NEWSFLASH: Zoopla offered to pay towards Connells’ legal costs in fight against Agents’ Mutual

Zoopla offered to pay £250,000 of Connells’ legal costs in the latter’s battle against Agents’ Mutual, the Competition Appeal Tribunal heard today (Monday).

The tribunal is examining competition issues around the ‘one other portal’ rule on the Agents’ Mutual-owned OnTheMarket.

Gascoigne Halman, a Gold member of OnTheMarket, signed up in January 2014 when it was an independent. It was bought by Connells in October 2015.

The tribunal today heard from David Livesey, Group Chief Executive of Connells Limited, a post he had held since 2008, having been a director since 1995.

In October 2015, Mr Livesey also became a director of Gascoigne Halman.

The tribunal heard that Connells was funding Gascoigne Halman’s defence in the case, with the effect that Gascoigne Halman was “completely insulated from the costs of this litigation”.

Mr Livesey added that Zoopla had “offered to meet a small proportion of our legal costs”, which he said was £250,000 and a “very small fraction”.

Alan Maclean, the QC for Agents’ Mutual, asked why he thought Zoopla would make such an offer.

Mr Livesey replied: “I have no idea, I’m not here to speculate.”

More coverage in tomorrow morning’s EYE.

x

Email the story to a friend!



17 Comments

  1. smile please

    WOW – shows up a few who said Zoopla had nothing to do with the case!

     

    Report
    1. Thomas Flowers

      The tribunal heard that Connells was funding Gascoigne Halman’s defense in the case, with the effect that Gascoigne Halman was “completely insulated from the costs of this litigation”.

      The question I would now ask now in court is are Connells ‘completely insulated from the costs of this litigation’ in any way, including later financial support, additional, reduced. enhanced or free share options in PL or ZPG now or at any date in the next five years?

      Also, is it anti-competitive for the biggest potential loser company (ZPG) helping to subsidise legal action of another company so as to accuse OTM of anti-competitive behaviour by helping to financing any legal action?

      Why would Connells pay to defend an action that would financially benefit ZPG  far more so?

      If OTM and ‘Connells’ agree to withdraw the one other portal rule, before a members vote, or legal instruction to do so,then could the OTM board be accused of complicity, particularly if they later list their properties with Prime Location or ZPG?

       

       

       

      Report
      1. Thomas Flowers

        Alex, is that you up late disliking my post at 8.30 PM?

        Report
  2. Peter

    I will offer £10 towards OTM’s legal fees.

    Report
  3. AgencyInsider

    So Zoopla offers to help fund an action that could destroy a rival portal set up to safeguard agents against predatory pricing and the unacceptable use of agents’ data.

    That makes Zoopla demonstrably anti-agent in my book. I trust the industry will recognise that fact when considering the renewal of their contracts with Zoopla.

     

    Report
    1. AgencyInsider

      Ah, 3 dislikes already. Welcome, Z reps. Feeling a little uncomfortable this afternoon are we? Bit of a squeaky b*m moment perhaps?

      Report
      1. smile please

        “I have no idea, I’m not here to speculate.” ha ha

        Report
  4. Herb

    Zoopla scrape the barrel to try and win. As an agent they disgust me.

    Report
  5. PeeBee

    ‘Unexpected news’ in that no-one actually expected it to ever be confirmed as fact. It would hover there forever as one of those urban myth-type thingymajigs.

    With that revelation coming so soon, I think we will all be surprised at what is going to emerge from under the mat it was swept under.

    This is clearly gonna be interesting…

    …BUCKLE UP!

    Report
  6. Ric

    That’s about a years worth of Z membership fees for GH I would guess. Assuming a £250 rate for 18 office company.

    So basically…… Z have GH continue on OTM until 2020 or get em out now and by early 2018 the £250k has been recouped in fees they would never have got by letting the situation continue.

    I think the fact they have offered to pay tells you how competitive the current situation is and almost proves it has purely added to the competitive nature the one other portal rule.

    I rest my case, hammer down, AM win, lets get on with it.

    Report
    1. Ric

      Stop disliking my comments please, it hurts, I am right and always right.

      Report
  7. Russell Williams

    Ah, Mr Putin and the ruskys pulling strings again!

    Report
    1. Russell Williams

      Sorry, where’s my head – should have said Mr Chesterman and the Zoops pulling strings again!

      Report
  8. Russell Williams

    I really wouldn’t be surprised if Zoopla were behind the Letting Fees ban too, what with Alex Chesterman OBE being chummy with ministers.  Maybe Ros can do some digging 🙂

    Report
  9. James Morris

    Not really a surprise is it.

    Glad to be shot of Zoopla, we lost nothing leaving them for OTM.

    Report
  10. I want to believe

    Zoopla put up the money to shut down a newby threat, just goes to show how dirty this business can be.

    For the record – I won’t be advertising on Zoopla – ever.

    Report
  11. Property Paddy

    OTM please drop your two portal rule, as you can see even zoopla are taking the proverbial out of you !!!

    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.