Agent challenges Rightmove’s new 14-week anti-juggling rule after fall-through

An agent has said he was on the brink of losing a valuable instruction because of Rightmove’s new 14-week rule.

The vendor of a fallen-through property saw the rule as disadvantaging her chances of a successful sale, and she came close to disinstructing the agent.

The anti-portal juggling rule is designed to stop the de-listing and re-listing of properties to make them look like new instructions.

However, Winkworth franchisee Sean Amner was critical when Rightmove refused to reset the listing date, despite his pleas, after a sale fell through nearly three months after going under offer.

With the vendor anxious for the property to look new to the market, she was about to disinstruct Winkworth in order go with a different agent – for no other reason than that they could list it with a fresh date and have the property sent through as a new alert.

The property in question was originally listed with one of Amner’s Winkworth offices in Surrey on November 3.

It went under offer on November 16. But on January 27 the sale collapsed, changing the property’s status back to For Sale.

However, the initial date of listing, November 3, continued to be shown.

Amner immediately objected, telling Rightmove that the property “now represents a new prospective purchase for any would-be buyers, and as such, it should be reflected in its listing date.

“The fact that it’s showing as being listed since November 3 suggests it’s an undesirable property that isn’t receiving any interest.

“This is simply not the case and will no doubt have a negative effect on the property’s perception and, theoretically, the price it is likely to achieve – why pay the asking price for something that nobody else wants?

“This particular vendor has called us to insist that the date is changed as she’s concerned about the adverse effect the original listing date will create.

“We’ve explained this can’t be done so she is now looking to disinstruct us and list with a new agent, as she realises that by doing so it will appear on Rightmove as a new instruction.”

Amner said: “This new rule is adversely affecting Rightmove’s ability to help sellers achieve their maximum selling price whilst simultaneously resulting in agents potentially losing instructions they would have otherwise kept.

“No doubt in time, once agents cotton on to this, they will be touting fallen-through properties to highlight the need for a vendor to change agent if they want their listing date reset.

“This will obviously put their original preferred agent at a huge disadvantage.

“It also begs the question that why should a property that has fallen through be regarded as a new listing simply because it has changed agent? Why is this any different to it being re-available via the original agent?”

Amner said it should be possible to list fall-throughs as ‘new’ within a week of a failed sale – not 14 weeks.

However, yesterday Amner was told that fall-throughs will not be re-listed as new on Rightmove. He called for the portal to reconsider.

He told EYE: “Rightmove feel that a property is only ever new to the market once, at the time of listing.

“In my view, a property should be classed as newly available when it is newly available to buy. As such, when a sale has fallen through it comes back to the market as ‘For Sale’ and presents buyers with a new opportunity to purchase the property from that point.

“Surely this is when it should be classed as ‘new’?

“They have also confirmed that the listing date will be reset if the property changes agent, which is completely contradictory. Either the property is newly available to the market or it isn’t, regardless of which agent is marketing the property.

“It seems that the changes are here to stay and we have to just accept it. My account manager has said that, to date, she has had a few agents raise this point, but seeing as it only came into force in December, the issue wouldn’t really haven’t surfaced much at this point in time.

“As more agents become aware of it and take it up with Rightmove, I would hope they will agree to reconsider.

“Another point to note is that Zoopla aren’t doing this. So, if this becomes the major problem I predict it will, a number of OTM agents may actually decide to swap their one other portal to Zoopla.”

The property in question is still with Amner’s agency as it is the subject of another offer currently being negotiated.

“However, this does not alter the fact that the vendor was about to disinstruct us and use another firm, purely as a work-around to the listing date issue,” said Amner.

Yesterday, Amner was told by his Rightmove account manager that he was still in a “in a much better position of selling the vendors property as it stands as you have already got the photographs and marketing finalised and approved.

“Because this property has also benefited from going out on the alerts when it was first listed you can use your database to go back to the original buyers who enquired on the property putting you one step ahead of another agent.  Consumers will still recognise the property from when it was first listed if it does go on with another agent so due to you already having potential buyers puts you in a much better place to sell this property than an entirely new agent.”

To this, Amner replied that “with respect”, he did not need a lesson in how to keep instructions following a fall-through.

Yesterday evening, Rightmove told EYE: “Currently any property that changes status within 14 weeks will not go out in email alerts and will retain the original listed date.  This update was made after extensive discussions with the industry.

“We will be listening to feedback from Rightmove agents and regularly reviewing how listings are displayed on Rightmove to ensure we are providing the most accurate data for agents, buyers and sellers.”

x

Email the story to a friend



80 Comments

  1. Ric

    Allow this and agents across the country will start falling sales through for a day or two to re-jig the listed on order and boast property sold quicker than it did!

    Gotta stand firm on this RM – A property is “New on” or “Added on” once and just once if it remains with the same agent.

    Or RM could relist and put “sale fell through on” as the last date stamp! that would be true, but I guess that truth is not something we want.

    So lets stop relying on the ****** date stamp on a website to sell our houses and if a sale falls through, get your staff on the blower! and stop giving the vendors the impression the website was responsible for getting a viewing or selling the property.

    Driving me ****** mad this reliance on the web.

    Report
    1. AgencyInsider

      If a sale falls through, get your staff on the blower! and stop giving the vendors the impression the website was responsible for getting a viewing or selling the property.

      Ric, those words should be pinned up in every agency office in the Land. Well said!

      Report
    2. Shaun77

      Ric

      Read my response toPeeBee’s comments below.

      This has nothing to do with whether we’re proactive or not. If a vendor believes it to be a problem, and if that vendor is having poison dripped in their early by other agents, it will become a problem.

       

       

      Report
      1. FromTheHip64

        Someone needs a little “objection handling” training session.

        Report
      2. Ric

        Shaun77

        I get that a vendors opinion/perception can be an issue and matters…

        But like with my staff, I tell them to explain, with confidence & passion is the key (like you ended up doing no doubt, which is why they stuck with you) that it is law to show true information and the FACT is the property is not “new on” bla bla…..but move swiftly on to how we are already calling the property out in the background.

        I think the minute you get in to that debate about why you/they want the house to have a newer date than the truth showing you are proving the antiportaljugglers right! “it looks better with the newer date” which is why #portaljuggling exists.

        I get your story and get your point, but the bigger picture is the ones who will be juggling dates 10 to 20 times a day to swallow up the few genuine ones like yours may have been, so lets let people like you, explain to vendors and assure them you have the tools in the box to get the deed done, as this is where the ReducedServiceAgents will struggle when they cannot manipulate the tool which has put them on a level playing field in an easy market.

        Our best tool are our staff and if we can make it that the public know this. The reducedserviceagents WILL struggle to keep up, without applicant lists and personpower when the portals are nothing more than price order property display.

        Report
  2. grantlance

    In my opinion the agents that are up in arms about this sort of thing are far too reliant on RM to do the hard work for them. Us “traditional agents”, with a hungry team of pro active agents working for us, promote fall throughs and treat them like new listings by jumping into our database and getting on the phones. Just need to roll your sleeves up and get it sold again just like you would have done before property portals were around.

    Report
    1. Shaun77

      So basically you’re saying the key here is to treat fall throughs as new instructions in order to get them sold again….

      I rest my case

      Report
      1. PeeBee

        “So basically you’re saying the key here is to treat fall throughs as new instructions…”

        I’m sure he actually said “treat them like new listings”

        BIIIG difference.

        Report
  3. PeeBee

    Note to Mr Amner:

    I know you say you don’t need anyone to teach you to suck eggs and all that but can I just ask, have you amended the property description with the words ***UNEXPECTEDLY READVERTISED DUE TO SALE CANCELLATION*** or other bold, eye-catching whassname?

    Didn’t think so…

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      Hate to remind you, Mr Amner – but you and I have already raised handbags on the thorny subject of reliance on technodribble doing an Agent’s job badly for them…

      …looks like you still have both feet planted firmly in the ‘pro’ camp.

      Report
      1. SParsons80

        In my experience, the tail is starting to wag the dog with Rightmove, they have completely changed the property performance report to its detriment and crippled our ability to effectively measure market share by moving to a postcode set up from a drawn map one. I have made strong representations regarding this and guess what, virtually no flexibility. They are happy however to increase our bills by 8%! All this and promotion of our online competitors. I have always been pro Rightmove but I am not sure now!

        Report
        1. PeeBee

          “In my experience, the tail is starting to wag the dog with Rightmove…”

          Sorry – STARTING?

          You’ve been wagged like a good ‘un for well over a decade.

          Report
        2. Ric

          Dare I ask SParsons80 – Are you on OTM?

          Report
          1. Ric

            I guess that is a no then?

            Report
      2. Shaun77

        Hi PeeBee

        Before you get too sanctimonious may I remind you that you failed to respond my last post on the subject leading me to believe that you conceded the point. If I’m mistaken then do feel free to pick up where you left off.

        Now, in response to this particular comment, you will see that I was representing my vendor’s concerns who believed, rightly or wrongly, that the listing date will have a detrimental effect on the marketing of her property and the fact that changing agents gave her a way to get around this.

        I firmly believe in agents being proactive and have a team of negs targeted and focused on viewing generation. We absolutely work on the basis that the agent’s job isn’t to sell properties, it’s to sell viewings.

        The fact the property is already back under offer is testament to this.

        And yes, we did add “unexpectedly re-available” to the description but the fact that you believe this is necessary only supports my point. If you didn’t think the listing date was relevant, why bother adding wording to counter it?

        Report
        1. PeeBee

          “Before you get too sanctimonious…”

          So – just how sanctimonious can I get before I push the boat out too far and it becomes too sanctimonious?  Rough guide will do – no specifics.

          Firstly – I’m sorry you thought I’d failed to respond to your post on 11/11.  I hadn’t actually failed to respond – I simply saw no point in responding.

          Maybe I should have made that clear by posting that – an oversight for which I apologise.  I’ve now corrected that oversight.

          Now – in response to your above comment…

          “…I was representing my vendor’s concerns who believed, rightly or wrongly, that the listing date will have a detrimental effect on the marketing of her property…”

          Yup – I assumed that.  I was clearly correct in my assumption.

          And I also assumed that, as an experienced Estate Agent you would be able to handle your client’s concerns and alleviate her worries in that respect.  The fact that you have apparently secured another offer for the lady’s property within days of the fall-through points in the general direction of this assumption being correct also – doesn’t it?

          So – why the brouhaha?

          Hope the new sale goes well… assuming it is finally agreed, that is.

          Report
        2. PeeBee

          “And yes, we did add “unexpectedly re-available” to the description but the fact that you believe this is necessary only supports my point.”

          Erm… no it doesn’t.

          “If you didn’t think the listing date was relevant, why bother adding wording to counter it?”

          Counter it? Give your head a well-overdue shake, will you!

          In respect of your earlier request I will not attempt to teach you how to suck eggs.

          I do suggest, however, you at least try sucking a few to familiarise yourself with the basic process involved.

          Report
  4. AgentV

    Why not Go back to everyone who viewed first time around. You would be surprised at how many people have not yet found anywhere to buy in this market where properties for sale are so scarce.

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      Article states that the next potential sale of the property is currently being negotiated, AgentV.

      I’m sure the guy will have an ‘app’ that did that for him… in a fashion…

      Report
      1. Shaun77

        Really?

        Report
        1. PeeBee

          Look up ‘sarcasm’ – I believe my comment is listed there as an example.

          But I bet you’ll now be thinking of an appropriate ‘app’…

          You keep the royalties.  My gift to you for all the sanctimoniousness you’re putting up with ;o)

          Report
  5. smile please

    How about RM just remove the date stamp?

    It’s no real benefit to a buyer knowing how long a property has been on BIT a massive diservice to the seller.

    If you are on the market 6 – 8 weeks sell. Have a genuine fall through 10 weeks onto a sale and then on market for another 4 weeks you are close to being on the market for 6 months with RM advertisingthis and making it look like a problem property.

    Not in the sellers interests.

    Report
    1. sb007ck

      Rightmove added the date stamp as Zoopla were already doing it and they felt pressured to do so, pressured as they felt it was something that purchasers wanted. Rightmove long ago, forgot that from time to time it is ok to prioritse the need of those that pays its bills.

      Agents dont want it, and not many buyers ever mention it, but as has always been the case, ask how long the property has been for sale, allowing me to explain the history to our selling of the property

      Report
  6. AndrewOverman

    Mr Amner, RM doesn’t sell houses, people do. Very disappointed that an agent (I use that term loosely) would make such a complaint.

    Get off your soapbox and on the phone.

    Firstly, to your Vendor, if you can’t manage her expectations and advise her professionally then perhaps you don’t deserve her instruction.

    Secondly, look at the marketing. Re-available due to chain break / unexpectedly reavailable or any number of phrases to comprehensively explain this to any potential purchaser.

    Finally, get on the phone. Not to PIE or RM but to your ****** database and actually speak to buyers, you’ll find that you’ll self generate viewings and interest far more successfully than waiting for a call / enquiry from RM!

     

    Report
    1. Shaun77

      Hello Andrew

      Thanks for the advice. Any other industry secrets you can throw my way? PeeBee Ric et al have already helped me learn to suck eggs so I’m all good on that front.

      Given your veritable goody bag of agency secrets I assume you don’t use portals at all. And no doubt when prospective vendors question this, you tell them that you’re right and they’re wrong?

       

      Report
      1. Robert May

        I am happy to take  some of the blame and flak for the changes Shaun, the negative affects of portaljuggling costs  honest agency  £252 million each year per 0.1% fee erosion,  on average every honest agent is deprived about  £31,000 fee income each year because of it.

        I understand the irritation  but the short term pain of ridding the industry of scammers will be long term worth it.

        Report
        1. Shaun77

          Hi Robert

          To be clear, I wholeheartedly support the anti juggling measures that likes of you, Chris and Pee Bee have worked so hard to introduce. However, you would think there would be a way that the portals can differentiate between genuine fall throughs and those being juggled.

          As it stands, in spite of what the regular posters think, it will potentially cost good, genuine agents income and that just can’t be a good thing.

          Report
          1. Robert May

            I  can see  and understand what you are saying but having costed out the effects of fee erosion you and all the other good agents are being penalised by  average £32,000 each every year.

            If numbers of vendors lured away by by other agents when  a sale falls through exceeds £32,000 commission you have a valid point. but  I’m sure agents like you don’t agree unsound sales and don’t face that problem once a month let alone more frequently.

            One  national agent has  new listed 246 properties in January but has re-listed 217.  When agents like that have their redress removed for breaching  redress codes of  conduct the industry will  be far more equitable and far less aggressive.

            Report
            1. Shaun77

              Hi Robert

              In this particular the case, the fee was £10,300 so it doesn’t take too many to cost me more than any potential saving.

              However, I’m at pains to stress that I am 100% in favour of eradicating portal juggling, but surely there’s a way to do it that doesn’t effect genuine fall throughs.

              Report
              1. AgentV

                Enjoy…thats five sales in our neck of the woods.

                Report
                1. PeeBee

                  SIX in mine…

                  NINE if you’re one of my competitors.

                  Report
              2. Ric

                The only way I can see there being a fair way is for RM to have:

                1. Added on

                2. Reduced on

                3. Increased on

                (or Price Change on) could cover both 2 & 3.

                4. Status change on (only for SSTC/Under offer to Available)

                I am sure their techy code writing bods could find a way to detect each, but saying “added on” can only mean one thing in the eyes of CPR.

                or get rid of the dates all together, don’t allow a “most recent” in the option to order the results and just have price high to low and low to high….. get our phones ringing.

                 

                Report
                1. Robert May

                  what happens if you  are the agent of a property in Oswestry that got price juggled 22 times in 24 hours.

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price increased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                  Price decreased at –/– on  –/–/2017

                   

                  or something like that?

                  Report
                  1. Ric

                    Then perhaps it is time to bring back the old “date stamp time line” and actually show the events like you have. I was always against Z doing this…. but if it meant the above would be shown next to the listing then perhaps the agent daft enough to do the above would think twice.

                    The vendor would suffer as a result and perhaps turn to the agent who has more than a port juggle to assist.

                    Report
                    1. Robert May

                      Looking at the agents who are still at it  they are predominately internet listers with either little or no applicant  management.

                      Now Rightmove have thwarted their shenanigans listers will we have to learn agency, including its rules, codes of conduct and case law obligations  or they will suffer from having either no business or no redress and therefore no business

                      Report
      2. PeeBee

        Actually, Mr Amer, I said I wasn’t going to teach you how to suck eggs.  I did however ask a pertinent question relating to the marketing of the subject property post fall-through, which you advise me that you had done what I enquired about.

        I’m pleased to hear that, by the way.

        Report
        1. Shaun77

          Yes Mr PeeBee, but you ended your post with “Didn’t think so” which is as condescending as it is presumptuous…

           

          Report
          1. PeeBee

            Guilty on both counts.  Or you very quickly added it to the listing ‘cos you knew I would check!

            (nice photos, by the way – I’ve seen far worse that have been passed off as ‘professional’)

            Report
            1. PeeBee

              Oh – and it’s just PeeBee by the way.

              I’m not my Dad yet.

              Report
  7. Robert May

    Rightmove must be congratulated and applauded for the changes they have made in response to NTSEAT and TPO guidelines.

     

    Relisting  false, ghost and other agent’s properties had reached epidemic proportions with  some branches of some agencies  relisting  50 or 60 units  every day.  I have just checked  the 24 hours to midnight, ie my yesterday report.  the worse offender had 5 relists with only 31 total in the top 10 jugglers.

    The benefits of portaljuggling have evaporated  from manipulating  Rightmove if Agents  who want to breach NTSEAT and redress scheme regulation and carry on juggling on Zoopla, I’m sure Rightmove will be delighted that they (RM) are seen as the portal who is working with honest estate agency rather than against it and that their main competitor is working hand in glove with  firms who are observably breaching CP and BP regulations.

    Well done Rightmove!

    It is inevitable sales fall through the  single re-listings  although recorded  don’t  get looked at unless  a pattern is noticed or the same name keeps cropping up in reports.

     

     

    Report
    1. Shaun77

      Hi Robert
      To be clear, I wholeheartedly support the anti juggling measures that likes of you, Chris and Pee Bee have worked so hard to introduce. However, you would think there would be a way that the portals can differentiate between genuine fall throughs and those being juggled.
      As it stands, in spite of what the regular posters think, it will potentially cost good, genuine agents income and that just can’t be a good thing.

      Report
  8. Mark Connelly

    The client should list with PB and do it themself. Seems they are controlling the sale anyway. Never read so much BS in my life. The vendor said bla bla bla. Grow a pair.

    Report
    1. Shaun77

      I’ve already got a pair thanks Mark but if your superior knowledge goes so far as knowing how to grow a second pair, perhaps you could share. I imagine there might be times that having a second pair could be useful…

      However, at the end of the day, I would rather get paid for my efforts than have a surplus of balls. If a vendor (rightly or wrongly) believes an old listing date/no email alert/no filtered search inclusion to be sufficient motivation to relist with another agent, regardless of my reassurance to the contrary, it’s going to result in lost income.

       

      Report
      1. Mark Connelly

        Sorry Shaun it’s not personal  but you will have noticed that you are getting caned. Maybe we are all a bit different but I never let the client call the shots. I sell me first and if they mistakenly believe they know better or can do better then after educating them as to their folley I drop them. I’m the expert not them. Put some value on your knowledge and expertise and be prepared to walk away.

        Report
        1. Shaun77

          Mark – please answer this question honestly:

          Have you ever had a vendor offer you their instruction, because they bought in to you, your knowledge, your experience, your professionalism, but they wanted to try a higher price than you recommended. And, if so, have you decided to educate them and walk away, or have you agreed to list the property, safe in the knowledge that within a certain period, the realities of the market coupled with your expert market narrative, will allow them to realise they’ve made a mistake and amend the price to your original expectation.

          If your answer is yes, can I ask you why you decided to accept the instruction, and not just walk away knowing that you were right and they were wrong?

           

          Report
      2. Robert May

        I actually cannot imagine any occasion where  a brace of nads could be useful, though I can think of a bloke who would claim have 2 pair simply to fix a deck of egotistical playing cards in his favour.

         

        Report
        1. Shaun77

          Sometimes I think there are plenty of people posting on here that are in possession of a doublet of danglers, given the amount of b******s spouted!

          Report
        2. Shaun77

          Only just twigged the reference…. very good!

          Report
  9. FromTheHip64

    What a load of nonsence.

    Report
  10. FromTheHip64

    Oh dear. Another agent with too much time on his hands.

    Let’s give the buying public a bit more credit. There aren’t stacks of new listings coming on right now and it’s likely be a tight year. If a tasty property appears back on RM for the first time in a few months the phone will ring irrespective of when RM says it was listed. And if the phone doesn’t ring then pick it up and make a few calls….you know, like in the old days.

    Seriously…….no keen, motivated buyer is going to see a property on RM that ticks all their boxes and then not view it simply because it says it was first listed a few months ago. Get a grip!

    And if an estate agent can’t overcome a simple objection like this from a vendor he should probably shut up shop.

    Have a good day all………and try not to spend to much of your day stressing about juggling. It’s no biggie really.

    Report
  11. gk1uk2001

    Why would RM allow you to change the date to make it appear like a new instruction when it isn’t a new instruction? What’s the difference between that and removing it only to re-list it to make it appear like a new instruction? Not really sure what you’re complaining about to be honest.

    Report
  12. Chris Wood

    Robert, PeeBee and I (as well as a few other key people who are working quietly away in blissful anonymity) are working with and talking to industry leaders and the portals either directly or indirectly, to try to find a solution to the problems the industry faces of juggling, misdescription, dodgy statistics and fraud.

    Robert and Coding Dobys’ software has already, and will continue to spot anomalies and make these reports available to those who need to regulate the industry or, are in positions of responsibility within it (as well as a host of other potential uses including cross checking a firms’ own data for bonus payments etc.). Not all anomalies are deliberate attempts at misdescription. Many are innocently posted properties which are showing as ‘new in’ due to the portals and not the agents wording however; a significant number are very clearly of a more questionable basis.

    A few people in the UK are now able to look with THE most accurate data available at the entire UK property market in almost real-time. This means we can check which agents are taking on what, their true market share, how many listing they are actually listing each month and, how many time properties are listed, re-listed and juggled in various ways. This is right down to the smallest agent in the far flung areas of the UK to the largest PLCs’.

    We can’t un-invent big data but, we can use that data to provide a better service to consumers (both our current and future clients) as well as ensuring that the big data is used fairly for and by all. What big data does offer us for the first time ever in the history of estate agency, is the ability to identify and weed out the bad, the unprofessional, and the criminal as well as allow the public to identify the lazy, the inept and the snake-oil salesmen.

    Report
  13. Shaun77

    Right, final points from me on this subject…

    There are some fundamental truths and principles that apply when marketing a property, whether online, in print, via your database etc. These include the fact that a property is “new to market” when marketing commences. When a property goes under offer, it ceases to be actively marketed and, as such, is no longer available and no longer on the market. If the sale falls through, the property is re-marketed so, in effect, it represents a new opportunity for prospective purchasers. In my view, this should be reflected in the listing date as the date should state when the property became available for prospective purchasers. In the case of fall throughs, it is after the fall through date.

    Once re-marketing commences, it falls upon the agent to do everything they can to bring fresh impetus and energy to that process with the purpose of stimulating as much interest as possible. Rightmove is a tool that we employ to assist with this process, and the new 14 week rule is handicapping our efforts. Why is it that somebody who registered for Rightmove alerts after the original sale was tied up, isn’t made aware the property is newly available? This is doing everybody a disservice, buyers, sellers and agents. The same goes for filtered search results, as many buyers will only search for those properties added in the last week, month etc.

    I’m also shocked at the hypocrisy from those shouting things such as “get on the blower”, as what you’re suggesting is that we treat the property as a new purchasing opportunity and ensure that it gets called out as such. Well, try to think of Rightmove as an extension of “the blower” but, guess what, it just happens to have the numbers of some people that haven’t registered with you.

    And, for those technophobes out there, every single good agent will use technology and the portals as another tool in their armoury to generate leads. However, it’s their sales teams that will convert leads into sales, and we all know that we take the enquiry for property A and sell them property B, or property C and so on. However, if we are using the portals as a lead generator, why limit their ability to generate new leads from fall throughs? What’s the point of allocating a huge chunk of your marketing budget to something that doesn’t help you market property as effectively as it can do?

    In my book, it is our duty to do whatever we can to maximise the outcome for our vendor and I’m struggling to see why so many of you seem to have an issue with that principle.

     

     

     

    Report
    1. gk1uk2001

      I totally get where you’re coming from Shaun77, however we can’t have it all ways. If it is made possible to do what you’re suggesting then the offenders that were previously ‘juggling’ with a view to hoodwink the public will simply use this as a way of continuing to do it i.e. they will simply mark a property as sold late at night then mark it as available again the next day, therefore making it appear to be a new listing and inflating their figures etc. I don’t see that there is a work-around on this, as frustrating as it is.

      Report
      1. Shaun77

        In which case you find a technical solution that is able to identify that, versus genuine cases. Surely it can’t be beyond the realms of man to come up with a solution that serves everyone.

        Report
        1. Robert May

          Chris Wood is one of those who is beta testing and verifying  what is being identified either as legitimate  or deliberate  gaming. I have offered to let Rightmove have a copy of portal watch which essentially is the solution that serves the decent folk at the expense of  the ethically and professionally challenged.

          Report
    2. AgentV

      I agree with much of what you say. If you sell a property in a week there may be a lot more interest that was never able to be recognised….equally there will be new lookers who have only ever seen the property as ‘under offer’ or ‘sold’. The problem is that if you are allowed to change the date of listing… we all know the system will be abused by those seeking to take advantage. I suppose the portals could have a ‘SSTC’ date and an ‘available again date’ put under the original date…but not sure how much difference that would make.

      If I were in rightmove’s situation I would seek to install a system whereby potentially interested buyers can register a ‘reserve interest’ in a property that is showing as sold or under offer. As the agent you are still forwarded these leads…..then if the property situation changes rightmove sends alerts out to those (and only those people) registered…..this increases the motivation of potential buyers to use the system. You can tell your vendor that, as the existing agent, you are the only one that has access to that ‘reserve list data’…..which you have been also been in contact with….and that’s why they should stick with you !!!

      Report
      1. AgentV

        Dang!!!!!…..just realised that was going to be one of my ideas for OTM if they had ever bothered to contact me after my invitation to them last week……oh well its there for everyone to see now. Does anybody out there have any comments on it.?

        Report
    3. PeeBee

      Mr Amner – from your ‘final points on the subject”:

      “If the sale falls through, the property is re-marketed so, in effect, it represents a new opportunity for prospective purchasers. In my view, this should be reflected in the listing date as the date should state when the property became available for prospective purchasers.”

      A question, if I may.

      Rightmove announced the change to the industry on 13 December – as reported here on EYE and down the other pub. That was seventy nine days ago.  Many Agents commented at the time – the vast majority in total support of the change that Rightmove had implemented.

      Yet… you only have a problem with it now.

      Funny, that.

      Report
    4. Ric

      Shaun77 –  Not arguing over this as I do get your frustration on how some have spoilt it for all however…..

      Why not for every property you have “not sold” which has been on for say 4 months or more – re-list em again on RM! Same thing as what you are saying, you would only be maximising the web marketing by adding a better looking “added on” date for the good of those unsold vendors who expect you to do everything possible to market it at its best. The logic is the same.

      I get you Shaun, I for years have talked how the website will help us on a fall through, to regenerate interest…. HOWEVER – this is not that simple…… to allow fall through property a different rule can be used by the crooks.

      Some agents will fall through stock on a regular basis, have it appear as available or “added on” and then reapply the “under offer” after a day or three and be boasting we sell property within a week! It WILL happen this…. as we know asking prices are lowered closer to sale prices by some, time to sell would be the next big thing.

      So just my opinion for the odd fall through, we need to suffer this and take comfort in if the property sold first time around it is likely to sell again……and we now educate buyers that looking on our own sites may also be a way forward, as lets be fair, you can do what you want with yours or ensure they now know if they want to use RM as their search tool, do not rely on the most recent order to find their dream home.

      PS – When I stop believing in “get on the blower” I concede to PB!

      Report
    5. PeeBee

      “In my book, it is our duty to do whatever we can to maximise the outcome for our vendor…”

      Then you’re reading from the right book, Mr Amner – AS LONG AS the “whatever we can” does not involve illegal, immoral, unacceptable or unprofessional methods or practices.

      Report
  14. Chris Wood

    Robert, PeeBee and I (as well as a few other key people who are working quietly away in blissful anonymity) are working with and talking to industry leaders and the portals either directly or indirectly, to try to find a solution to the problems the industry faces of juggling, misdescription, dodgy statistics and fraud.
    Robert and Coding Dobys’ software has already, and will continue to spot anomalies and make these reports available to those who need to regulate the industry or, are in positions of responsibility within it (as well as a host of other potential uses including cross checking a firms’ own data for bonus payments etc.). Not all anomalies are deliberate attempts at misdescription. Many are innocently posted properties which are showing as ‘new in’ due to the portals and not the agents wording however; a significant number are very clearly of a more questionable basis.
    A few people in the UK are now able to look with THE most accurate data available at the entire UK property market in almost real-time. This means we can check which agents are taking on what, their true market share, how many listing they are actually listing each month and, how many time properties are listed, re-listed and juggled in various ways. This is right down to the smallest agent in the far flung areas of the UK to the largest PLCs’.
    We can’t un-invent big data but, we can use that data to provide a better service to consumers (both our current and future clients) as well as ensuring that the big data is used fairly for and by all. What big data does offer us for the first time ever in the history of estate agency, is the ability to identify and weed out the bad, the unprofessional, and the criminal as well as allow the public to identify the lazy, the inept and the snake-oil salesmen.

    Report
    1. Chris Wood

      Sorry, there appears to be an echo in here, echo in here

      Report
  15. RealAgent

    When a property first comes to the market it is a new instruction. If it goes “under offer” and falls through, the date that it came to the market hasn’t altered!

    A property will fall through for a variety of reasons quite obviously, but as one of those COULD be survey, in my opinion to not allow an interested party to ask the question about when it came to market can be potentially abused by some agents and buyers could be the unwitting victims of deception.

    You may not agree with RM publishing the date, but even if they didn’t, as an agent you’d have too, so sorry Sean, I don’t think you have an argument here.

     

     

     

     

    Report
    1. Shaun77

      That’s a fair point, but in my experience a bad survey on the property in question is rarely the reason a sale falls through. And if it is, every other property in the chain also falls through, so everyone is penalised for an issue beyond their control.

      Even if your case relating to the listing date was deemed valid, it still doesn’t explain why the property shouldn’t be included in new email alerts of filtered searches, as this would be to everyone’s benefit.

      It’s also worth debating your definition of New Instruction. I would argue that it means you have been newly instructed to sell the property. When it goes under offer, the property is no longer being marketed. If it falls through, the vendor can either decide to pull up stumps, or newly instruct you to find another buyer. At which point, you start the marketing process again as you would any new instruction.

       

      Report
      1. AgentV

        A lot of fall throughs nowadays, in our experience, are more due to a buyer not getting through a lender’s ‘affordability checks’ …even though they had a good AIP in the first place. I would say that happened three or four times last year (and we had to resell)….but we didn’t have a single sale fall through because of survey.

        Report
      2. RealAgent

        No it isn’t the reason every sale falls through as I said, but the point is it could be that, it could be a derogatory local search, it could be a planning application, the point is really that it did fall through and if you simply mark things as New Instruction you are giving the impression it wasn’t on the market previously….and to be fair in your example under offer is not sold so by definition it is still on the market, its YOUR choice not to market it, but thats a whole different discussion.

        You may have a point about it going out when re-listed after a fall through, I get that frustration but it just can’t go out as as new listing simply because thats convenient.

        Report
  16. smile please

    Well the multi office agents have found a way round this.

    They take the property off one branch and list through another branch.

    New instruction alert goes out and date reset.

    Report
    1. Ric

      Indeed smile please…

      A certain agent close to me has started this tactic on their border line properties, I picked up on it today.

      I’ve today asked RM if I can shuffle my entire stock between offices if this is seen as acceptable. No surprise I await a reply!

      #officejuggle the new way to #portaljuggle

      Report
      1. PeeBee

        “#officejuggle the new way to #portaljuggle”

        Unfortunately it’s not the new way.  It’s quite an old way – the sixth variant of #portaljuggling out of (so far) thirteen we have identified.

        ‘New’ ways are no doubt in development mode. Bad news for the #portaljugglers is that we have been sitting waiting for the last five ‘new’ fiddles to show up – and are ready for at least four more when they surface.

        If only they put half as much thought and effort into actually selling the listings as they do finding ways of gaming the system and spreading #CONmisery to those who have been taken in by skewed statistics – then we would have some genuine competition to be worried about.

        In the meantime – keeps us amused…

        Report
  17. AgentV

    Another echo;
    If I were in rightmove’s situation I would seek to install a system whereby potentially interested buyers can register a ‘reserve interest’ in a property that is showing as sold or under offer. As the agent you are still forwarded these leads…..then if the property situation changes rightmove sends alerts out to those (and only those people) registered…..this increases the motivation of potential buyers to use the system. You can tell your vendor that, as the existing agent, you are the only one that has access to that ‘reserve list data’…..which you have been also been in contact with….and that’s why they should stick with you !!!

    Dang!!!!!…..just realised that was going to be one of my ideas for OTM if they had ever bothered to contact me after my invitation to them last week……oh well its there for everyone to see now. Does anybody out there have any comments on it.?

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      AgentV

      “If I were in rightmove’s situation I would seek to install a system whereby potentially interested buyers can register a ‘reserve interest’ in a property that is showing as sold or under offer.”

      Surely Rightmove can’t (or, more like, shouldn’t) do that?

      They already have a system in place that puts potential buyer in contact with selling Agent. Nothing needs to change – anyone with an interest in a property which is ‘SSTC’/’SSTM’/’Under Offer’ can contact the agent via Rightmove if they so wish.  The Agent should then deal with the enquiry appropriately.

      Surely that is plain, simple, basic grass-roots Estate Agency?

      This hasn’t been raised yet – but people often want what they don’t think they can have. If someone else wants something, it raises the interest of others.

      Mores often than not we have a ‘back-up’ purchaser for an agreed sale which has come as a result of someone seeing it marked in some way ‘unavailable’.

      Report
      1. AgentV

        PeeBee,

        I may be wrong…but to me it would just be the online version of a call into the office where you tell them your sorry but an offer has now been accepted, but you’ll get back to them if that changes. I’m sure you and I have both sold properties in the past to people you have gone back to (who may not have viewed initially) after a fall through….especially if it was a comparatively quick sale in the first place.

        Report
        1. PeeBee

          AV – unless I’m mistaken that’s what I said?

          Report
  18. Property Paddy

    last word:

    I don’t want properties re-listed as new just because the sale falls through because we know there are some terrible cowboys that will do anything to make themselves look like they are listing more than they really are.

    For my money keep the 14 weeks

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      For my money – extend it to where NTSEAT say it should be – SIX MONTHS*.

      * There are always going to be anomalies which the portals will have to take on a case-by-case basis.  (Part-exchange sales being the one which may crop up most often).

      Mr Amner is not taking into account the fact that certain Agents will stop at nothing to gain a competitive advantage over their opposites.

      He should have been walking in the moccasins pre-t’interweb!

      Report
  19. ammik

    Not sure what all the fuss is about – had the same problem. Sorted it.

    Relisted a property last month after removing from rightmove in December due to vendor circumstance. Disinstructed. Completely stopped all marketing. On relisting following reinstruction, sure enough rightmove showed the original 2016 listing date. Now it shows the date we relisted it.

    It really didn’t take much thinking to ‘correct’ the rightmove listing…

    Report
    1. PeeBee

      Sorry but your ‘explanation’ of events is about as clear and easy to digest as mud pudding with a tar-based coulis, ammik.

      Report
  20. ringi

    I think RightMove should allow a new listing provided a property has been marked as “SOLD” or taken of their side for at least 30 days.   No agent would choose to hide a property for 30 days just to make it look like it is new on the market.

    Report
    1. Ric

      This post may get lost now, however your solution will allow for #portaljuggling

      An agent could let’s say: take 6 months to sell a house, then after a month of it finally being sold on RM “say 32 days of being sold” fall the sale through (even though it is still sold) on RM and then a day or so later, reapply the sold. The result is: (The buyer and vendor unlikely to notice and if they do blame a tech hic up)

      That agent starts to boast 1. A new listing 2. A new sale 3. A quick sale and possibly even 4. A quick turnaround from offer to completion as the public will not know it is the same buyer buying who is already 4 weeks down the line.

      You really will have certain agents use the fall through loop to boast stats which do not paint tell the truth.

      Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Comments are closed.

Thank you for signing up to our newsletter, we have sent you an email asking you to confirm your subscription. Additionally if you would like to create a free EYE account which allows you to comment on news stories and manage your email subscriptions please enter a password below.