More online agents are now showing their fees with VAT, although some are showing fees both with and without the tax.
Purplebricks, eMoov, House Network and Tepilo were all the subject of a complaint to the National Trading Standards Estate Agent Team, while the Advertising Standards Authority had also been told of a number of online agents not showing VAT.
However, Purplebricks now says on its site that it charges £665 plus VAT. It adds in brackets (£798 including VAT).
eMoov quotes charges in the same way – for example, £495 plus VAT (£594 including VAT).
Yesterday, House Network was still quoting its charges as £499 plus VAT.
Tepilo had been quickest of the four to comply with the requirement to show its fees with VAT.
Both Tepilo and Hatched appear to be following official advice to the letter.
Tepilo advertises its price as £595 (includes VAT). Hatched simply gives inclusive fees and states on its site that all prices include VAT.
Advice from the Committee of Advertising Practice says firms should not be showing their fees as exclusive of VAT.
CAP says that the headline fee should be shows as VAT inclusive, but that it is permissible to add that the fee is inclusive of VAT.
So, for example, a percentage sales fee of 2.5% plus VAT should be advertised as 3%. It is, however, permissible to add that the fee is inclusive of VAT.
It says flat rate fees should also include VAT. For instance, a sales fee of £495 plus VAT should appear as £594.
Letting agent fees should also be advertised as inclusive of VAT. Again, it is permissible to include an “inclusive of VAT” statement.
As from May 27, it became a legal requirement under the Consumer Rights Act for all agents to show their fees as VAT inclusive.
Comments (13)
Got a letter from our local Trading Standards office today. It’s a circular to all estate and letting agents in the borough advising that they are going to be checking all of us for compliance with membership of a redress scheme; proper display of fees, and some other stuff. Wonder if they’ll do it… I hope so.
I won’t hold my breath though as the last time our local Council wrote to the businesses where I am, several years ago, it was about having proper contracts in place for waste disposal. They warned this and they warned that for those not complying, and indeed said they would be checking, but they did bugger all, as did those not complying. So far as I know, they achieved absolutely nothing except a waste of paper and postage, as well as their staff salaries.
Still, fingers crossed….
Naughty word check? For bug errrrrr?
Try bu99er, MF – never fails me! ;o)
Yes and also solicitors, surveyors, builders and many other trades. Why do the public feel they will get the best selling price with a ‘cheap fee upfront’ online parasite agent?
…or better still prosecuted, and named as such in the local press. Along with all those who omit STC from their sold signs, etc, etc.
Any agent not correctly displaying their fees is trying to mislead and should be avoided.
Errr … how may high street agents are ‘transparent’ and publish fees in their windows and on their websites??
The corporates with their feet in RM and Z won’t even allow fees to be posted in an EA’s summary or mini-site.
At least OEA’s publish fees … massive duplicity me thinks by those posting negatively about this issue.
Haree – Fair point to an extent, in so much as the rules apply to all. However, you know the only reason that the OEA’s are promoting their prices so openly (but in the main incorrectly) is because they are selling on price alone.
M Barnard & Harree – yes – the rules DO and MUST apply to all.
However, the “rules” do not currently require Agents to advertise their Fees (Sales) – just that WHEN they do, VAT must be included.
M B – your last sentence says it all. What OTHER “USP” does an OEA have?
Indeed it does PeeBee.
Although 3 of the sites now show a vat inclusive price it is less prominent than the +vat price. Why? They are still attempting to mislead & confuse the consumer.
Claims are made on all 3 sites about ‘transparency’ and they can’t even be transparent on this simple aspect which has actually been a part of the Advertising codes for many years. I’m sure the ASA will remind them that their ‘new’ format of displaying their prices isn’t acceptable.
Fair play to Hatched though for getting it right.
Ros – please re-write the headline:
“SOME Online Agents Now Paying Lip Service to Legal Requirement On Fees”
Kinda sums the reality up – dunnit?
Don’t mess with these folk Peebee, they have got the authorities on their; side ignoring blatent dishonesties and mis truths and seeking to silence anyone who knows too much!
Besides one of the Agents in this story is The best Estate Agent. you didn’t ought to be knocking that!
You know me, Robert – I’ll gnaw wherever I see an exposed, meaty ankle! ;o)
The authorities will at some point HAVE to deal with complaints – there is only so much can be swept under mats and allowed to drop between floorboards, after all…