A single-office agency in Wales says that it would have “gone under” had it continued with its membership of OnTheMarket.
Gareth L Edwards, in Bridgend, cancelled its contract with OTM last summer but says it has only now received a legal letter.
The firm says that it was not even invoiced on a monthly basis from last June onwards, until receiving an invoice today (April 15).
It says that OTM was a “brilliant concept” but failed to deliver business, and that its membership of OTM had been used by competitors to “slaughter us”.
The firm has now received a letter from OTM’s law firm, Eversheds, demanding payment of £3,186.
But managing director Gareth Edwards, who founded the firm in 1968, claimed that he had always understood that his relationship with Agents’ Mutual was non-binding.
In his letter to OTM boss Ian Springett of July 6 last year, Edwards said: “We were always led to believe that our relationship with Agents’ Mutual was non-binding. This was stated in the meeting we had with the representative of Agents’ Mutual.
“To be held in a five-year contract is completely unacceptable and restrictive; restrictive practice is not acceptable or I understand, legal.
“I am not prepared for my business to suffer as we have experienced in the past six months, mostly due to the fact that we have been using the wrong property portal.
“We have taken legal advice and if you wish to pursue this matter further, I can assure you that it will be vigorously defended.”
Edwards said that three other firms in Bridgend had not signed up to OTM – and used this to their advantage when winning instructions.
Edwards’ own firm gave up Rightmove but remained on Zoopla, to comply with OTM’s ‘one other portal’ rule.
He said: “It definitely cost my business and there is no way I am going back to OTM.”
He said he was surprised to have received the legal letter from Eversheds so many months later, and to find that the alleged arrears were not itemised.
The firm is now back with Rightmove and remains with Zoopla, and says that it has built its business back up.
An OTM spokesperson said: “We do not comment on contractual relations with individual members.
‘Smile please’ said: “As many know, I have sat on the fence for some time.
“Reading comments and talking to others this week, I think now is the time I get off it and throw my support behind OTM.
“I think there is still a long way for OTM to go and still not convinced they will topple RM, but with the rise of online-only agents, increased fees, data sales and by the looks change in stance of OTM fees, we should take the plunge. It’s a risk but a calculated one.
“I hope others too will join up in the coming months.”
Comments (72)
After seeing sooo many posts on here, I have to ask Robert do you actually have a day job?
This is my job and I love it!
Any examples?
I can vouch for Roberts day job. A lot of it is checking the data and accuracy behind stories such as this.
Hats off. At least someone is checking data for themselves and not just trusting everything they have been told. If more people checked what happens to data there may be a lot less problems I’m out industry!
CD – what is your day job if you can vouch?
Sorry meant to read
Lot less problems in our industry.
My day job is to write the advanced interrogation systems that reveal the data manipulations. If it’s out there I can find it.
You wouldn’t believe some of the daft things I am asked to investigate.
Made me wonder what has happened to Taff? he used to be on here quite a bit.
And GPL, been unusually quiet for some months, Although i am enjoying the calm 😉
I reckon you are GPL in another form, smile please.
So – with that in mind – the award for ‘Curveball of the Year’ goes to…
;o)
I like to think my comments are a little more measured than the mighty GPL!
Hmmm… another post ‘awaiting moderation’. Note to self – the smutfilter also doesn’t like www’s..
Okay – clearing out the full web addresses – here’s what I posted a couple of hours or so ago, in relation to the subject company and in particular to its’ website claim:
“To help you in your search, we update our website… window display and showroom daily. You can also find a list of all our properties in the Property News, on …onthemarket…, zoopla, primelocation, findaproperty, globrix… and propertylive (The NAEA site).”
So – maybe not updated DAILY, then…
You’re quite new on here aren’t you davidbamforth? In which case you could be forgiven for not knowing that smileplease has considerable credibility and longevity in respect of matters pertaining to OTM and that his signing up to them actually is news that is of interest to many of us.
Congrats on winning PeeBee’s award. You thoroughly deserve it.
Can anybody confirm that this davidbamforth poster is a bona fide agent?
If it is who I think it is yes and I have respect for him and his firm.
Smile Please just signed to OTM? give over! and who cares? Very strange you would put this at the end of this particular article… your bias to OTM has the subtlety of a giant red white and blue brick.
Your ads are paid by OTM yet you have to report OTM’s failings to keep your traffic…,tough time to be a PIE journalist.
EAT may be pro Zoopla but they at least do it with subtlety, where has the art gone from propaganda these days!?
And the prize for Pure, Unadulterated ******** Comment of the Year goes to…
Oh hey Pee Bee! sorry to darken your day but I much prefer Smile Please response as it at least adds debate…
Certificate in the post? I’m guessing there must be a reason you’re the judge of Pure, Unadulterated ******** Comment of the Year?
I’m glad you like the comments by ‘smile please’.
I think he nailed it, actually – back in November 2014, to be precise – with his response to one of your previous prize contending efforts:
“What a numpty comment. Guessing you are not an agent?”
I knew the lad had something about him even back then…
PeeBee leave name calling for the playground, join the debate!
Much more interesting and you might learn a thing or two 🙂
All that energy trawling the old comments, put that energy back into the discussion of what’s happening here and now.
“…name calling”? WHERE, exactly?
Your intention was never to encourage debate of any sort – your initial post was a plain and simple sideswipe at EYE.
You just don’t like it when others bite back.
Well… diddums.
I don’t need to resort to name calling, Sir – I have more than a sneaky feeling that people have plenty of appropriate alternatives swimming around in their own minds without needing my suggestions…
To be fair David i was surprised to get a mention (yet honored).
However i have been a consistent poster over the last few years on a number or stories not just OTM and i like to think my views on this and other stories have been very balanced and not emotionally led like some. Maybe the editor thought it was worth highlighting my change in stance to other regular posters who have followed my consistent, constructive remarks as i have now nailed my colours to the mast.
To be honest i do not think PIE are struggling for readership and their advertising seems to have increase so commercially they are doing well.
Emotional responses for business led decisions tend to lead on the path of disaster.
Swapping your digital marketing from the two strongest portals for a crowd fund project, purely on a cost basis (£50 deal) instead of facts such as consumer traffic, marketing budget and brand awareness, (all of which RM and Zoopla dominate OTM) to me is a emotional not factual business decision.
You joined very late, I would love to know if you are paying £500 as a Gold member or undercutting the entire ‘mutual’ purpose of OTM, (one of the main things I liked about OTM in the first place).
Also how much are you paying Titus Aduxass? he sounds like he would be a great PA!
You sound like the zoopla rep i spoke to this morning when giving them my notice 😉
To be honest Yes nationally Z have a more well known brand and a better hit rate. But I do not sell property nationally (yes to buyers) I sell houses within a 5 mile radius of my offices. I can tell you in my area my competition are not online agents or corporate agents but other local independent agents. And more local agents are now using OTM. And locally the buyers and sellers are increasingly more aware of OTM.
We also get about a fifth of our leads through Z, The majority of buyers and renter come through RM. The majority of our instructions come from recommendation or leaflet drops.
Now this is just my business,it maybe different for others in other areas. I cannot comment on that.
All i know is i feel comfortable in my choice to leave Z att his stage that i will not loose instructions. I still have the dominant RM.
To be honest i could probably do with out a second portal at all and just advertise on RM as it is so strong BUT i want that to change which is why i have signed to OTM
No i am not a £500 a month Gold member, (i do not think Gold membership is even still available).
But from what other members are saying is they do not mind agents such as me coming late o the party. They had at launch circa 6000 agents. If you believed in everything OTM had you would have signed up then. Something had to change to get more agents to commit.
If you are a Gold agent paying £500 pm would you want 6000 agents for the next 5 years and not grow but you all pay the same OR would you rather they grew to 10,000 over 5 years become the second choice portal and then look to do something interesting with RM?
Taking new agents on means they grow, they have adapted their business plan for growth.
As for Titus they were very kind words and greatly appreciated!
Smile Please, first of all thank you for your open response, it is very refreshing.
I would like to touch on national coverage, how do you feel about OTM investing heavily on their overseas aspect of the site? Do you think this should’ve been invested into their marketing budget for local members such as yourself?
Are you not only strengthening RM by still advertising with them? Surely the best (and quite unlikely) outcome of OTM being successful would be a super RM?
Not to be rude but isn’t your strategy a little short sighted? surely all that can come of this is a dominant RM and Zoopla OTM having a bun fight?
Growth comes from marketing budget, consumer brand awareness and offering a unique service to the consumer, OTM lacks all of these aspects. I was excited at first, I just don’t see how they can do it without any of this in place.
I think if you were paying £500 a month, told it was a mutual and then you found Joe Bloggs down the road had the same offer at £50, I would feel betrayed. It lacks integrity surely?
I wish I had my old enthusiasm for OTM, it has been eroded the past few months with their current actions.
Is it fair to blame OTM for the failure of a business that was apparently struggling before OTM was even released?
Bridgend isn’t a market that will attract hoards of overseas or out of area applicants so the need for a global presence is reduced. Most of the people who sell in Bridgend will be in residence so instructions will be determined by local reputation.Applicants will be familiar with the agents in the town so the need for a portal over an agent’s own site is reduced.
I think this was a clumsy attempt to knock OTM and think it will rally some of the fervent support for OTM which it has to be said has waned in recent months.
Do i agree with overseas marketing and let also lets through Country Life into it as well. NO i do not. I wish they had spent the money on more advertising or something else BUT they are not going to keep all the agents happy all the time. circa 7,000 members some are always going to be upset. Do i think Overseas and CL are detrimental to the brand of OTM no i do not. Maybe if they were advertising property on an adult natured site yes it would hurt the brand.
Maybe i am strengthening RM now. But RM had price rises long before OTM and they would have continued without OTM, at least this way there is a chance they will stop.
I As for my strategy being short sighted, No. I think you can only plan for your business in the near future and in the near future this will not hurt my business. i have also not signed up for 5 years (not that brave) i will reassess in a year.
If you have lost your enthusiasm not much anybody can do to get it back unfortuantley. I would revisit why you thought it was a good idea to start with and that was probably to make OTM the portal of choice for buyers and sellers. Its still possible, its not dead. It was never going to happen inside a year which is why there were 5 year contracts.
Great point about my original enthusiasm Smile Please and one worth addressing,
My enthusiasm for OTM sprung from three promises made.
1) They would break the duopoly.
2)They would provide good leads with time.
3) They are a mutual, we are treated fairly the same.
They didn’t break the duopoly, they created a RM super monster, impunity to increase rates higher (even more) as their main competitor Zoopla has short term pain and need to deal with OTM.
They did not provide good lead generation, even after a year (between 8- 15 lead a month)!
They undercut founding investors paying £500 offering it for £50. Being a ‘mutual’ went out the window.
What I would ask yourself, can a digital marketing platform survive with their current marketing budget? churn of agents has dropped, apparently ‘hundreds’ of current members are looking for release thanks to this £50 offer (see EAT)
If that goes through expect OTM slow decline, letters of intent mean little, they need a dramatic change in numbers and current management will be embroiled in legal action with the rebel agents.
It does not look good for OTM right now.
Enthusiasm is hard for sombody to reignite, like a relationship you have to work at it.
A year ago i had many posters on here telling me i should sign up trying to create enthsiasum for me. It did not work. For me there was no way i was going to sign at that stage.
I will not try and sway you, you have your mind set and respect you for that if you work for who i think you do you are in a good position to judge.
All i will say is points 1 & 2 are still very relevant. They are closing in monthly on the number of agents they need to take stock over from Z to be No2 spot and then they will have disrupted the duopoly. I beleive they will provide good leads in time. It has only been 16 months i was always going to take a few years to be on par leadwise with Z, In the meantime you have RM for numbers.
As for point 3 -No its not equal but in your heart of hearts ever think it would be? I believe there is a vote coming up for the board, if you feel an independent local agent would act better look to nominate and endorse them.
As for rebel agents, how many are there? i am guessing probably 20 agents out of 7000 thats not bad! – Considering they are probably agents that did not understand the contract, or as in the case above deciding to drop RM at this early stage i would say more fool them.
Time will tell but i can feel please with myself i support a cause i believe in and confident it will not lose me instruction now at this point.
What is an RM super monster? It’s already the dominant force, the no1.
It’s a bit like saying RM is the equivalent of a 5.1 earthquake and now its a 6.5, they are both going to do you royally!!
From their website:
“To help you in your search, we update our website… window display and showroom daily. You can also find a list of all our properties in the Property News, on http://www.onthemarket.com, http://www.zoopla.co.uk, http://www.primelocation.com, http://www.findaproperty.com, http://www.globrix.com, http://www.bridgendpropertynews.co.uk and http://www.propertylive.co.uk, (The NAEA site).”
Maybe not DAILY, then…
The reason we have decided to back OTM is simple.
We like the idea of what they are trying to do.
We are worried about the rise of online only agents.
We are fed up with being in competition with the portal we advertise on for leads for mortgages & solicitors etc.
We are fed up our data is being used to produce valuations on properties for online agents.
We decided that the risk now at his stage would not effect our business walking away from Z
We think this is the last stand as an industry to help fight RM fee and rise on internet listers.
We like the idea of being part of a “Club”
To put it into balance we also still have a number of reservations if OTM will work but from compiling figures every month for the 5/6 months there has been a consistent steady increase of branches not once in the last few months have OTM lost more than they have gained. Can Z say the same?
Hmmmm….. in february you wrote in the arena that you had no intention of joining OTM. This was after you had met the OTM rep and been told there was NO £50 deal, though you were offered a discount. A few weeks later and the £50 deal is miraculously being offered to new members for at least 12 months and suddenly you decide to join. Could you confirm for those unbelievers that you will be paying £50 and put that issue to bed once and for all.
This reminds me of when Debbie Magee was asked in an interview by Mrs Merton ‘what first attracted you to multi millionaire Paul Daniels?’.
If its all about price you have obviously made the right choice for you.
As for me I still haven’t seen any attempt by OTM to adapt other than via cheap fees. And saving £250 a month should not make or break any agent. I would be happy to throw £50 a month at it to see if it worked for me and to support it if it didn’t have the current portal restrictions. As for the voting/non voting rights of gold/silver/newbies it seems it makes no difference as they will do what they want anyway.
Aren’t all agents online these days?
Whilst I admire the bravery dropping Rightmove in favour of OTM this is simply a poorly considered short sighted financial mistake. If you’re not on Rightmove then it doesn’t matter if your second choice is Zoopla or OTM you are of course going to be (rightly) attacked by your competitors.
I see that Mr Edwards is now back Rightmove. Agents in my area attacked us for being on OTM in the early days, a quick Rightmove report showing that the aggressors were taking twice as long to sell with twice as many price reductions quickly put paid to this desperate tactic.
Stick with Rightmove Mr Edwards, drop Zoopla and honour the contract that you signed. You seem to have a strong well established business and I am sure that the vast majority of your customers will choose you because of who you are and not because of your second portal choice.
Indeed; I dread to think how much more Rightmove are xxxxxing him, now he will be on their ‘standard rate’. Big mistake
Struggling estate agencies are possibly a fault of there own making. That said if you have a precarious business the last this you should do is throw in your lot with an untried and untested new marketing venture.
Although having looked at his website he is still pushing findaproperty, Globrix and PropertyLive so is it any wonder OTM didnt work for him…
This might sound like a stupid question but what does a portal do?
…..make everyone fall out and cause a sh1t load of arguments.
Chuckle, great answer but most agents don’t seem to know the answer to that question.
It generates on line traffic to look at property for sale and to rent, it passes leads on to the advertisers.
You could call it a digital newspaper without the news just the adverts.
That is what they were designed to do in 1996 but things have moved on; each agents own website should now be a digital office replacing that function of portals, the portals should only be used to introduce new applicants from out of the area to a firm distance precludes them from knowing about.
It is marketing lunacy to promote an advertising medium that promotes your competition more than yourself.
Eh ?
Using your logic, before 1996 we should all have produced a local newspaper ?
Portals are designed to generate massive on line traffic to show what they are offering.
The reason we all complain about RM is because they don’t seem to be fair with us advertisers on cost or who they let on and what some of these new age hybrids get up to.
But we ALL still advertise them.
The cost of the press to produce a newspaper was a barrier to entry that sporadic groups of agents couldn’t afford let alone organise the distribution chain.
Bear in mind I’ve been at the heart of the attempts by media corporations to keep a grasp on advertising revenue in a digital world, there are no similar comparable barriers to producing and distributing a competitive web site for property.
Massive online traffic is an attempt to create a barrier to entry that genuinely does not exist. On one consultancy I did, I got after 3 weeks of not accepting a smoke screen of deception, the honest and logical facts behind the massive online traffic; the people element of the traffic at the time was just 8.5% of claimed traffic. Of that only a micro fraction was new enquiries for the Agent.
It is just bonkers to spend upwards of £300 per month paying for anything that assists you competitors as much as it helps you. That is exactly what aggregating portals do.
FYI Many local associations did infact produce their own paper. Many also sold it and made a killing and managed to get reduced fees.
Indeed but I personally found the meaningful enquiries came from vendors who were conditioned to look at the property pages within the local paper. The printing of single firm multiple office or affinity group newspapers never got to the equivalent point that we are now with portals as they were still beholding to the firm that owned the printing press.
Having been a supporter of Property Live for a number of years without any benefits I was somewhat sceptical about the introduction of On The Market so decided not to join Agents Mutual until I saw how successful it was.
Since then I have carried out my own market research by asking prospective and existing landlords and tenants which portals they are aware over and overwhelmingly they say Right Move and/or Zoopla. Very few I have spoken to appear to be aware of On The Market.
I cannot afford to spend my limited advertising resources on a portal that will not bring me new business or prospective tenants and, with the current adverse publicity that Agents Mutual are attracting with proposed legal action, I will remain ‘on the fence’.
Incidentally one local Agents Mutual member I have spoken to has told me that they wished they had never signed up and will end their contract as soon as they are able. It will be interesting to see how many jump ship when their contracts are up.
Also should have considered his ‘other portal’
Edwards says ‘We were always led to believe that our relationship with Agents’ Mutual was non-binding’.
Did you sign a contract/agreement with OTM Mr Edwards? Because if you did then you should have read it. And if it says you were in for 5 years then that is binding.
If you didn’t sign anything to that effect you can tell OTM to take a running jump. But I will bet a pound to a penny that you did commit to the 5 years.
Add this one to the growing list of ‘not credible’ bleatings about OTM.
p.s. If he expected OTM to fully replace either Z or RM within 12 months of start-up, then, with respect, he is utterly naive.
Houses built on poor foundations fall. Equally, poor contracts that compromise situations or don’t deliver aren’t worth the paper they’re written on.
The whole AM/OTM stance was dubious when they as a business tried to put out contracts that compromised agents against CPR’s and BPR’s and the 1979 Estate Agents Act.
Its like a taxi firm boss saying ‘his rules’ are that drivers can drive on the path in rush hour to get passengers home earlier. UK Highway law wouldn’t allow it, even if the big chief made such a rule.
Definition in the EAA 1979 is based on best representing a clients home not restricting it from being seen. The EAA 1979 also doesn’t stop online only agents from being agents.
With AM and OTM having two different company registrations and different directors, its restrictive actions are cartel like. Period. It’s AM/OTM that needs to change its game or for the powers that be to now close it down for cartel like rules.
Shame as it could have been good, but currently should look a home before throwing stones in its glass house.
You could have told poor old ‘Smile Please’ it was a cartel before he signed up Trev. I can’t believe you have kept that to yourself.
Its a Cartel????!!!!
Disillusioned, you are right if only i had heard! 😉
smile please – I’ve been saying it all the way along 🙂
Do a search on Companies House – AM and OTM have different directors.
Thus two separate companies colluding in a market place as to restrain or block traders in a open market is a taboo.
When powers that be (government bodies, NOT Mr Springett) define what an agent is and how agents may trade, then AM/OTM’s cartel like restraints would make me as an agent who signed their agreement walk away and happily tell a judge why I walked away.
Get any government body or judge to accept an agreement that favours its own commercial interests over agent consumer law.
AM/OTM are very brave to not just take on the big portals, but to define away from what government says agents are and what they can and must do in conf;lict of what a few directors at AM and OTM have decided.
AM and OTM banning others like some portals and online agents could also come under BPR’s as placing unfair restraints on other commercial traders. VERY brave or stupid.
CPR’s, BPR’s, EAA? So have you reported them for these breaches? The OTM haters are so vitriolic, I can’t believe they haven’t thought of that.
The million dollar question for you and all the other members of the anti OTM brigade is, if they dropped would you join OTM?
If the answer’s yes, you obviously believe it’s a credible alternative.
If the answer’s no, what do you care about how other agents spend their money?
Of course it could be a crusade for the common good. Very commendable. Oh, and I refer you back to the first line of my post.
I have no reason to join AM/OTM. I do believe there is space for a mutual. But why would anyone join something that simply brings agents together to simply compete.
Maybe it should have been called an Anti Mutual.
I work with agents who collaborate to get fees up by being mutual in effort via main sub agency. For a fact I have many agents who offer clients the fact that for a higher fee they can extend exposure via more agents to more applicants.
Why would I want to join a RM/Z bear bashing group that simply helped RM grow further. i hear many agents have had letters through saying subscriptions to some portals are going up. I’d say AM and OTM have mainly helped the Anti-Christs they set out to destroy.
Mr Mealham – you state
“i hear many agents have had letters through saying subscriptions to some portals are going up”
to which I would say that if you at any point – for as much as a nanosecond – believed that this would not be the case with the ‘Duopoly’ (credit: Robert May) portals who have pledged to increase their revenue and shareholder payouts every year, then you are sadly, badly deluded.
But at least it allows me to hand out another of today’s award’s –
and the prize for ‘Scraping the Bottom of the Barrel for Cheap Digs’ goes – once again – to…
Mr Mealham
I must warn you that your apparent infatuation with using taxis within your arguments in one way, shape or form is starting to become proper Hendrylike…
…and could well earn you a visit – and your collar well and truly felt – by a blast from the past poster, the Sh!tty Analogy Police.
He’d have you bang to rights!
Mr Mealham
Your impression of the Plank is, in fairness, admirable – but you’re not nearly generous enough in the handing out of ‘Dislikes’ across the board… and the wodge of ‘Likes’ for your own posts is a dead giveaway.
I’ll give you seven out of ten for effort, however – and I will bestow upon you honorary ‘P.L.A.N.K.’ status to add to your other alphabetic accolades.
;o)
That isn’t a fair claim by Mr Edwards. A companies house search for his firm shows a very poor and consistently poor trading history going back a long way back before Agents Mutual was first announced let alone rolled out with its one other portal rule.
Give over with the dislikes, it’s a basic instinct before deciding what’s what on any story to have a quick look at the background. The trading history for this firm isn’t glowing for the 5 years prior to AM launching so to blame that on OTM is unfair.
The only possible fault that can be laid at the door of OTM, it has not controlled subscriptions to the other portals as predicted, that is not the fault of the product but the affinity group. A collective comprising 30% of the industry ought to be enjoying economies of scale discounts on more than than just portal fees, it is down to someone to understand that, organise it and roll out the savings.
are you off your fxxxxx meds?
A strong and well considered post Eamonn, well done! Can you now explain what you think I’ve got so wrong.
I love the fact someone is clearing down their cookies just to whack the dislike button.
You do know; start, run, to command prompt then type RMdir /s /q press return (robert may dislike instruction repeat) will save you the effort of clearing down the cookies and you’ll be able to dislike me forever?
If you don’t know what that actually does don’t try it. If you are daft enough to try you have been warned.
I told you. I told you all. But some of you doubted it.
HES OFF HIS MEDS
Over the years I have the pi55 taken out of me for the way I think and act, apparently; I have the devil in me, I’m aspergers, ASD, ADHD, ADD , bi-polar, a psychopath, stupid, a dullard, on meds… think of an insult, a something ignorants don’t properly understand for someone at my end of the spectrum and I’ve been called it, the dyslexia doesn’t help.
This is the 2nd time a firm in apparent financial difficulties has blamed OTM for it’s failings; both stories have a familiar ring about them so I suspect they are connected. The facts are; Mr Edwards was 74 when he entered into a contract with OTM, if he signed up for a 5 year contract he was committing himself and his business to a contract until he is nearly 80, when he signed up his business apparently had liabilities exceeding £250,000. but with assets less than £90,000.
What is most likely going on is someone wants out of the contract, either the next generation wants to take over the firm and doesn’t want the commitment of the contract or this is a corporate buyout, the liability of the contract is an unwelcome part of the deal. There is probably about £20,000 of liability to satisfy before that firm can be free of the commitment to OTM. Whatever is going on at Gareth L Edwards (I admit I can only guess) it is simply wrong to blame OTM and there is something distasteful in doing it so publicly.
Take the dislikes as a compliment. They can’t think of a counter argument so hit the nice and easy dislike buttons instead.
Agree with you, would prefer to see clever arguments than people spamming the dislikes.
I got 118 ‘Dislikes’ on one post a week or so ago – I’m as happy as a pig in 5h!t about it.
I must have REALLY dischuffed my ever-present Plank with that one…
I’ve concluded Eamonn must be one of the agents dissatisfied with OTM and doesn’t like the spin of the story being undone by fact.
From recall he is an AM Gold member in the South East who has previously challenged AM on numbers.
Following on from Mr May’s investigation, a very quick look at the agent’s website shows that they list their properties with such websites as FindaProperty, Globrix and PropertyLive.
Wow, how are those going for you Mr Edwards? Sending you many leads?
And, if you come to removing the logos of long dead websites, you may also want to update the text in your branch write up, which states “In addition to our website, we advertise all our rental properties on http://www.onthemarket.com, http://www.zoopla.co.uk,http://www.primelocation.com, http://www.findaproperty.com, http://www.globrix.com, http://www.bridgendpropertynews.co.uk andhttp://www.propertylive.co.uk…”
Obviously one of the fly-by-night agents.
Actually, I think I’ve worked it out! Mr Edwards is in fact a genius… He’s managed to get around the one-other-portal rule by sticking with three that don’t exist! He should be applauded.
Also, if his company hasn’t been performing that well, why on earth is he not charging any tenancy fees? There are none at all listed on his website, so in line with the legislation…