‘Phoney portal war’: but is site that bans estate agents really the next disruptor?

According to the Financial Times, it’s a “phoney property portal war” – and there’s one real disruptor on the horizon.

The FT article by Paul Murphy names it as theipropertycompany.com which, it says, “hasn’t formally launched as yet”.

Eye was a bit surprised to learn this as we have covered this site before. Our readers will know it as the site that is backed by the National House Building Council, and allows private sellers and landlords as well as developers – but bans agents.

However, according to the FT, in terms of disruption this seems to “be the real thing – no commissions or other fees, because it’s not an agent”.

The article ends: “It takes agents out of the equation entirely. Which, if it works and if it spreads to other countries, might well quality for some sort of Queen’s Expert Award.”

So, it’s not an estate agent.

But can we be sure? Tesco, after all, thought it wasn’t an estate agent and was a bit surprised to be told it was and had to conform to the Estate Agents Act – apparently caught out by its use of For Sale boards.

However, “passive intermediaries” are exempt from much regulation provided all they do is act as a platform which introduces buyers and sellers to each other.

On theipropertycompany site, we note that the service is entirely free, but the company does make its money by providing optional property-related services.

For example, it offers property valuations at £19.95, signboards at £65 and photography at £89.

Property commentator Henry Pryor took to Twitter to disagree with the FT assessment of theipropertycompany: “I fear that [they] ARE estate agents as defined by 1979 Act regardless of 0% fee.”

Pryor told Eye that he believed the firm to be estate agents because he thought they did a degree of “hand holding” that goes beyond simply allowing buyers and sellers to contact each other.

This is what the FT wrote on Monday.

This is what Eye reported way back last July.

And to help readers make up their minds as to whether this is an estate agent or not, here’s the site.

x

Email the story to a friend



6 Comments

  1. Mark Walker

    I think they need to check the new Consumer Protection Regulations – anybody doing ANYTHING propertywise comes under the regulations. Looking forward to Rightmove's first suit… 🙂

    Report
  2. Estate Agent W1

    Great, an agent banning agents, how's that work!

    Report
  3. ringi

    What we need is ONE site that is free for ANYONE to list on apart from agents that are listed on OTM. Then there will only be two sites I have to check….

    By automating the process and cutting out the sale people a "free" site can still make money from advertising and add on services. Most of the costs of running a site like RightMove are the sales people they send out to all the agents…

    Report
    1. Robert May

      Is that a serious suggestion?

      Report
      1. PeeBee

        I'm sure it is 'serious', Robert – in exactly the same way that Doogie Houser was touted as a 'serious' alternative to current, future – or even long past, dead-and-buried – property portals… ;o)

        Report
  4. Trevor Mealham

    As the site offers services such as photyography, valuations etc it is trading as an estate agent and not a passive model. It therefore comes under CPR (Consumer Protection Regulation) and needs to be registered with one of the three Ombudsman redress schemes. Today they are trading illegally.

    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.