Reviews site allAgents has given a barbed welcome to news that Purplebricks will now be working with Feefo in addition to Trustpilot – warning of what it called Purplebricks’ “seemingly insatiable desire to eradicate negative reviews”
allAgents also said it remains to be convinced that the reviews Feefo publishes will be a fair reflection of Purplebricks customers’ views.
However, Purplebricks emphatically rejected the latest criticism, suggesting that allAgents had quite simply got it wrong.
The site is in dispute with Purplebricks over the validity of reviews on its own site. allAgents has suspended both the reviews and Purplebricks’ page from its siite.
allAgents tried, but narrowly failed, to raise £50,000 via crowdfunding to cover possible legal expenses should Purplebricks take action if the reviews are reinstated – something that allAgents says it will now do anyway.
Martin McKenzie of allAgents said: “We think the more review sites that carry reviews from Purplebricks customers, the better.”
He claimed: “However, Feefo is a closed system, which means that Purplebricks will be managing which customers review their service – and which ones don’t.
“Our fear is that Purplebricks won’t be asking customers who’ve been given a poor service by the company to write reviews.”
He went on: “The persistent rumours concerning the validity of the reviews on Trustpilot damages the reputation of the whole reviews industry.
“Purplebricks tried to bully us into taking genuine negative reviews off our site.
“We stand behind the validity of these reviews.
“Let’s hope Feefo doesn’t become another casualty of Purplebricks’ seemingly insatiable desire to eradicate negative reviews.”
In response, Purplebricks made it clear that the claim that it will be able to cherry-pick which customers review it on Feefo is incorrect.
A spokesperson said: “We are partnering with Feefo because of their reputation and robust procedures with leading global brands.
“Our systems will be integrated with Feefo so they will receive an automatic feed of every customer.
“Feefo will then send out the invite to all customers, ensuring feedback is full, frank and genuine.”
Comments (33)
Absolute nonsense. I know 100% that all the PB reviews on TP are genuine. Much as I would like them not to be, they are. As a high street agent I’m not a PB lover but equally I don’t see the point in writing disparaging or unsubstantiated comments just because it’s PB.
Can nobody see that all this anti PB stuff on here is getting quiet pathetic and not doing our industry any favours. We all look like frightened, moaning, competition knockers. It’s one company guys. Lets get on with our jobs and let them get on with theirs.
“I know 100% that all the PB reviews on TP are genuine.”
Absolute claptrap. You simply cannot “know” that – not ONE percent, never mind the ONE HUNDRED you claim.
Hey – feel free to prove me wrong. Go on – shut me up on the subject that no-one else has been able to… including Trustpilot themselves – who found it easier to block me than respond.
Here’s one I’d like you to verify. It was posted just a few minutes ago:
https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/5a259a795f61550b08976446
The reviewers – John and Sally Hollis.
The Agent/LPE they reviewed – John Hollis. NO – scrub that… apparently it’s BEN Hollis.
Easy mistake to make I guess.
Or what about the one recently where the doting wife of an ex-footballer used the wrong spelling of her husband’s name in the nauseating billshuttery of a ‘review’?
Someone once said “You couldn’t make it up”.
If you could – you’d certainly want to do a better job of it, I reckon.
I don’t have much issue with the reviews – I expect the majority are genuine (both positive and negative) it’s the system, and the way it’s used, that is at issue: the timing of the invitation (there appears to be significant evidence that some reviewers are invited to post fairly soon after they sign up – at least pre-completion) and the fact that there is a significantly better system they could use: Google.
Any company wants my business I want to see Google reviews (preferably from people that have written more than one, and those with a credible G+ account). Any company (other than a hotel or restaurant) that uses another site – I walk away. Simple – and, above all, FREE!
Companies that use review sites should be held to account and scrutiny by regulator. The whole purpose of a review site is to plug how good you are, to gain more business. Review sites are flawed, as none of them provide a 100% truthful reviews, good or bad and to allow any company to mislead or manipulate its reviews is tantamount to fraud, completely at odds with what the public is looking for. All review sites should all be banned unless they can provide 100% guarantees. I’m still amazed that government hasn’t stopped this disgraceful behaviour considering how much consumer protection there is.
The CMA is the relevant regulator. Here is a summary of the rules: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/512880/Giving_a_balanced_picture_-_dos_and_don_ts_for_online_review_sites.pdf – and i anyone doubts that the CMA has teeth (and is willing to use them against estate agents who are found in breach) I suggest reading https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/sep/18/cma-fines-cartel-of-estate-agents-rate-fixing-burnham-on-sea
Maybe a question already asked & answered….
Where do I post a Review about a Website Review Company?
Either on that review site (and risk it being #NUKED) – or on another review site – who seem to get quite moist at the prospect of doing down their competition…
For Trustpilot: google ‘Trustpilot London’, for Feefo google ‘Feefo Petersfield’ – illuminating, to say the least.
Feefo Fi Fum I smell the blood of an Englishman. Be he live, or be he dead, I’ll grind his bones to make my bread.
Be he rich or be he poor, we shall ensure that only the best reviews endure?
Quiet day at the office Thomas? 🙂
Past midday, a Purplebricks story, and no sign of the dom & ducky show.
I suppose it would be too much to hope that they have trolled off into the sunset, never to be heard of again?
Ducky’s too busy peddling utter tosh on his other favourite forum. A classic here: ‘I think as investors we need to be careful about paying too much attention to the trade press I was guilty of this when I held the shares’.
Google all the way for me, we also use Facebook and our own website. We invite landlords and tenants to review at start and beginning of tenancy, only a small proportion bother at the time but sometimes months later we’ll get a Google review because they were doing something else and it reminded them.
Just one simple question: Why is Purplebricks not asking its customers to review it on Google?
I remember the early days of AllAgents reviews – nobody liked them or trusted them, so this whole article is a little like the story of the prodigal son to me. A naughty boy seeking redemption for earlier sins.
You can edit and adjust reviews on TrustPilot as well as delete them, and of course the point about when the reviews are requested is perhaps the most valid.
Some sales will sail through, the proof in the pudding about their service, or lack of it, will come when transactions collapse, or become stressful and there is little or no support from the Lexpert.
Just to look at other agents and see if it’s just purple , I know estate agent don’t have the best reputation I’m sure there is lots of good agents
Richard247 – I’m going to assume that this is a reply to my earlier question as it doesn’t seem to fit with anything else. Forgive me if I’m wrong – however I would suggest that one way or another my following comment is relevant.
There is an inherent problem with reviews of property transactions that affects no other industry that populates review sites. That problem being that no two property transactions are alike; no single experience can be compared to a ‘text-book’ – as no-one can write such a book.
Take, for example, booking a holiday. Either the holiday is as descbribed, or it isn’t. The room was palacial as per the photos or it was a 5h!t-bin. Or anywhere in the middle. Whilst there are always some that cannot be pleased – they stand out like sore thumbs and make it relatively easy for most folk to suss from the tone and veracity of their reviews that they are serial complainers and ignore accordingly.
A holiday is a throwaway experience. A few days or weeks of subjective Heaven or Hell is not a life-changer, and therefore the majority of reviews read exactly that way. Buying a kitchen appliance the same. Or makeup… tyres… you name the commodity – it is a peg that probably fits that general one-size hole.
I would suggest that only when you get to the likes of cars and homes does it become a transaction where, in the vast majority of cases, human emotion really kicks in and common sense flies straight out of the window. At this point people are on emotional autopilot. Many have simply ‘not been here’ before – and even if they have, then their last ‘experience’… ‘journey’… – whatever current buzz-word fits – was a completely different one.
There is a lot an Agent can do to make a transaction successful. There is, unfortunately, an awful lot more that they can (or rather don’t) do that can negatively affect the success of a transaction – and in some instances stop it from happening at all.
But whether either of these potential outcomes (or the myriad of intermediate permutations) are to see the cold light of day on a particular review site seems to depend upon a number of factors – of which quite a few have distinctly questionable methodologies in my opinion.
And I am far from alone in having that opinion, it seems.
“I remember the early days of AllAgents reviews – nobody liked them or trusted them…”
Not sure that very much has changed in the seven-or-so years it’s been in business, J1…
I’m looking at archived articles by Frau Renshaw when she was Landlady down the other pub in early 2012 and the majority of comments bemoaned this company’s model and operation.
Seems to me those comments are every bit as valid today – and euqally relevant to more than just this one company.
It is interesting isn’t it that AA seem to want to set themselves up as being “holier than thou” these days.
When it comes to Purplebricks no, we can’t shut you up.
As an avid reader of PIE I’ve noticed that unless the article mentions PB, you don’t have actually have much to say about anything. The things that really effect our industry seem to be a bit too much to cope with or are of no interest to you.
Sorry bud, there’s something a bit trollish about your posts on here. Methinks someone got turned down for a job there!
Suggest you take your head out of your @r$£ – it may help your vision.
Interestingly, only one of the five comments I have posted on this particular thread prior to this have been made on the subject you say I am fixated upon – and that was in direct reply to the frankly ridiculous statement made by yourself.
Which is noted you have made no attempt to respond to.
Probably just as well – you wouldn’t want to make yourself look any bigger of an uber-eejit than you’ve already managed with a style and panache all of your own…
Peepee….I’m just high street agent who doesn’t get the obsession that everyone else has with bashing PB. That’s all.
As I have stated previously, the reason that I know so much is that my partner works for them. So I get it all first hand and can confidently contradict a lot of the tosh that’s written on here. Simple.
“As I have stated previously, the reason that I know so much is that my partner works for them.”
Actually – you haven’t. Not, that is, in your guise as “MrLister”.
That would be your alter-ego, ‘PJ’, that has admitted to sleeping with the enemy.
Explains a lot, though…
Agreed – but I still keep asking myself ‘Why Trustpilot/Feefo/allAgents, not Google’?
In my opinion, we have to take the view that every single review of Purplebricks is invalid no matter where it is displayed.
Until every single customer is able to only place their review after their property has physically sold (whereby the purchaser has actually paid for the property) or until the seller has either withdrawn their property or their Purplebricks contract has expired….. the Purplebricks review process is simply pointless.
Purplebricks lightweight/front end reviews…. rather than of a full/completed service ……are wholly unreliable as a means of judging their service….. in my opinion.
In my opinion Purplebricks are blatantly manipulating the Reviews Process and must withdraw from every review site until they give sellers an opportunity to comment on the entire process which they have experienced.
Now, on a separate note…. working as part of a Solicitor Estate Agency ….where can I comment on the woeful interaction one often has when dealing with Purplebricks ……there is no review opportunity for me currently?
At least they have a review page not like most high street agents
would be interested to see others reviews to compare
“to compare” what, exactly, ‘Richard247?
Be my guest Richard247, our completely uncensored reviews taken at the END of the client journey, NOT the beginning are on Feefo. Search estate agents in Monmouthshire.
Fluter – and please don’t take this personally (I don’t know which agency you represent) – why are you asking your clients to review you on Feefo, not Google?
Need we say anymore https://www.stockopedia.com/content/small-cap-value-report-fri-1-dec-2017-purp-gaw-rm2-pam-248023/
ama18, read your link.
In my opinion, another nail in Purplebricks ReviewGate Coffin!
Wow – that’s a shocker! Well spotted ama18. This saga leaves no review site with any credit and simply goes further to show them up.
This MAY be the case, however as they take their money prior to selling, the BIG question is at what stage will the be asking for the review? If Purplebricks know they cannot sell the property at the price valued or at the price the vendor wants, then they should have a moral obligation NOT to take on the property unless they are prepared to refund the fee. simple.