An independent agent says that he and others in his area have complained to Trading Standards after their clients received touting letters from a Countrywide brand.
The letter (see below) appears identical to the ones shown on Eye yesterday, accompanying a story about Spicerhaart threatening to sue Countrywide.
The signature also appears identical.
Matt Billingham, director of Billingham Cooke in Stourbridge, west midlands, said the letters – sent by the Countrywide brand of Dixons – were received on Monday.
He said: “My clients and the clients of other OnTheMarket agents have been subject to these letters, the response to which has not been favourable towards Countrywide –especially as we have already informed our clients of our portal marketing strategy for 2015.
“Myself and a number of agents have logged complaints with local trading standards.”
Eye has invited Countrywide to comment and it is fair to point out that some posters on yesterday’s story said that the wording in Countrywide’s letter did not say that the vendor’s current agent was pulling off “both” Rightmove and Zoopla.
The Property Ombudsman’s code of practice relating to touting says: “You must not use unfair methods when seeking new properties for sale by unsolicited approaches. Any canvassing material must be truthful and must fully explain who the message is from, its purposes and how the seller’s interest can be followed up.”
A TPO guidance note on canvassing says that any flyer should also make clear the potential for two fees where a previous agent has been or is currently instructed.
Comments (14)
Re: A TPO guidance note on canvassing says that any flyer should also make clear the potential for two fees where a previous agent has been or is currently instructed……check the bottom right hand side of the letter……yep, it's there!
Allegedly there's an apology letter on its' way – who to…and who from – as the signature gives no clues whatsoever – remains a mystery.
Anyone receiving one – let us know…
About what you can expect from the Countrywide-boys. I would question the validity of the statement 'We list every property on all major websites'. Looking down the list of the 100 most popular website on tinternet I don't believe Dickons or any of the Countrywide-boys are on 'all major websites'. If they actually meant 'all major property portals' then with 4000 agents from next week on OTM they are NOT even listed on 'all major property portals' so I think Trading Standards will be interested in this misleading bull****
And a big thank you to Countrywide, we have turned this on its head and now use it to show how unprofessional and inaccurate they are. Most customers seem to already know this, but to have the agent themselves put pen to paper was an absolute gift (own goal).
They are a very large organisation and appear to use tactics that they deem acceptable. Back in 2009 I complained to NAEA when I found that a local branch manager had the initials NAEA after his name (but no logo) when a search of the NAEA register showed that almost no-one in that company, other than their director, was actually in NAEA. At their size it would seem that hitting targets is an over-riding criterion for their staff.
Countrywide do not shy away from letting staff know its about "Results" i had the pleasure to work for them for a number of years in my early days in estate agency and have very close contacts that hold senior positions there today. As long as you are a "Top Performer" you can get away with anything ….. and i do mean anything! They do not care about NAEA (not sure why anybody would) they train their staff up with a city and guilds qualification (which they allow them to take open book) to promote "standards" customer service is basically "Dont let the issues become a written complaint to MD" crack on otherwise. They openly state in training that most of their property sales come from "The internet" so the branch staffs sole job is seen as taking properties on. They are a poor company to work for and most vendors do not get the service promised to them as the branches are so thinly staffed and there is not enough emphasis on service just results
Direct 'canvassing' other agents instructions in whatever form is a desperate and cheapskate method of attracting business. This particular tactic is pathetic – the letter – and it's senders – belong in the tip!
I'm not sure why this is such a surprise, the corporates AND others have been doing this kind of thing for years.
If only agents had not blown the trumpets of the portals from the beginning and let the public to believe that the only way to sell and rent property successfully is to be listed on all major portals.
Can't wait for the response. Getting my popcorn ready 🙂
Ros, thanks for outlining the various requirements for letters as outlined in the Ombudsman’s code. My personal two cents is that Countrywide did well to ensure they checked each of those boxes, so I don't really see the issue.
Its a shame they didn't put the Branch Managers phone number on so we could all ring him and ask him!
Unambiguous my a**….All independent agents/fence sitters should WAKE UP, take a look at those RM & Z logos at the bottom of that page it is as though the letter had come directly from the portals. What their saying is we run the show, we are the estate agency industry and if ever you decide to leave these portals this is what we will do to you too, either by Z writing to your clients or our share holders doing the same. The 2000 or so share holders who currently benefit from massively reduced fees need to be put in a position where they have to drop one of the two and be on a level playing field with everyone else. The consequences of not joining OTM will mean we all pay our insurance money like good little boys and girls.
We have also raised the issue with the Property Ombudsman. We believe it fails to comply with their code on prospecting.
If the Property Ombudsman bans them from membership, does that effectively spell the end of Countrywide, what with being part of a redress scheme being a legal requirement?
Not that the Ombudsman would, but makes for an interesting line of thought.