A couple who will be featuring in Sarah Beeny’s new C4 TV series about selling property online have told their local paper that they failed to sell with an estate agent.
The property in question is now with Housesimple, which charges from £95, and is up on Rightmove.
Rob and Sian Saunders, of Pen Y Ball, Flintshire, will be one of a dozen couples to be featured in the six-part documentary, due to go out in a prime time slot this autumn.
Rob said: “We used an estate agent for three months and it didn’t really work so we thought, as we do marketing for a living, we would market it ourselves by putting it on a web-based agent.”
The husband and wife team believe they made the right decision trying to sell their home themselves online, says the newspaper article.
It goes on to explain that their property still features on sites such as Rightmove but they do all the leg-work, meaning “massive savings”.
Rob added: “We would definitely recommend selling this way. It saves so much money and isn’t as complicated as it sounds.”
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/local-news/look-tvs-sarah-beeny-help-7398564
Comments (40)
I have info that actually the vendors provided the photos to the original agent. Considering the additional photos on Housesimple seem wider angle and of better quality it seems they are using the best and improving the rest! Professional marketeers no? Don't you High street agents realise that you just need to make a bit more effort on presentation? Either that or lower your price. To charge a premium you need to offer a premium product. It really is simple, come on stop acting like a bunch of old whingers and get back to improving your product rather than sitting leaving moody comments all day.
WOW! – the above comment scores TWO 'Likes'.
'Will B' has a fwend… 😉
Peewee you come across exactly like one of those high street agents that is causing this industry so many problems. Stop embarrasing yourself and do some work.
Peewee! Oh – I've NEVER heard THAT one before… how chucklesome! Actually – that's not true. Done before – several squillion times. Like you – it's boring.
"Stop embarrasing yourself and do some work." Erm… pray tell me – HOW, exactly, can an ANONYMOUS poster "embarrass" him- or herself? Congratulations – you have just passed the Utter Dullardship entry examination with flying colours.
Before you relaunch into sticks and stones mode – trust me, chum – I've been called all the names under the sun by people WAY bigger; WAY better and WAY cleverer than you. you don't even touch the sides.
But you DO seemingly get your rocks off by 'Liking' your own posts. Speaks volumes…
Beeny has scored a spectacular own goal with this surely. Its obviously going to be anti agent and pro online but ironically she'l be the only one who wont be able to use it for marketing material. I bet that bloke with the *** chin cant wait for this to air.
"Beeny has scored a spectacular own goal with this surely."
wardy – the question being will she 'do a Balotelli' with her shirt to celebrate, I wonder…? 😉
Bluerr? Blurr? weerp? What is the correct onomatopoeic phrase for a diaphram tightening reaction ?
In MY case, in reference to said act from Ms Beeny, the phrase would be Zzzzzzzzzz.
Sorry – my boat the lady doth NOT setteth sail forthwith…
Shame about the excessive number of poor quality, out-of-focus, badly lit, narrow angle photos that do not do justice to the property not to mention the many typos and phrases that a decent agent would not use to remain compliant with the Consumer Protection Act 2008 guidelines.
It is time that the Portals and these cheap self-help listing companies were held more responsible for ensuring listings were compliant with these legal requirements that agents have to follow. Too many amateurs who think they can do an agent's job better fall foul of the law and apparently get away with it.
Looks a nice property that said and should sell if properly priced
"Shame about the excessive number of poor quality, out-of-focus, badly lit, narrow angle photos that do not do justice to the property…and phrases that a decent agent would not use to remain compliant with the Consumer Protection Act 2008 guidelines."
Interesting comment, considering that, according to wilko's post above, the original High Street Agent who marketed the property initially has stated they are "…naffed off that the online agent copied their marketing and used their pics"
There will never be a time when on-line, non-full-service agents dominate the estate agency industry, no matter how cheap they are, UNLESS the general public fall out of love with the existing no-sale, no-fee standard model. Over the years, many have tried to introduce a pay-up-front service (including me) which can obviously be offered for less than the no-sale, no-fee service but the simple fact is that the vast majority of home owners are simply not willing to pay for the service unless they get a result. Paying for a couple of months advertising on the internet does not guarantee a genuine buyer will be found so there is a cost risk to the seller. It is fruit machine thinking – you puts your money in and you takes your chance – but clearly it will work for some. Good estate agents bring so much more to the table than just advertising but it costs money to provide a superior service and so the price is always going to be higher. I believe there is a place in the UK market for many types of estate agency model but the cheaper brands will always attract the type of clients that I don't really want, so I'm happy. Let Beeny do her worst – she will never deter the clients who appreciate proper professional advice and who are willing to pay for the best service delivered personally by experienced local agents.
"Let Beeny do her worst – she will never deter the clients who appreciate proper professional advice and who are willing to pay for the best service delivered personally by experienced local agents."
I hope you are right, but I fear that there are a lot of sellers who trust her with regard to property matters, due to her time on property related TV programmes. She will have her "presenter" hat on and the watching public will be unaware of her vested interests behind the scenes, which is a worry.
I concur. With so many alternative presenters in their stable, Beeny shouldn't have been given this gig.
You see, wilko – we CAN and DO agree on SOME matters, mon ami…! 😉
Excellent post Robin!
Good luck Surrey 1, I will look forward to you supporting our side of the debate.
Already shot it. Was asked nothing about high st v online, just to value a property. I tried to shoehorn some context in there, but all rather out of my hands. I don't have spiky hair, an orange face or an over sized tie knot so I did what I could for us 🙂
In my view and opinion this stinks of a stitch up…Couple put their house on the market at way above what the local agents valued it at (not mentioned) then had the cheek to say the agent couldn't sell it and then drop the price massively to go online……they commented how "simple" the process is!!!!!!!……Well uploading a picture of a property to the internet IS simple…..but they don't elaborate the fact that this is ALL you get for less than £100!!!……..As I've said so many times before RM and Z should BAN these companies from selling listings and protect their members like they originally promised to do….Bring on OTM.
But, wilko, 'your view' is simply that – YOUR view.
1. You have NO proof whatsoever that the couple originally marketed the property at ONE PENNY MORE than advised by their Agent.
2. They apparently reduced from £325k to £299k – a reduction of 8%. Hardly "massive" – considering one of The AM Collective 'oop here advocate a minimum TEN PERCENT reduction to vendors if not SSTC within a couple of months.
3. "OTM" ain't gonna change SQUAT, matey, because FSBO/Passive Intermediaries/Online/'Hybrid' Estate Agents and whatever else gets chucked into the funnel of the Great Sausage Machine we inhabit is here to stay (however rocky their – and our – journey proves to be…) thanks to the wisdom of HM Government – NOT RM/Z. Anyone who believes OTM can or will "change" things, is, in my opinion, sadly deluded.
Or, brainwashed.
Or, engaged in brainwashING.
Tick whichever box suits you best, matey.
"But, wilko, 'your view' is simply that – YOUR view"
Thanks for clarifying that…a really important observation.
Always a pleasure… never a chore, mon ami! 😉
Come on, wilko – surely you have some comment on the REAL material contained in the post? You're not just resigning yourself to accepting MY alternative view, are you…?
1. I do actually have proof. I RM + d and spoke to the previous agent, Tate Rowlands in Flintshire, they confirmed that they valued significantly less and had recommended a price reduction, they were also naffed off that the online agent copied their marketing and used their pics.
2, 8% reduction in this market is massive as far as I'm concerned…If you feel it is an insignificant amount then I don't think I would be too happy with you valuing my house at the moment. The AM person you refer to re the 10%…That is incorrect as far as I'm concerned as no one can say a blanket 10% off is what is required. All cases are different.
3. "OTM aint gonna change squat" may I borrow your crystal ball, will it predict the price of gold next year as well?
There now, all points covered so you can tick me off and move onto the next poster on your list who needs to reply to you.
Ahhh, wilko… I knew you'd come good in the end, mon ami… 😉
Okay – here goes.
1. IF said Agent (please note for the record that I am NOT questioning YOUR comment here…) valued said property "significantly less", then WHY did they agree to market at what then would have been an unrealistic price?
2. "8% reduction in this market is massive as far as I'm concerned…"
We concur again. Good, innit? 😉
"If you feel it is an insignificant amount then I don't think I would be too happy with you valuing my house at the moment." Did I say it was "insignificant"? I don't think so. My current average differential between Asking (and that is ORIGINAL Asking – not 'market adjusted'…) and SSTC is -1.9% (last 30 recorded sales).
"The AM person you refer to re the 10%…That is incorrect as far as I'm concerned…" Sorry you don't believe me – but then you don't know the person or the company as I (and its' other competitors) do.
3. "…may I borrow your crystal ball, will it predict the price of gold next year as well?"
Okay – allow me to ask you a couple more questions. Firstly, do you agree that RM & Z AIN'T GOING AWAY anytime soon? Secondly, do you really believe that the problems you refer to are going away any time soon either?
Lastly – how far into the future do you want me to predict?
At this moment in time, matey – from where I'm sitting, at least – the only 'future' we need to be concerned about is 2/1/15 and what happens in the VERY near future beyond.
I answered 1. in my post.
dave_d – sorry – you've lost me on that one. Are you referring to my ORIGINAL (1.) or the latter (1.)? Or, for that matter to wilko's (1.)?
to PBee further responses;
1. Do you refuse to put properties on the market if the seller wants to initially try a higher figure than your valuation?
2."hardly massive" I read to believe that you actually don't think it is massive. You're right to say that you didn't say it was insignificant but in the absence of you not stating how you rate 8% overvalue. "hardly massive" is indicative that you don't think it anywhere near as bad as I do.
" Sorry you don't believe me – but then you don't know the person or the company as I (and its' other competitors) do.". I actually said that the 10% scenario was incorrect….I don't know (or care) who said it (or who they "support")….It is someones' personal opinion and, in my view that opinion it is totally incorrect, which is what I said (and still think it's nonsense!). I don't recall saying I didn't believe you!
3.Rm and Z won't go away…I've never said that. What I've always maintained is that when "on the market" launch they will be a fresh alternative for "high st agents" to offer sellers. With significant ammounts of stock (and £millions in revenue") coming away from RM and Z it must make a difference/change….how could it not?
I know you state "it won't change SQUAT" but I can't see how you can state that…..unless you disagree with the facts that a sizeable chunk of stock IS coming off R and Z and that the existing portals will lose £millions in revenue?.
With regard to "problems" going away….If I can offer "on the market" and say "rightmove" initially do you really believe that you , as a fellow pro agent, are going to get the swing from the same vendor to put on with you because you can offer Zoopla as your "extra"?
Sorry to be/sound sadly deluded(as far as you're concerned) but change is happening, Jan 2015 and that is a fact. Whatever you say or believe.
wilko, matey… "Sorry to be/sound sadly deluded(as far as you're concerned)…" NO – you've got that wrong BIG style. I gave you three choices – I said anyone believing were EITHER 'deluded', 'brainwashED', or 'brainwashER' – YOU have chosen to be 'deluded'! 😛
Anyway… responses to yours:
1. Yes I have – and will again on many occasions, no doubt. Most recently two weeks ago. Let the competition who chant the Numbers Game mantra better than any Corporate I know (…and are AM/OTM Gold Members…) have them. It'll never sell. Sorry – there's that crystal ball again. It PROBABLY will never sell. I'll let you know if it does – but don't hold yer breath… I'm certainly not.
2. Blimey – you've given me a stonker of a brainache deciphering the first bit! Let me (re)state for the record something I have banged on about wherever I have followed ( maybe that should read 'stalked'…;) ) Ros for the last five or so years, both as an Agent and during the period I wasn't strictly in the sense but still cared passionately enough about the industry to force my opinions upon poor readers – "Overvaluing" is a curse upon our profession. Those that practice it should not be practicing at all. The question (and dilemma) is – where is the line between "acting in the vendor's best interests", and "humping the val figure to get the instruction"? I know "the answer" to that question; YOU know "the answer" – and I will bet that every one of those who arrives at the figure they give the vendor by method #2 knows "the answer" also – and that every "answer" will be different. Vendors where I am are lucky – if they ask four Agents for an appraisal – they'll get at least five different figures to choose from! Tell me it's so different where you are, matey. Please. By the way, I take on board that you weren't questioning the validity of my statement – sorry if I picked you up wrong. You will no doubt have noticed my hissy-fit last week with Paul H – I take exception when someone seemingly challenges my ethics, morals or motives. I absolutely agree with you that "no one can say a blanket 10% off is what is required. All cases are different." (Unless, of course, the initial directive is to ramp the val by ten percent to get the board up…OR the knowledge that a ten percent reduction will make the buyers flock in – even if it means underselling the property a bit…)
3. Okay… you're of course correct – things ARE going to change come 2/1/15. But only SOME things. Not ALL things. I reiterate that on 3/1/15, RM&Z, FSBO/Passive Intermediaries/Online/'Hybrid' Estate Agents, Uncle Tom Cobbley and all will still be there – still all mahoosive pains in our rear quarters… and won't be showing the slightest symptoms of galloping terminal illness.
And you/me/we will STILL be there with them, in one way or another… barring ONE that is, of course.
"…do you really believe that you , as a fellow pro agent, are going to get the swing from the same vendor to put on with you because you can offer Zoopla as your "extra"?"
Matey – I can assure you quite categorically on this – you will NEVER hear me namedropping a portal to get an instruction. THAT would be admitting that I have NOTHING to offer the customer.
To you, mon ami 😉
Is there not a conflict of interest with Beeny doing a programme about for sale by owner websites & online agency when she runs a website that does just that? Is this not worth a referral to Ofcom?
That was rather my thought. However, after assurances it would be a balanced programme my MD kindly put me forward to be on it. I'm dreading it, saying anything without editorial control seems like a bad idea.
Just had a look at their property on Rightmove Plus – I find it interesting that they felt the need to drop it £25,000 when changing to housesimple…
"We used an estate agent for three months and it didn’t really work"
"You mean the estate agent came to your home and advised you what the property was really worth.. against better judgement and your own ego you decided to put it on for 25,000 more than the market value… after 3 months you received no viewings and then blamed the high street agent.."
Not heard this story before…
The makeover one with Andrew Winter used to be much the same. Ten minutes of looking a swirly carpets, the garden gnome collection and the bar in the living room, 15 minutes of watching the **** get thrown out and everything get painted white, 2 seconds of the words "price adjustment", hey presto, 4 minutes 48 seconds of self congratulation for selling it.
I suspect the 'devil is in the detail' on this one. My colleague tried to get Tepilo to value his mother's bungalow. They e-mailed a land registry based estimate!
How many sales have been destroyed by seller dealing direct with buyer? DIY is a great method – for some.
You did not sell your property after three months…….IN THIS MARKET. Either you were too adventurous with your price or you made the wrong choice in agent. Either way we can all see where Sarah Beeny is going with this programme.
It's a pleasure to actually be able to concur with you here on EYE, Paul H! 😉
I concur with mostly everything that you say on here PeeBee.
Erm… isn't that a dangerous statement considering my stubborn refusal to accept that "Resistance is futile", Paul H? 😉
The main difference is that I have acknowledged that there is a problem with the duopoly and want to so something about it. From what I can tell you think everything is just hunky dory with Rightmove and Zoopla and are happy with the status quo.
Oooh, Paul H – you're trying to make me sweat on this one, ain't ya?! Not doing too bad a job of it either… 😉
Tell me – when was the last time that you put your Fees up? I don't mean how much have they GONE UP as a result of price rises in your market – I mean black and white INCREASE OF COMMISSION/FIXED FEE RATE?
The portals raped you at the beginning of the year. Maybe you're on a fixed rate for your gas & electric – but whatever – be prepared for an increase. Business rates – how much more this year from last? I suppose the easier way to phrase would have been "what 'cost element' to your business HASN'T risen in the last twelve months?" My guess will be 'your wage'.
Cost is a *****, matey – I'm right there as your wingman on that one. But aren't you simply replacing ONE cost with another? The cost you are replacing MUST have been 'worth' spending over the years – as a businessman (I note last week you referred to AM Members as 'entrepreneurs' – so you may wish to substitute one with another there…) I will credit you with sufficient nous NOT to pay a portal charge for no return on investment (either quantifiable or perceived…) – but you are abandoning that 'safety' for an unknown quantity. That takes nads, and I admire them – strictly in the metaphoric sense, of course… 😉 . I have said it before, mate – the early bird may well get the worm – but it is ALWAYS the second mouse that gets the cheese.
Squeak to you tomorrow, bud… 😉
"The main difference is that I have acknowledged that there is a problem with the duopoly…"
Who hasn't…?
" From what I can tell you think everything is just hunky dory with Rightmove and Zoopla and are happy with the status quo."
Far from it, mon ami. NEVER have I said, nor even hinted, at that.
Then what do you plan to do about it PeeBee, your fees will not stop going up, surely your plan is not to lie down and take the annual rent increase every single year?
OOPS – sorry – reply posted two or three above, and not here. You'll have to scroll up a bit – you certainly don't want me to repost it! Bleedin' site layout – you don't know where you'll end up!! 😉