A complainant to the Advertising Standards Authority about savings claims made by an online agent has said he is dissatisfied with the outcome.
Two weeks ago, we reported that the ASA had informally resolved the complaint.
The organisation has refused to reopen it despite protests from the complainant – who is not an estate agent.
He got in touch with EYE to say that he still believes the public could be misled.
His original complaint revolved around a claim on the eMoov site which said: “Trust us to sell your home . . . £4,200 average saving for sellers.”
The challenge was as to whether this could be substantiated.
The ASA went to eMoov with the concerns raised and eMoov added some wording to clarify the source of its claim. Satisfied with this, the ASA closed the case.
The claim on eMoov’s site now reads: “We’re achieving 99% of asking price per sale compared to 95% by the typical UK estate agent (Hometrack). £4,200 average saving. (*eMoov Seller Survey June 2015, 40 respondents)”
The site also says: “We’ve sold over 4,500 homes since our launch in 2010, with a total property value of over £1 billion.”
Yesterday, the complainant said: “I feel that the savings claims made by eMoov are very misleading to the consumer and don’t reflect fairly on the majority of high street agents throughout the country.
“While the source of the ‘savings’ has now been added to the eMoov website, I feel that the prominence and thrust of the savings advertised are still misleading to consumers like myself.”
In asking the ASA to reopen the case, the complainant said: “The claim ‘£4,200 average savings for sellers’ is based upon a sample of just 0.88% of the properties that they have sold.
“It therefore begs the question what are the average savings for the majority, ie the other 99.12% of the sales that the company have made?
“Surely the saving made by the majority rather than the few should be the ‘headline’ figure in any claims made. Surely Emoov would be able to calculate an ‘average saving’ based on the full 4,500 properties that they had sold?”
He also said that no evidence had been provided of the survey methodology: “For all I know, the surveys could have been sent to the 40 highest priced properties sold by Emoov in the first half of 2015. This would then obviously skew the results that they could then display.”
He also said that while the source of the claim has now been identified, he felt this has been “buried away” at the bottom of the home page.
Finally, he told the ASA that the £4,200 average saving for sellers was “far removed” from any saving he could make on his own property.
He said: “The average fee that I found when I was visited by three estate agents in my area to value my house was 1.5% inc VAT.
“It is therefore not possible for me to benefit from the level of savings suggested based on a valuation of my property of £125,000.
“On a like for like basis the possible savings for myself by using eMoov versus a local estate agent would be £880.”
In response, the ASA said that eMoov would be asked to make a further clarification, that the £4,200 savings related to the first half of this year.
However, the ASA said eMoov had qualified its claim properly and consumers were unlikely to be misled.
It also said that eMoov had not claimed to save consumers money in a particular geographical area. Instead, it was a claim about average savings.
We invited Russell Quirk, CEO of eMoov, to comment.
He said: “Of course, the £4,200 seller saving applies to our average sale price and includes the vat element as is payable by the consumer. Our average sale price is £269,000. This, multiplied by the average as attested to by the person in question is indeed £4,200 after our fee at £595 (inc vat) is subtracted) .
“Obviously, this saving varies based on the sale price of each individual seller’s property. So whilst a £100,000 property will save less, a £1m property will save much more. That’s why we use an average.
“We’re grateful to this individual in allowing us to clarify the claim, and as per the rightful decision by the ASA to close this matter without further recourse, we are satisfied that the statement made is honest and accurate. As are the ASA it seems.”
Comments (21)
ANYWAY… to Mr Quirk and his Law of Averages once again…
One of his employees has had a lightbulb moment – and decided to post the following on Tw@tter:
“Some really interesting stats here – 56% of people find dealing with their Agent the most stressful part of moving!”
Unfortunately, same bright spark was reminded by some nasty-pasty ankle chewer that, by her own CEO’s Law of Averages, 56% of people dealing with eMoov find them the most stressful part of moving!
Ya just can’t have it both ways – can ya? #glasshouses #stones
Bless… ;o)
The dudes throwing ‘average’ around like he spoke to my wife. Either that or he just read my Tinder profile
Ok, so we can all get goofy with stats but Russ’ tells are real obvious, like shoulders too broad for a girl obvious. Jeez bad clicks ain’t worth the price to any business but dude here’s the thing. When you’re heading up a faux business (with other people’s money) so binary it’s pretty much an augmented reality then any click will do. Awesome Russ. Just awesome.
Good old RICS! I remember some 10 years ago releasing keys to a surveyor instructed to provide a home buyer’s report.
The property was a Victorian 2 bedroom terraced house. Keys came back some hour or so later with the feedback that all is ok. Problem being that he missed the significant movement in the main bedroom suggesting that the property needed underpinning!
Still as a mere estate agent who am I to criticise?
“We’re achieving 99% of asking price per sale compared to 95% by the typical UK estate agent (Hometrack)
Its time to stop giving hometrack your numbers (for free) especially if the data is going to be used against you.
Every agent should read and understand the contents/implications of the terms and conditions of all their service suppliers and wonder exactly who “associated 3rd parties are”. It isn’t right to single out Hometrack when service suppliers trusted with data are a more prevalent source of data distribution and authorised (by trusting naivety/ complacency) data phishing.
Agree, we stop a long time ago. We give nothing out to anybody anymore. Even surveyors get turned away.
Quite possibly the worse use of English you will see today. Must read my posts back before posting in the future!
Give me chance!
Quote from a letter in yesterdays Evening Standard.. ‘We need to separate the trustworthy, professionally qualified valuation services offered by surveyors from unqualified salesmen at estate agents’…..I agree with ‘Smile Please’.. give no info to all the leaches that drink from our businesses while universally slagging us of or trying to put us out of business.
Problem is that is an RICS view portraying all, including NAEA to be unqualified. That comment is knocking anyone who isn’t RICS. It actually misses the point entirely that one does not need to be a surveyor of cracks and bulges, slump or heave to analyse demand push or pull.
For me I don’t have an agent in my town that’s not the market leader. Claims like this exist all over the place . The shampoo ads that have added sthrengthilium and 70 % agree it’s better based of a survey of 12 people . Truth is is people are gullible enough to believe massive numbers than I don’t want to deal with them . The general public aren’t idiots and know what’s what , sometimes claims of £5000 savings actually help my case when I’m asking for 1% of an average 3 bed semi
My colleague received an eMoov e-flyer the other day with opening line of I am writing to introduce you to eMoov – the UK’s best estate agent’. Quite some claim, which i’m sure is backed up by even more tenuous evidence * ‘says my mum when surveyed on October 1st 2015’!
40 sales for your website headline grabber all around the £269,000 average Mr Quirk. Who’d have thought it?
“He said: “Of course, the £4,200 seller saving applies to our average sale price and includes the vat element as is payable by the consumer. Our average sale price is £269,000. This, multiplied by the average as attested to by the person in question is indeed £4,200 after our fee at £595 (inc vat) is subtracted) .”
So… just to confirm what’s being said here –
The average price of ALL properties handled by the COMPANY (reportedly around 100 instructions a week I seem to recall Mr Quirk stating recently…) is £269,000 – thus the average saving is £4200 – yes?
Okay… I’m absolutely fascinated that the “40 respondents” to the eMoov survey – insignificant number though it is, also appear to fit that magical £269,000 average figure (otherwise the claim would be incorrect – wouldn’t it?).
Sheesh – what are the chances of THAT coincidence happening – huh?
Well done, Mr Quirk – The Law of Averages is clearly your best friend… innit?
Come along, Mr Jury – you know that simply ‘Disliking’ my comments doesn’t carry any weight with readers!
DEBATE!
My guess is Stephen is in the office and has confiscated all the keyboards.
Office, keyboards? Like all good marketeers, I’m in soho being creative and drinking lattes
Dressed as who, D’Artagnan, Porthos?
I’m right though aren’t I? that post got snuck out before you were up, about and in control.
Complainant ‘is not an estate agent’. But is a property publication in Lincolnshire that is funded by ad revenue from high street estate agents. Vested interests indeed…
It does not matter who the complainant is, what interest they do or don’t have, it is not mathematically possible to average save £4200 on an average fee of £2400.