economical to instruct a solicitor.

Please let me know how you wish to proceed.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

Unless I'm misunderstanding you the point remains, it can look however it looks, in term of the OPs question about whether they're on the hook they either legally are or are not.

I deal with this fairly regularly, you can feel however you like about a contract dispute but it will have a clear outcome based on the definitions.

Only if you subscribe to the definition of sale as completion date. That is what opp set out as guidance, but that is a totally optional scheme. Ignoring 'time' for a second (I mean we are one month out from triggering it specifically and against opp definition), the op did exactly what the rule was there to protect again.

 

[matt100]

Only if you subscribe to the definition of sale as completion date. That is what opp set out as guidance, but that is a totally optional scheme. Ignoring 'time' for a second (I mean we are one month out from triggering it specifically and against opp definition), the op did exactly what the rule was there to protect again.

*Exchange, not complete

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

I think Sale in law is probably one of the most defined and tested things there is. Per SOGA 79.

Housing being kind of unique in the terms of sale that most individuals will come across in that its more complicated and there will be exchange as well. Although in effect exchange in its traditional guise often doesn't really happen now.
Exchange being a step where you have signed a contract that is binding by law to buy a property or sell yours. As such once you have signed you are contractually obliged to take the action or you can be sued for non-compliance and the losses someone incurs as a result.
Its why typically a deposit is placed so they can quickly secure that to remedy their position should you break the contract.

I think if estate agents are using the term sale and wanting it to be construed as something other than a sale in legal terms they would need to be very very clear about that when offering a contract, else they would probably struggle to enforce it.

Arguably they should be contracting on exchange of contracts since thats the point when in reality their part is done, if thats the same time as completion (ie confirming the sale with funds) then thats fine.

 

[SpeedFreak]

I think you should have (with hindsight):

1. Ensured that your contract with the new agent captured an exception in the event a previous potential buyer re-expressed interest.
2. Once you had provisional agreement with the potential buyer reached out to the original agent and agreed a course of action.

You terminated in August, six months to completion puts that window to February. Given formal contract exchange is late in purchase processes, the intent to buy had been established I assume well before then. You sold to an individual introduced to your property via the marketing of the agent making the claim against you.

I think this is an unfortunate set of circumstances all around. Morally I believe you ultimately benefitted from the marketing activity of the original agent. Legally it will come down to the intent to buy, which I expect was captured via a formal offer and acceptance via your newer agent. Those are likely to be the dates to assess liability, with the assumption that a crystalising event would be required (e.g. completion). That means November, which falls within the original restrictive terms set out to you.

 

[Shep_Cobain]

Transform_IT was my new account. I have managed to recover my old account. I am the OP.

Today I received the following email from the estate agent demanding £5k:

Further to my conversation with you regarding the sale of xxxxxxxx xxxxxxx. We are aware that the property was sold to XXXXXXXX & XXXXXXXXX, applicants of which we introduced during our sole agency. Please see below a copy of the email which was sent to yourselves when you withdrew your property from ourselves, the email clearly states the applicants we had introduced and clearly states that any sale to one of these applicants would incur our fee.

I have previously sent an email enclosing the invoice for payment which we have had no reply, therefore have attached the invoice herewith, please could you be kind enough to contact me at your earliest convenience otherwise we will be instructing our solicitor to commence legal proceedings for collection of the commission.

This is the first request of this. I have referred this to the property ombudsman and have penned the following reply. Any thoughts?

Good morning, XXXXXXX,

This is the first email we have received regarding this matter. No previous emails have been shared outlining an invoice payable, nor have any discussions taken place. I do recall a phone call from you several months ago regarding our sale, but no further details were discussed. At the time, I explained that we sold via Yopa, with XXXXX XXXXXXX facilitating the sale.

Our property was indeed sold seven months (213 days) after our withdrawal from the market with XXXXXXXXXX. Your agency terms clearly state:

"We will have a commission fee entitlement if you terminate our agreement and then sell your property to a buyer introduced by us within six months of the date our agreement ends."

As the sale occurred beyond the six-month period, both we and our legal representative are confident that no fee is payable.

Given your continued demands and now the threat of legal action, we view this as bordering on harassment. As a result, we have raised this matter with The Property Ombudsman and have also instructed a solicitor to review the situation.

Kind regards,
XXXXXXXX

 

[Semple]

Good to hear of an update. I'm betting at this point they haven't sought legal counsel and are trying their luck based on their own understanding of their terms. Will be interesting now you've pointed out that the sale happened 6 months after you terminated their services, what their legal rep makes of it.

 

[Shep_Cobain]

I sent the response - despite my asking for him not to harass me, he immediately tried to call.

 

[Slam62]

I find in these situations it may helpful to get them to explain why they think you owe money, that way you know what you have to defend against.

 

[Kenai]

"Hi, this is the first email I have received about this but given your continued demands, I view this as harrassment"

Not surprised they immediately tried to phone you

 

[Shep_Cobain]

"Hi, this is the first email I have received about this but given your continued demands, I view this as harrassment"

Not surprised they immediately tried to phone you

He has phoned me previously. We had a conversation, and he then attempted to call two further, which I missed. And then emailed, saying he had emailed already (which is untrue.)

 

[Shep_Cobain]

I find in these situations it may helpful to get them to explain why they think you owe money, that way you know what you have to defend against.

They have said "We are aware that the property was sold to XXXXXXXX & XXXXXXXXX, applicants of which we introduced during our sole agency."

 

[SpeedFreak]

So not really sufficient then. I would put the ball firmly in their court to evidence fully with complete marked up reference to the contract and chain of events before I engage any further. I would propose to them that they in writing confirm:

• The termination date of their sole agency for your sale.
• An extract of the terms of their contract that specify the details around the terms of their entitlement to a fee when a client was introduced by them.
• Whether their potential entitlement is based on the completion date or exchange date.
• On what date, based on their interpretation of the contract you would have been free to engage with a previously introduced party.
• Comparison of that date to the completion/exchange date.