Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
plummet expert

High St Estate Agents Charge £750Ph !

Recommended Posts

Amazing isn't is? Apparently, if this article is to be believed Estate Agents in the UK are charging up to £750ph. Even if it was £500 ph it is hardly justified. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY NO ONE HAS MANAGED TO STOP THIS BY AN INTERNET/HOUSE SIGN/NEGOTIATION ON YOUR BEHALF PHONE SERVICE. Can anyone explain how E'as manage to survive and persuade most people to sell a home through a shop and internet listing on Rightmove.co.uk. ?

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-2562253/Where-sell-home-without-high-estate-agent-fees.html

I really cannot say if the hourly rates quoted are realistic, BUT I can comment on the hourly rates for Lawyers since I am in the trade. Much against media output, the hourly rates for most lawyers doing things in Courts is actually about £50-100ph depending on what it is. Mostly £50ph. That is the fee befor expenses and therefore the turnover and not the profit figure. Only commercial lawyers charge things like £500ph. Out of 110,000 lawyers, about 100,000 of them will be on those lower rates. I know we are not very popular in the media, but most of what you read is simply untrue. Legal aid lawyers earn less than plumbers these days, and they will all leave over time if Grayling cuts it any more.

The reason you read that major Fraud trials are hanging about without barristers is because Grayling has cut the rates at the snap of his fingers by 30%. The rates he cut have been in force without a rise for 18yrs so far. Yes, I said eighteen years. So, Grayling thinks that some of the most talented lawyers required for large fraud cases will not now get the £150ph they worked for previously but, actually only £100ph. No wonder several trials including a £4.5million fraud are sitting idle because no lawyers will take it on and those originally there walked out before Christmas. Grayling is about to wreck the justice system in this country and it's actually valuable and worthy to have courts running fairly with people represented properly. The Guilty should not go free, but neither should the innocent be convicted. The Prosecution have also been cut beyond the bone and are in a shambles. My firm currently wins 2 out of three prosecutions, when it should be about 50/50. So there you have it. Like us or not, we in Legal Aid are generally not very well paid and the fat cats AMONGST legal aid lawyers, are mostly a myth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Estate agents have made their clients lots of money. No different from corporate tax lawyers making £750 ph. If there's money to be made,people want their cut.

Not much money in scrote prosecutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Estate agents have made their clients lots of money. No different from corporate tax lawyers making £750 ph. If there's money to be made,people want their cut.

Not much money in scrote prosecutions.

The difference is that Lawyers and Doctors require years of training and you are paying for 'expert' advice. Anyone could cut it as an EA!

EA Training

1. Look up street on Rightmove.

2. Find price of last similar house sold in location.

3. Add 5%, (if possible 10-20%)

4. Quote price to mug, opps! I mean seller.

Hardly compares with the years of training a Lawyer or a Doctor goes through.....

Edited by renting til I die

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is that Lawyers and Doctors require years of training and you are paying for 'expert' advice. Anyone could cut it as an EA!

EA Training

1. Look up street on Rightmove.

2. Find price of last similar house sold in location.

3. Add 5%, (if possible 10-20%)

4. Quote price to mug, opps! I mean seller.

Hardly compares with the years of training a Lawyer or a Doctor goes through.....

You aren't paying for the training with the Ea you are paying for the extra profit you will likely make compared to DIY sale. Simple really,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You aren't paying for the training with the Ea you are paying for the extra profit you will likely make compared to DIY sale. Simple really,

Do you really think that someone with a little sales and marketing knowledge couldn't work out how to sell a house. What you are really paying for is the EA's brand and large advertising budget. The main reason EA's get all this business is that most people are too lazy to do the necessarily research and get appropriate advertising and profession photos taken.

Funny, because most people will spend hours trying to save a tenner off a new TV but when it comes to a house, whats a few 1000 pounds!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't agree with that at all. Most houses sell through EAs. If it's DIY you limit the market, and also people might think that it's dodgy because no EA and make a lower offer.

If the EA gets you £350k instead of £325k, he's worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Estate agents have made their clients lots of money.

The government and the Bank of England have made lots of money for estate agents and their clients. A chimp in a top hat and tails could sell a terraced house in London right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the EA gets you £350k instead of £325k, he's worth it.

How do we know what the price would have been without the EA? This is unmeasurable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do we know what the price would have been without the EA? This is unmeasurable.

Well you could look at selling prices for EA and non-EA properties, % of asking, but it would still be difficult to control for differences in condition, etc.

Still if you pay an EA 1% fee, then while the nominal hourly rate is perhaps very high, you only need a 1% higher house price to make it back. So it's probably worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't agree with that at all. Most houses sell through EAs. If it's DIY you limit the market, and also people might think that it's dodgy because no EA and make a lower offer.

If the EA gets you £350k instead of £325k, he's worth it.

I totally understand the angle you are coming from. Most people think they have to sell through an EA. Hence most people go to an EA to find a house. I also agree that most D.I.Y sellers will market their house poorly and unprofessionally, causing the state of mind in the buyer that you note. However, if you really think that EA's will maximum the value of the house for the seller, you really have to have a read of Tim Hartford, The Undercover Economist. It may make you question how much of an effect EA's really have and if it is really worth the additional cost.

Luckily, don't have anything to sell and I can be as off as I like with useless EA's! I also have always put in a lower offer, if it was with an EA or not! :P

Oh, one last thing. If you could list your house on right move with profession floors plans (I've seen some really bad one from EA's) and photos. Have contract with the interested parties directly. What would be different? (apart from you would have a appointment booked right away and wouldn't have to wait for the EA to get back to you!) I think you are only comparing with the D.I.Y sellers on Gumtree! Almost all the houses I viewed were on Rightmove and unless it was a repo the seller was always the one to show me around their home. I think EA's are taking too big a cut and it is down to laziness and a lack of understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do we know what the price would have been without the EA? This is unmeasurable.

Not totally unmeasurable but not a fair measure. I'm sure some D.I.Y sellers get a cracking deal for themselves but overall the poor ones will drag their rating down putting people off doing it. As Dorkins said a chimp could sell a house in London at the moment. EA's look at turnover, not if they are getting a good deal for the seller or not.

Edited by renting til I die

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The link includes the following statement -

Taking the average time it takes an estate agent to sell a property, which is between five and 15 hours according to the Land Registry, this translates into an hourly fee that could be as high as £774.

What does an average time to sell mean? Do Land Registry record when the seller puts the property on the market? Do they take into account how many agents are involved? Do they factor in the time spent on unsold properties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The link includes the following statement -

Taking the average time it takes an estate agent to sell a property, which is between five and 15 hours according to the Land Registry, this translates into an hourly fee that could be as high as £774.

What does an average time to sell mean? Do Land Registry record when the seller puts the property on the market? Do they take into account how many agents are involved? Do they factor in the time spent on unsold properties?

There has been mention on here of houses on the market for six years! That is a big bill to the EA :lol: This article is just more baloney trying to make property look like the "best place to be". Five hours to sell a property...mmmmmmm, maybe in certain prime spots, but not for much longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other three are MCDONALDS.

:lol:

There has been mention on here of houses on the market for six years! That is a big bill to the EA :lol: This article is just more baloney trying to make property look like the "best place to be". Five hours to sell a property...mmmmmmm, maybe in certain prime spots, but not for much longer.

Yep, more property porn for the masses!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has been mention on here of houses on the market for six years! That is a big bill to the EA :lol: This article is just more baloney trying to make property look like the "best place to be". Five hours to sell a property...mmmmmmm, maybe in certain prime spots, but not for much longer.

No - I don't think the article is trying to make property look like the best place to be. It is promoting the use of on-line cheaper services to sell houses by trying to rile punters with a high rate of earnings that regular EA's charge.

I have no time for EA's in general, but I do not believe for 1 second that using any sensible costing system, the length of time involved to sell houses is 5 hours - Even 15 hours would be a push. Yes, one might argue EA offices are overstaffed and they waste a lot of time. But an estimate of the length of time to sell a house could be achieved by computing total hours worked by all EA / number of houses sold.

Even at 35 hours per week * 20% (assuming 80% of time is wasted) * number individuals would be a lot. Again, while many on this site (self included) might criticize EA's, almost all of the firms are run as "for profit" businesses, and if the busy factor is much below 50%, I suspect employees would be made redundant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed that using an online EA to sell is becoming more popular near me. Fees are a fraction of that of the high street estate agents I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the US, EAs (Realtors) have to pass a test and be licenced. Is this merely to keep the numbers down therefore profits up for those already in the biz? Or is there something of value to the seller and/or buyer that the Realtor has learned in order to get licenced?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No - I don't think the article is trying to make property look like the best place to be. It is promoting the use of on-line cheaper services to sell houses by trying to rile punters with a high rate of earnings that regular EA's charge.

I have no time for EA's in general, but I do not believe for 1 second that using any sensible costing system, the length of time involved to sell houses is 5 hours - Even 15 hours would be a push. Yes, one might argue EA offices are overstaffed and they waste a lot of time. But an estimate of the length of time to sell a house could be achieved by computing total hours worked by all EA / number of houses sold.

Even at 35 hours per week * 20% (assuming 80% of time is wasted) * number individuals would be a lot. Again, while many on this site (self included) might criticize EA's, almost all of the firms are run as "for profit" businesses, and if the busy factor is much below 50%, I suspect employees would be made redundant.

I think it is taking an extreme example - expensive house sold quickly, and then just dividing the agents fee by the tiny number of hours, and then generalising this as some sort of "industry rate" (to make a point, yes I agree, but it undermines the point by being too incredible) Many EA`s outside London would be doing well to pull in £750 a DAY for the whole office IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing isn't is? Apparently, if this article is to be believed Estate Agents in the UK are charging up to £750ph. Even if it was £500 ph it is hardly justified. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY NO ONE HAS MANAGED TO STOP THIS BY AN INTERNET/HOUSE SIGN/NEGOTIATION ON YOUR BEHALF PHONE SERVICE. Can anyone explain how E'as manage to survive and persuade most people to sell a home through a shop and internet listing on Rightmove.co.uk. ?

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-2562253/Where-sell-home-without-high-estate-agent-fees.html

I really cannot say if the hourly rates quoted are realistic, BUT I can comment on the hourly rates for Lawyers since I am in the trade. Much against media output, the hourly rates for most lawyers doing things in Courts is actually about £50-100ph depending on what it is. Mostly £50ph. That is the fee befor expenses and therefore the turnover and not the profit figure. Only commercial lawyers charge things like £500ph. Out of 110,000 lawyers, about 100,000 of them will be on those lower rates. I know we are not very popular in the media, but most of what you read is simply untrue. Legal aid lawyers earn less than plumbers these days, and they will all leave over time if Grayling cuts it any more.

The reason you read that major Fraud trials are hanging about without barristers is because Grayling has cut the rates at the snap of his fingers by 30%. The rates he cut have been in force without a rise for 18yrs so far. Yes, I said eighteen years. So, Grayling thinks that some of the most talented lawyers required for large fraud cases will not now get the £150ph they worked for previously but, actually only £100ph. No wonder several trials including a £4.5million fraud are sitting idle because no lawyers will take it on and those originally there walked out before Christmas. Grayling is about to wreck the justice system in this country and it's actually valuable and worthy to have courts running fairly with people represented properly. The Guilty should not go free, but neither should the innocent be convicted. The Prosecution have also been cut beyond the bone and are in a shambles. My firm currently wins 2 out of three prosecutions, when it should be about 50/50. So there you have it. Like us or not, we in Legal Aid are generally not very well paid and the fat cats AMONGST legal aid lawyers, are mostly a myth.

You sound like a scrounger who seeks Legal Aid as lawyer's benefit. Legal aid should be totally abolished, forcing down lawyers' rates. We should end no win, no fee, and simplify the process for litigants in person. Why do you insist on receiving state money? You're just a glorified welfare sponger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   212 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.