There has been a ‘significant’ rise in down-valuations which are now running at the highest rate since the crash in 2008.
The Victoria Derbyshire Show yesterday looked at the problem, with Russell Quirk one of the contributors.
Quirk, CEO of Emoov, said that one in five of its transactions is currently being down-valued by surveyors after the sale has been agreed.
Two years ago, it was fewer than one in 20.
Quirk said it reflected surveyors predicting a crash, and that they were covering their backs.
He said: “”Surveyors are prophesying a crash. The system is built to protect them.”
Mortgage firm London and Country told the BBC show that the number of its advisers seeing down-valuations on a daily basis now exceeds those who do not.
Notably, Quirk said that the RICS did not put anyone up for the programme, although surveyor Nick Hanson of Vospers did appear in a private capacity.
Other contributors to the programme included Jonathan Hudson, of Hudson Properties. He denied agents were over-valuing properties, saying there would be no point in having properties on the books if they were not going to sell.
A couple of first-time buyers also told the programme of their experiences. They had a down-valuation of £10,000 on the first property they tried to buy, and lost out when the seller refused to drop the price.
A second property purchase was also hit by the same down-valuation but this time they borrowed £5,000 from family members to save the deal.
A home owner looking to remortgage after renovating his property told how a surveyor valued the house at £20,000 less than a local estate agent. The surveyor had not gone inside the property but had done a drive-by valuation.
Trade body UK Finance said: “Lenders have a responsibility to ensure that the value of property taken as security on mortgage loans is current and realistic.
“Although the valuation is carried out for the lender, borrowers also benefit from a realistic independent valuation as it could help them avoid paying over the odds for the property they are buying.”
After the show aired, Quirk told EYE: “Surveyors are being over-cautious and pessimistic on property values currently because they are concerned that lenders will call upon their indemnity policies for losses.
“Self-interest rather than accurate market reflection, in other words.”
He said that of the one in five deals being hit by down-valuations, some resulted in fall-throughs and others in re-negotiation to get the seller and buyer to compromise.
Comments on the BBC forum included a question about what was making lenders nervous – Brexit?
Another said: “House prices are way too high relative to earnings and the bubble must burst at some point. And that may be soon.”
The segment on down-valuing can be viewed via the link below, one hour and 11 minutes in.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bc3y2l/victoria-derbyshire-23072018
Comments (64)
There have been some good responses on here, and some total nonsense.
I have been a “valuer” for best part of 20 years within a relatively small region, so yes, I feel qualified to value properties in this small part of the world. Certainly more so than the latest fresh rics valuer who lives 45 miles away.
Likewise the old stubborn rics valuer who clearly got stung last time around and as such has an outstanding reputation for being negative.
And then the rics valuer who also has an estate agent and ALWAYS over values.
Or get this, the rics valuer who once downvalued a property for us because of the ancient gas fire. Even though the house didn’t have a gas fire.
My point being even the R.I.C.S qualified valuers are not perfect, and often they do not deal with a specific area like we do as agents, and it is them who always ask us for our comparable evidence. To say that agents are largely inferior to R.I.C.S valuers is not accurate at all.
For me personally, it is the fact that I have NEVER had a valuer change their mind, despite masses of comparable evidence being available, that makes us as agents dislike them.
It is the system that needs changing, and absolutely yes to estate agents becoming more qualified/regulated. I don’t know of a single good agent who doesn’t think that is a good idea.
The frustration is of course because we have a willing seller, a willing buyer, a price agreed and then somebody comes in and says no, that’s too much. Nobody can be that accurate, if its 5k on a value of 100, or 50 on a value of 500k, it’s not an exact science.
My hat is off to you Sir. An erudite and entirely accurate comment.
I would suggest to Mr Quirk that he could dramatically decrease the number of down valuations he is experiencing by providing the surveyor with comparable evidence when the surveyor pops into the office to pick up the keys………….ohhhh wait
wardy – you’ve gotta come back once a week matey.
You’re what “COMMENT OF THE WEEK” was made for!
Speaking as a surveyor this thread is quite troubling. It is clear from some posts that a number of estate agents don’t really understand the concept of valuation and the RICS definition.
This also reinforces my opinion, that all Estate agents should be properly certified before they can walk into someone’s home and give them ‘advice’ on their most valuable asset.
There is actually no such thing as a surveyor undervaluing a property in the true sense: rather it is often the case that an estate agent has overvalued it. 99% of the time this tends to be where the estate agent is not the most reputable one around. The good agents generally get it right.
If an estate agent feels he can get X for a property then finds a genuine buyer prepared to pay X for a property how has he “overvalued” it ?
Surely the only reason you are in a property is because someone has agreed to pay X for it ?
Agree re. qualifications for Estate Agents btw.
This where the RICS definition regarding ‘compulsion’ and ‘knowledge’ are crucial for the objective valuation. If someone is willing to pay £20,000 more this may be for an emotional or another personally subjective reason. Similarly, they be willing to pay ‘extra’ because they are ignorant of the market in that area i.e. a terraced house in Blackburn at £90k may seem a great deal to someone from Surrey especially given an estate agents reassurance it’s a great deal but this may not actually be the case. Hope this helps.
Thanks for the response, I understand why a valuer may value a property at X- £10k but to say an Estate Agent has overvalued it in the first when they have achieved X place is incorrect.
“rather it is often the case that an estate agent has overvalued it.” You seem to be implying that an agent should try to second guess the valuer and only sell at the figure they feel a valuer may value it at ?
How would you like estate agents to advise on a marketing price, what they think they can achieve or what they think a valuer may value it at ?
My view is that all estate agents should know and understand the RICS definition of Market Value.
The answer to your question is in there.
Just for clarity are you saying we should advise a vendor to market a property at a lower figure than we believe we could realistcally achieve incase it is donwnvalued ?
How do we second guess that figure ? Ive had two valuers give diferent prices on the same house this week!
What if we found a cash buyer ?
An estate agents job and a valuers job are not the same thing which is why they will occasionaly feel differently about what property is “worth”, frustrating but it is what it is.
To say we should advise vednors to sell their property for less than it may sell for is frankly ridiculous.
Your questions are all valid ones and these are the types that surveyors are trained to understand and deal with as part of their assessment of professional competence.
This reinforces the argument that estate agents should be certified and anyone advising someone on the value of their property must be qualified to do so.
If my questions are valid why havent you addresed them ?
I agree re certification but that still wont change the fact that our job the vast majority of the time is to get the best offer we can, yours is to check as to suitablilty for security and LTV. ITs no surprising EAs and valuers will sometimes differ in opinion, this is the nature of the system and inevitable but you seem to be implying its the Estate Agents fault when this isnt the case.
I will ask again Are you saying we should advise a vendor to market a property at a lower figure than we believe we could realistcally achieve incase it is donwnvalued ?
Interesting to see a surveyor comment, very brave.
All i will say is my staff are inundated with surveyors calling for comparables every single day. If we were all so poor at the job why do surveyors need to call us?
I have no doubt a homebuyers or full structural is of use. But the mortgage valuers seem a complete waste of time.
If on the VERY rare occasion we do get a down valuation its by 5k, whats the point?! i can understand it if properties were down valued by 25k.
I don’t see it as brave! I had an estate agency for several years so can see it from both sides.
The reason surveyors call estate agents is often to confirm the data they have or to see if the subject property is directly comparable with those previously sold. For example, if one house on a street has sold for £50k more than the others then it makes good sense to try and establish why.
I would wager that a very significant majority of estate agents don’t even know the RICS definition of Market Value never mind understand the meaning of the statement.
The definition is internationally recognised and accepted by all lenders. A further reason why all Estate agents should be certified before being allowed to ‘value’ someone’s property.
Generally in my experience the reason given for a down valuation of, say, 5K is that the lowered figure is ‘ at the top of its range ‘ So a house agreed at 200,000 which is knocked to 195k is justified 190 – 195 with 195 – 200 giving them the jitters, drives me insane that there is a conceit that says they can value to within 2.5%
Dont get me wrong I like valuers and we’re lucky to have good ones in our area who’ve been around a long time and there’s mutual respect, I know when we’re chancing our arm and they’re happy to talk to us if they are uncomfortable
“It is clear from some posts that a number of estate agents don’t really understand the concept of valuation and the RICS definition.”
I would respectfully (sort of… ish…) reply by saying that it is abundantly clear to a great number of Estate Agents from their dealings with some of your professional peers that they clearly do not understand the concept of anything other than lead-plating the seats of their pants.
But feel free to remind your audience precisely which RICS ‘definition of valuation’ you are referring to.
And also why you feel we Agents don’t appear to understand its’ concept.
Including, that is, the ones with RICS qualifications on their business cards…
Market Value is the definition you need to know.
Unfortunately by asking which definition, you kind of prove the point.
I can’t speak for others and your experiences with them.
In terms of ‘lead-lining’ it should be understood that the surveyor’s client is the buyer with an inherent duty of care to the lender. Surveyors are not paid commission nor do they have any vested interest in the sale price.
No but we all know one or two local surveyors with a ‘God Complex’ ;0)
You caught me in mid-edit, as I noted the thread had moved on since your initial post.
The fact that you did not specifically state which ‘valuation’ your were referring to was your error not mine – as you know there are many forms of ‘value’ to which the RICS refer to.
The fact that I knew exactly what you were banging on about matters not one jot. I was merely making a point that you were not being clear with your banging. You have a large audience here on EYE, of different levels of knowledge and understanding of the process of housing transactions. It is always better to ensure that all understand, not just a chosen few.
Did no-one at RICS teach you to start with the foundations – not with the roof?
With regard to your ‘inherent duty of care to the lender’ – whatever. Some of us have a very different term for it.
Your last sentence kind of proves the point as to why some surveyors – even those who state they worked in agency – understand so little about the process that goes before their little lead-plated @r$es cross the threshold with what some might think is the sole intention to scupper a deal.
For clarity and my own professional development what are the various ‘forms of value that the RICS refer to’ and please can you explain them to the uneducated?
You would be providing a great service to the readers of this board and demonstrate the depth and understanding which you undoubtedly deserve credit for.
CPD – Chronically Pompous Demeanour
That certainly has happened in the past and Surveyors do get know which agents are less than professional and not trustworthy. Is this the type of reputation you want for your company?
That cuts both ways Will, valuers who pay no heed to the merits of an individual sale and simply knock it due to general market sentiment and commercial worries are less than professional and untrustworthy
Valuers are highly regulated by the RICS and their method of valuation is set down in the professional guidance note. Because a lower value was returned does not mean the valuer has just knocked off a set amount. A good agent will explain why there is sometimes a variation between the figures as any purchaser must pay “top dollar” to achieve his purchase ie beat the competition. A similar situation arose with certain cars a few years ago where you could by a new Morgan for x but had to wait 3 years for delivery but a second hand new one available for immediate collection attracted a premium of perhaps 10%. What is the value? x or x+10%? Answer it depends on who is buying and if a special buyer wants to pay over the odds for instant self gratification he pays x+10% yet could have bought the same car for x if he wanted to wait 3 years.
We’re not seeing an uptick in down valuations as yet, time will tell.
There have been times in the property cycle where its been an issue to the point that its endemic, no rationale just fear, a solution ( and I’m not going into the morality of it ) can be:
1. Agree sale @ 200,000
2. Speak to vendor and purchaser, ” look, there is an issue with down valuations at the moment and valuers are just looking at the price agreed and knocking it by 5% because they are worried about the trajectory of the market and their PI, we know we’ve agreed at 200,000 but we’re going to issue the memo at 210,000 ( and if necessary tweak the guide ) that way if he values it up at 210,000 we’ll just issue price reneg letters back to 200,000 post valuation , if, as I expect, he/she knocks it we’ve built in some redundancy to compensate ”
3. Proceed on that basis.
htsnom79
Rather than not going into the morality of your suggestion, may I respectfully suggest you first consider the not insignificant aspect of its’ LEGALITY.
It’s a conceptual point I’m not advocating it, and I am sufficiently ignorant of the detail of any law that might be broken in such a scenario, the valuer can value it at any number between zero and the price on the ipad he’s being told its agreed at, he’s just starting at a different number, he can value as he sees fit.
Fact remains that there are market conditions or commercial considerations that can result in:
Input value 200,000 output value 190,000
Input value 210,000 output value 200,000
Same house, same day, same valuer, same everything except output value.
Who’s ‘ valuing ‘ anything in this scenario?
I cannot say we have had issues of down valuations. Cannot remember the last one.
The only one that did fall through on valuation was a property we sold as a BTL the values (small independent surveyor based 30 miles away) did not agree with the price we said we could let it at.
In my very recent experience the cause of down valuing property has been the realisation that it is leasehold with onerous clauses such as doubling ground rent. At the recent demo by NLC outside Westminster I spoke to a lady who’s £500000 london flat has been down valued to £ZERO because of this and the huge annual maintenance fees.
My own property ( a leasehold house) was down valued by £20000 because it had ground rent linked to RPI!!
Its time for the industry to wake up to the fact that if gov don’t act there will be a crash purely due to the leasehold scandal.
The real scandal is that the conveyancers presumably failed to alert their buying client to the existence of these onerous clauses. No-one in their right mind would have proceeded had they been properly informed.
No one in their right mind would have bought a leasehold house with onerous rent increases, uncapped permission fees and, very often, an uncapped, unregulated estate charge had these been highlighted in the original advertising material and in the sales room before a reservation fee was paid and a solicitor engaged.
The new norm is to advertise newbuild houses as Freehold, when they are not. Developers are still retaining third party profit-seeking interest in those feeholds in the form of variable estate maintenance charges, fixed rentcharges and fee generating covenants. In time, these properties will also be devalued as the public realises they are not traditional freehold and they become unsellable in the same way as leasehold homes,
As a valuation (not for mortgage purposes) surveyor I am not seeing sale prices going down but I am seeing more and more houses overvalued to gain instruction.
There still seem to be a degree of agents who over inflate their appraisal and then wait for the owner to agree to a price reduction.
Other agents all know who is doing this and are frustrated that the vendors stick with the original agent at a lower price rather than switch to those who got the appraisal spot on weeks/months before.
Occasionally you will get someone prepared to pay an over inflated price for a property as they are ruled by the heart and not the head, as we all know emotional factors can play a huge part in the house buying process. Lenders do not have an emotional tie to a property and as such mortgage valuers are dictated by “comparable evidence” and are either forbidden or scared rigid to deviate from this method of valuation. I guess it could be seen as a bit of a safety net for buyers.
Not really sure where the market crash is coming from, seems like an attention grabbing headline to me.
“seems like an attention grabbing headline to me.”
WHATTTT?
How can you possibly say that about an article that features the attention-grabbing headline maestro that is Russell Quirk ??
I was talking with a landlord recently that had had a down valuation on a property in St Ives, Cambs. The town is about 12 miles west of Cambridge. The valuer couldn’t apparently find anything in the area to compare with so he used a property in Norwich and another in Ipswich. How completely ridiculous! People like him get his profession a bad name.
Valuing has been a discussion for years going back to the early 1980’s. Agents tend to over-value or be a little optimistic. This gives room to test the market and allow some room for negotiation. Wholly understandable. Grossly over-value and the property will not get interest and could leave the property stale. What is the price the purchaser pays? He/she will pay the top price the market will take to achieve beating any competition. So what is the value as a security for lending purposes? This has to be the price a second purchaser would pay in a reasonably quick timescale as a lender holding a property as a security has ongoing losses/expenditure and costs if he has to repossess. In a good and progressive market an optimistic view can be taken perhaps at price paid. In a suspect market caution is sensible. At present, we have the risk of much more property coming to the market due to Government Landlord Bashing – high tax burdens and reduce tax relief on lending for landlords will force some to sell and increase supply of property to the market for sale. This increase in supply may reduce sale prices as landlord will become more cautious in buying. This time investors/landlords will be selling and not taking up the slack as they did in the last property value drop back as the Government is hammering landlords – so I suspect a recession on values is coming. The last time the property recession came (pre letting market) surveyors were hammered with negligence claims by greedy lending bodies covering their own back sides suing surveyors wholesale. Professional Indemnity premiums went up 6 to 8 fold and claims against surveyor spiraled. So perhaps we all need to look at the purpose of a valuation before using the terms “down-valued”. TV like to sensationalize – it good for viewing numbers. If you listen to TV journalists 90% of landlords would be deemed rogues just to grab the headlines.
I guess most of you are agents and will probably disagree my personal take on the term down-valuation and I will no doubt get a lot of dislikes! In any event perhaps food for thought???
“CEO of Emoov, said that one in five of its transactions is currently being down-valued by surveyors after the sale has been agreed”
THEN STOP OVER-VALUING THE PROPERTIES IN THE FIRST PLACE YOU DONUT SIMPLY TO WIN THE BUSINESS.
Is there a single estate agent out there who hasn’t ‘over valued’ to win a job? Is there??
Yeah, me. Never.
I HAVE priced high. I HAVE “reset” the values of an area by going high when I figured the market would take it. And sometimes it’s not worked and I’ve had to reduce. BUT always discussing the plan with the vendor and agreeing IF that is a strategy they want to try.
What I never do is give a falsely high expectation to mislead a client into listing with me instead of the opposition. And as a strategy, I found honesty with clients won the business over the “too good to be true” merchants almost every time. Winner.
Good answer – me too
Me.
I have never ever over valued…although I might have promised tomorrows prices today 🙂
If they have found a buyer willing to pay that price have they overvalued it ?
That’s also my thought AgentQ73. If the agent achieved a genuine offer at that price then they can’t really say they over valued it.
Surveyors don’t really understand “subjective value”, maybe because they think its a bit too irrational…. yet they also see their role as protecting “stupid irrational” buyers from being ripped off.
The true role of a surveyor is (IMO) to alert the buyer and bank to any defects with the property that the buyer might not have the skills to notice (structural issues).
Surveyors also do need to be on the alert for buyers who are committing mortgage fraud, as should agents!
But (IMO) it should not be the job of the surveyor to tell the buyer they are wrong to the “value” the house with a big garden and no garage more highly than the house with the garage and small garden… just because the preferences of the buyer don’t match the preferences of the surveyor, they risk a down valuation.
Value is subjective and understanding how to use “subjective value” to your advantage, means a good agent can get a better outcomes for their client.
‘The true role of a surveyor is (IMO) to alert the buyer and bank to any defects with the property that the buyer might not have the skills to notice (structural issues)’.
The surveyors in this context are merely there for the lender, the buyer is not their client and the valuation is on basis of accessing adequate lending security.
Many lenders will not allow the applicant to have a copy of the valuers report as it is not theirs to have,
AgentQ73 the question is can you find a second or third buyer at the same price? if not expect a lower value to reflect the resale sale.
With respect that wasn’t the question.
If an estate agent thinks they can get X for a property then finds a genuine buyer prepared to pay X then in my opinion the estate agent hasn’t overvalued it.
I fully understand why a lender/valuer may not wish to lend on it being worth X. But that isn’t really the fault of the Estate Agent.
The valuer is checking the property is suitable security for a loan and the L.T.V. is correct.
The Estate Agents job in 90% of cases is to get the best possible offer from the best possible buyer.
The two figures may not be the same, its not too say either is wrong because they are two separate things.
AgentQ73, I was not being critical of your achievement. The point I was making (perhaps not very clearly) is that for lending or security purposes the value may not be the same as the sale price from a special purchaser for example. The use of the term “down-valuation” is emotive and shows a lack of understanding of the bigger picture. It is merely a differing value (using differing criteria) where you have achieved an exceptional price. Your job as an agent is to achieve the best price you can for your client; which I am sure you do. the Job of the Surveyor is different and to reflect a realistic price that 2 or more buyers might pay ignoring the special buyer. This is because if your exceptional buyer dies the day after he completes and he may have paid well over odds that the next buyer may pay. Who is right and who is wrong? Neither they both value but on a different basis. So it is not an over valuation nor under-valuation it is just valuing using differing criteria. The problem is many agents do not fully understand the Surveyor’s remit and basis and home buyers understand even less. The sniping between all sides is not helpful to anyone and shows a lack of understanding the bigger picture. I guess this explanation will be disliked by some.
Couldn’t agree more, and very eloquently put.
Two people doing different jobs to different criteria will occasionally come up with different results, its frustrating but not unexpected. If its something that i think may happen i will always try to make my vendor aware and try to manage their expectations as best I can.
Disliked only in the sense that this particular argument does not answer satisfactorily the issue of down valuing ( or valuing by different criteria if you prefer ) by only a few thousand pounds which rules out any exception
I could be wrong but i believe some lenders (Halifax I think) arent imposing retentions and downvaluing accordingly instead. Kind of makes sense rather than getting reports etc then them not lifting the retenion.
My property was down valued by a rics surveyor and when I asked Housebuyfast for a copy of the report I am still waiting as housebuyfast paid for the survey they could potentially ask for anything that makes it easier to reduce their offer put into it .
I very much doubt it was a qualified surveyor who ‘valued’ your property.
Ring a couple of local agents and talk through your situation with them before you do anything else.
Unfortunately, AQ73 I believe it is a ‘done deal’. You can read what the chap has had to say about the issue over on The Arena here:
propertyindustryeye.com/forums/topic/where-do-you-go-to-get-justice/
Mirrors an experience that one of my vendors endured 3 or so years ago. Luckily for her it didn’t end that way.
Something that needs much wider coverage than hidden within a forum, I would suggest.
who sells through Housebuyfast!! wake up people
Down valuing aside, since when have CEO’s of companies that don’t make any money suddenly become industry experts? It’s like asking Countrywide for advice?
He’s always been a publicity seeker. Maybe he’s the new Sarah Beeny?
Pay your PR agency enough money (or other people’s money!) and they’ll get you a slot on the 9 o’clock news.
Quirk owns eye for propaganda and recruitment.
No, he doesn’t.
An outbreak of down-valuing happens periodically and it spreads like a disease among mortgage valuers who quickly become infected with ‘CYA Syndrome’*.As always the outbreak will die down in due course after liberal applications of media hype.
*’Cover Your A**e’.
No doubt that the housing market has slowed in recent months, but in my opinion a crash seems unlikely,though the more people talk about a crash the more they will convince the public one is going to happen!
From a personal point of view i havent had a down valuation based purely on value in years. Retentions etc based on recommended works yes, but not anything beyond this. Maybe we price property correctly, maybe just lucky, but if Mr Quirk is stating 1 in 5 of Emoovs sales are getting down valued that suggests more of a problem in what Emoov are doing IMO.
Lastly if down valuations are going to happen frequently, a local high street agent is essential for keeping the market moving and for keeping sales together. With all respect to homeowners i dont fancy their chances when selling through PB, Emoov and a buyer contacts them directly stating a 10K down valuation has happened.
Blame the banks for lending . Surveyors shouldn’t be allowed to have an opinion. No one knows the future. #brokenSystem
The Property index should never have been taken away from the overall inflation target of 2%.
1 generation had 4 generations wealth. Not fair people..not fair.
Haha Bet that thumbs down was from a 65 year old.