The Property Ombudsman's most recent interim report, outlining the number of complaints about estate and letting agents, makes for disappointing reading. Compared to figures for the previous four-month period, that number has risen sharply. High Street agency fees, already at an all-time high, are being pushed upwards to cover the cost of staff and premises making consumers already financially worse off... and when it comes to service levels they are definitely being shortchanged.
During May, June, July and August the Ombudsman received 4914 complaints, up 19% on the previous four months and a significant number considering that there are fewer than 20,000 estate and letting agency branches throughout the UK. Many complaints don't make it any further than the initial approach. Others are withdrawn and yet others are outside the Ombudsman's terms of reference. Significantly, however, some 18% of those complaints during that period concerned agencies that had chosen not to be bound by the voluntary scheme. These past four months, the Ombudsman upheld the complaint and found for the complainant a total of 288 times, a 10% increase on the previous four months.
A lack of accountability and knowledge within this industry means that standards have always been shoddy. There is a case for licensing estate agents, both online and offline, and we support it fully. Renegade estate agents need to be prevented from running fast and loose with both homebuyers and vendors, and the way forward would be to establish a professional standard to prevent customers' stress and even financial loss. Regulations should be put in place to govern the behaviour not just of the agency but also that of its employees, given the protracted length of time required for the current conveyance process, the enormous amount of money involved in the purchase of a house and the ridiculously high fees High Street agencies are charging. Even though most people move house just a few times in their lives, regulating and licensing those involved with the process would offer consumers more in terms of efficiency... and less in terms of emotional and financial stress.
I have to admit that I do think that markets should be free, and that the concept of 'caveat emptor' should prevail. But when it comes to pitting ruthless salespeople against an all too trusting public without a safety net of enforced standards or even accountability, this kind of concept is neither fair nor practical. Since people seldom have to use the services of an estate agent on a regular basis, their experience of the property industry is too limited for them to counter the sloppiness and underhandedness encountered all too often during the process of buying or selling a house. The increasing number of complaints received by the Property Ombudsman is surely a definite signal that it's time for the government to step in. But this does not mean it's time to carve up various parts of the National Association of Estate Agents to create an alternative that regulates itself and makes a profit, because - unlike the Property Ombudsman - it is an entity with no authority or even mandate to offer compensation for wrongdoing on the part of any of its members.
There is proper oversight in so many other industries, from financial services, to door-to-door sales, to pyramid schemes and even clamping, so why should the property industry, which has so blatantly and consistently failed to improve its standards, not have its own oversight as well? In an industry where customers have so much to lose it would be logical to introduce self-regulation. eMoov have been members of the Property Ombudsman Scheme since its inception.
During May, June, July and August the Ombudsman received 4914 complaints, up 19% on the previous four months and a significant number considering that there are fewer than 20,000 estate and letting agency branches throughout the UK. Many complaints don't make it any further than the initial approach. Others are withdrawn and yet others are outside the Ombudsman's terms of reference. Significantly, however, some 18% of those complaints during that period concerned agencies that had chosen not to be bound by the voluntary scheme. These past four months, the Ombudsman upheld the complaint and found for the complainant a total of 288 times, a 10% increase on the previous four months.
A lack of accountability and knowledge within this industry means that standards have always been shoddy. There is a case for licensing estate agents, both online and offline, and we support it fully. Renegade estate agents need to be prevented from running fast and loose with both homebuyers and vendors, and the way forward would be to establish a professional standard to prevent customers' stress and even financial loss. Regulations should be put in place to govern the behaviour not just of the agency but also that of its employees, given the protracted length of time required for the current conveyance process, the enormous amount of money involved in the purchase of a house and the ridiculously high fees High Street agencies are charging. Even though most people move house just a few times in their lives, regulating and licensing those involved with the process would offer consumers more in terms of efficiency... and less in terms of emotional and financial stress.
I have to admit that I do think that markets should be free, and that the concept of 'caveat emptor' should prevail. But when it comes to pitting ruthless salespeople against an all too trusting public without a safety net of enforced standards or even accountability, this kind of concept is neither fair nor practical. Since people seldom have to use the services of an estate agent on a regular basis, their experience of the property industry is too limited for them to counter the sloppiness and underhandedness encountered all too often during the process of buying or selling a house. The increasing number of complaints received by the Property Ombudsman is surely a definite signal that it's time for the government to step in. But this does not mean it's time to carve up various parts of the National Association of Estate Agents to create an alternative that regulates itself and makes a profit, because - unlike the Property Ombudsman - it is an entity with no authority or even mandate to offer compensation for wrongdoing on the part of any of its members.
There is proper oversight in so many other industries, from financial services, to door-to-door sales, to pyramid schemes and even clamping, so why should the property industry, which has so blatantly and consistently failed to improve its standards, not have its own oversight as well? In an industry where customers have so much to lose it would be logical to introduce self-regulation. eMoov have been members of the Property Ombudsman Scheme since its inception.
About the Author:
Home buyers don't bother to walk into estate agency offices these days. 90% of them search for houses on the internet. eMoov, internet estate agents, cover the whole of the UK but save money by not having hundreds of premises which you otherwise end up paying for in high estate agents fees. eMoov are online estate agents and ten times cheaper than the High Street.
No comments:
Post a Comment