Portal juggling is one of the scams highlighted in a new report out today from National Trading Standards. It is the first time the public have been specifically warned.
Today’s annual Consumer Harm Report highlights the practice whereby agents manipulate property websites to make re-listed properties appear new on the market – and to falsify their own listing figures.
The report says that it expects the practice to continue as a major issue.
Portal juggling being cited as a risk to consumers in a high-profile report represents something of a breakthrough for industry campaigners, who have been trying to bring it to wider attention.
The report quotes James Munro, team leader of the National Trading Standards Estate Agency Team, who said: “The practice of portal juggling has seen some estate agents deliberately mislead potential home buyers by removing and re-listing properties to make them appear new on the market or using the practice to manipulate sales figures.
“The practice misleads prospective home buyers and harms honest estate agents who conduct their business in a fair and professional manner.
“If you suspect an estate agent of portal juggling or spot anything suspicious on a major online portal, we urge you to report it to Citizens Advice on 03454 040506.”
The new report also says that NTSEAT has other cases under investigation, including insider trading, fraud, theft, violence, kidnapping and breaches of the Estate Agents Act such as failing to declare a personal interest in property.
Last year, 2015–2016, NTSEAT received 171 complaints about agents across the UK, issued 12 prohibition orders and three warning orders, and saw six individuals or businesses banned from estate agency work.
Today’s Consumer Harm Report lists other scams, including sales of dodgy secondhand cars, scam adverts where money is taken but the goods never delivered, and the growing use of social media to sell counterfeit goods.
The report also refers to how increasingly sophisticated today’s criminal scammers are becoming. However, it also warns that there are still a number of doorstep crimes.
Comments (27)
Wouldn’t it be nice to see the portals & co have to appear before a select committee? It is overdue and time the industry regulators had a grilling for failing (they are part of the problem), RM & Z for turning a blind eye effectively aiding all that is rotten and web-only portals for their claims. The public have a right to be protected, we have oodles of regulations to do that but the system is seriously failing.
That’s not even to mention ‘Kidnapping’ we have a huge issue with that here. Half of our vendors seem to have gone missing! Best call Citizens Advice!!
The whole portal juggling fiasco has carried on far longer than it should have. Agents are going to continue to play the system. So, why not change the system?
The portals have an algorithm that decides whether a property is new or not. They need a minimum amount of time for the property to be off the market in order for it to be classed as new.
So, it’s actually quite an easy fix for the portals. Just a relatively small bit of development work.
[New listing received]
[Has this property been listed for sale within the last 3 months with this same agent?]
[No = brand new listing, start ‘First Listed’ date as today, send to email lists]
[Yes = use original ‘First Listed’ date and property does not go out to email list]
The portals will be aware that this is an easy fix but they don’t want to do it.
Exactly right, wonder why the portals haven’t come up with that…..and stated they are going to do it.
“…wonder why the portals haven’t come up with that…”
IF, as has been suggested, around 10,000 properties are #juggled every year (I personally think that is quite a soft estimate…) – then you can see exactly why the portals don’t want to lose all those bricks and clicks from their already questionable statistics used to justify the 6-10% increase lurking round every corner and keep their shareholders #happyhappyhappy.
In fact – I wouldn’t be in the least bit surprised if the heads of those in the ‘Data Quality’ (a prima facie misdescription if ever there was one…) that previously suggested a ‘fix’ are displayed on the walls of the corridor leading to the HR Director’s chamber…
Also, Portal Juggling often actually works in generating fresh interest in a property. The property will appear at the top of ‘Newest Listed’ filtered searches. It is also sent out to email lists as a new property. It’s all extra exposure.
This generates buyer leads for the agents. Which is another thing the portals pride themselves on and do not want to see falling.
Here goes… what I hope will be received as a balanced view…
In all probability, re-listing a property is one of the tools that has been sitting in an Estate Agent’s haversack – and used by I would suggest a fairly large proportion of Agents both honest & decent and otherwise from time to time – since the dawn of the profession. In itself – and used solely for the purposes that it was originally designed – it is relatively harmless (sorry to pint out the obvious, Mr Heyward – but you’ve got the wrong end of the wrong stick entirely with your ‘take’ on the matter) and in some cases brings together buyer and property when they may have missed it buried under more (genuinely) recent listings.
I’ve done it myself – back in the day – but followed the then, albeit wishy-washy, ‘rules’ that we all played to at the time.
The above ‘version’ of the activity is NOT what we are about bringing to an end – but it will most likely have to go that way as a consequence of criminalising/outlawing/penalising the practice by those who we believe are doing it on an industrial scale to ‘game’ the system in order to (not an exhaustive list):
1. deliberately mislead the public and thereby gain unfair competitive advantage
2. deliberately misrepresent
a) market share;
b) performance;
c) perceived income being generated; and/or
d) shareholder/potential shareholder confidence
3. manipulate figures relied on to extract monies from potential customers or shareholders by what may be deemed by the authorities at some point as deception (and the headline of this article strongly suggests that this point is here, and now.).
So far, the number of entirely separate forms of #portaljuggling that have been identified is approaching double figures – including two potential forms that the most active perpetrators haven’t yet risked bringing into wholesale use… but there’s time yet!
Interesting times lie ahead. In doing what we firmly believe to be the honest and decent thing for the benefit of the industry and the public it serves we may have opened Pandora’s box…
…but it would have been rude not to.
Excellent summary.
Thank you.
sorry to pint out the obvious. Touché ….. or where you down the pub? Lol. I know I do it all the time, big fingers, small keys, less haste.
“…or where you down the pub?”
Advantage: PeeBee
New b@11s, please…
;o)
Its this dam knew “American English” ke bord that jumps ahead with ortow spel.
*damn – sorry, couldn’t resist 🙂
You are welcum but I assoom the rest was OK!
Another day’s mining brings another nugget to the surface.
Activity that could well be a new* form of the act has surfaced.
Keep an EYE out for further info!
I think we now need to be demanding that the portals make these programming changes to their algorithm so Portal Juggling is not possible.
We have . They say they do. They clearly don’t. I regard it as a breach of contract and their own Ts’ and Cs’. Zoopla promised to ban agents who carry this practice out but, despite compelling evidence of one major firm, they have failed to fulfil their promise and Rightmove openly stated that they do not recognise portal juggling as an issue.
The irony is that Rightmove are currently tweeting about how agents can engage with their customers on social media. Yet, despite a ‘simpler’ bill that is going to add several hundred more pounds to the annual office invoice they are not engaging with their own customers; us.
Perhaps if everyone who wants this practice stopped, tweet the following, they might finally take some action against the chief offenders.
@Rightmove @RightmovePro Why are you continuing to facilitate #PortalJuggling on your website? #engagewithme
Someone suggested a ‘The Purge’ style protest day where on a specific date everyone delists and relists later on. Wonder if they would take notice then?
Thanks Ros.
It’s nice that they’ve noticed, but… “The report says that it expects the practice to continue as a major issue.” (because we are not about to start policing it) > “If you suspect an estate agent of portal juggling or spot anything suspicious on a major online portal, we urge you to report it to Citizens Advice on 03454 040506.” Citizens Advice. Please.
“and saw six individuals or businesses banned from estate agency work.”
Across to Letting agency then!
Since most consumers are conditioned to believe estate agents offer a ‘no sale,no fee’ service, there should be a standardised statement where this is not the case…and the consumer will be charged whether or not their property sells. Perhaps something along the lines of;
‘This service is chargeable from outset, and you will have to pay the fee whether or not your property is sold’
Does what it says on the tin….stops customers being mislead, and gives them the opportunity to ‘think before they commit’. It also counterbalances a little the claim…. ‘you could save thousands’ as people also realise ….but you could lose hundreds.
I also think it is about time we had a national survey of high street average fees to counterbalance the ‘thousands claims’. It automatically makes people think every agent charges a few thousand for selling their £180,000 property for instance. I’m sure in most towns that’s not the case. If my average fee is less than £2,000 say….then no one saves thousands in the plural by using an online agent compared to me….and my fee is ‘no sale, no fee’
if the claim was a realistic ‘you could save a thousand or lose hundreds’ (which is the truth) …then all of a sudden it’s not so attractive is it.
Throw in the differences in levels of service….
Forgot to add….and then there is the difference in the potential sale price you are likely to achieve.
I’ve been saying this for over a year and only recently made a comment about a wealth warning for consumers. Advertising is supposed to confirm if the fee is non-refundable. They should be made to confirm that they have no incentive to get the vendor the best possible market price, as they have no incentive with a fixed fee. If they fail to sell the property within the 9 month period, the fee should be refunded within the 10 month. They claim they are just like traditional estate agents ….. that’s is the biggest lie ever.
This should be made clear in all marketing as they use us, the High Street as their comparison for financial gain. It must never be left to the point at which a customer is required to sign a contract. Many don’t read it or put under pressure to sign once they are in the house.
Well said, I totally agree. I think your point about them comparing themselves to high street and claiming thousand of savings in comparison, without being held up to state ‘the differences’ is extremely valid.
So eloquently put… the sheer classical beauty of your post brought a tear to my eye…
…and a fountain of coffee from my gob – YOU OWE ME A KEYBOARD!!
“scam adverts where money is taken but the goods never delivered”
what advert like save thousands on traditional estate agents fees, sell your home for £***! ,,,,,,but the small print says “sorry love, you haven’t sold your home you were paying to have a bad photo whacked on the internet, cough up or our payday loan firm will slap you with a CCJ before your toast goes cold?