Estate agents who deliberately mislead potential home buyers through the practice known as portal juggling are warned that they could be prosecuted and banned from the industry.
The warning, issued yesterday afternoon, is from industry regulator the National Trading Standards Estate Agency Team, and represents a major victory for a handful of independent agents and their supporters, adamant that the market has been skewed by portal juggling.
It comes after months of protests and huge amounts of evidence delivered by a handful of determined estate agents and allies, horrified at the practice and who have battled frustration after frustration to get their concerns even understood, much less acknowledged or dealt with.
Almost all the evidence has been seen by EYE. When we have asked questions of various parties, reactions have included legal threats and failures to comment. Or we have been told that the problem simply doesn’t exist, or that it is due to an IT issue.
Undoubtedly, some of those explanations are valid.
However, in a highly significant breakthrough which finally recognises the practice, NTSEAT yesterday confirmed that portal juggling is in breach of trading regulations and can be fraudulent.
Portal juggling involves the deliberate removal of properties on major property portals before relisting them to make them appear new on the market, thus putting them to the top of the list of new properties as well as triggering a possible new property alert to potential buyers.
NTSEAT said it has received complaints that some agents who may be struggling to sell a property are using this practice to mislead potential home buyers.
It confirmed that the practice is illegal and could lead to prosecution.
NTSEAT said that if an estate agent has relisted a property and described it as ‘new on the market’ (or implying it as such), or using relistings as a mechanism for falsely inflating sales statistics, this would constitute an offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs).
It warned that false representations made by an estate agent could also fall under the scope of the Fraud Act 2008.
James Munro, team leader at NTSEAT, said: “It is clear that portal juggling is a concern to many in the estate agency industry and we are today warning those estate agents involved in portal juggling that they may be breaking the law, which could lead to enforcement action from local Trading Standards authorities and prosecution.
“Estate agents and individual employees involved in this practice also face being issued with warning or prohibition orders if they have used misleading statements or made false representations about properties they are trying to sell.
“We will work closely with industry bodies to stop this unfair and misleading practice, which misleads prospective homebuyers and harms honest estate agents who conduct their business in a fair and professional manner.
“If you suspect an estate agent of portal juggling or spot anything suspicious on a major online portal, we urge you to report it to Citizens Advice on 03454 040506.”
NTSEAT is now working with the industry including the redress schemes, estate agency bodies, Trading Standards across the UK and the major property portals to stamp out portal juggling.
This will see guidance issued to the industry about the practice and steps taken to safeguard potential buyers.
Yesterday afternoon’s NTSEAT statement included quotes from Property Ombudsman Katrine Sporle and NAEA managing director Mark Hayward, among others.
Sporle said: “Manipulating internet portals (and any other channels of marketing) to give the impression a property is new to the market, when it is not, is simply misleading.”
Sean Hooker, of the Property Redress Scheme, said: “Agents who are tempted to inflate their number of instructions to lure unsuspecting customers to their doors, or advertise non-existent deals or offer properties they clearly cannot deliver, are cheating the public.
“It is poor practice, unfair and could ultimately be deemed illegal.
“If we get complaints of these nature not only will we come down hard on the perpetrators, we will be obliged to report the matter to NTSEAT for enforcement action.”
Comments (45)
It’s actually quite an easy fix for the portals. Just a relatively small bit of development work.
[New listing received]
[Has this property been listed for sale within the last 3 months with this same agent?]
[No = brand new listing, start ‘First Listed’ date as today, send to mailing lists]
[Yes = use original ‘First Listed’ date and property does not go out to email list]
Am I missing something?
The usual suspects always pop up…
This is good news. However what I don’t understand is why Rightmove would allow this to even get this far?
Hmmm… let’s have a think about that one…
How’s about the figure bandied about that around 10,000 properties are #portaljuggled every year? As an example, Rightmove quote approximately 120,000 property listings per month – so there you have getting towards 1% of the UK property stock potentially being bogus.
And what about all the ‘Page Views’ of those properties? The ‘Telephone/Email Leads’ generated?
All the above are statistics that, if I were in their shoes, I’d not be happy to lose when the expectation YoY is more, more, more (makes the increase in subs just that slightly bit easier for us poor saps of Agents to swallow…).
The City wouldn’t be happy…
Surely, ‘portal juggling’ would be much less likely, if the portals stopped the practice of stating how long a property had been on the market, or that it was ‘new on the market’. There would be little,k if any advantage to re-entering them.
Yes that is correct in essence – until you consider the facility within all of the main portals to see the list of properties in ‘Newest Listing First’ (or similar poncy phrase) order.
I always ask those who ‘dislike’ my posts to engage, so I will engage Eamonn.
Portal juggling* is, as we have been saying for some time now, illegal. It misleads consumers and disadvantages decent, law-abiding agents.
Q.E.D.
*Portal juggling takes its name from the early days practice of removing a property for a while whilst transferring it to another and then repeating the process. Much like a juggler does with his balls. I hope this now illuminates the naming of the unpleasant activity for you.
I only make this point because people are moaning that it took two years for it to be addressed by Trading Standards. I cant help thinking the name “portal juggling” hasn’t helped it. It hardly gives any credence to the problem. It sounds like something agents do to be better advantage on their competitor rather than the real issue of mis leading the public.. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable statement.
Thanks for explaining where the name comes from. I was correct first time.
Market a property?, with names like portal juggling you couldn’t market curry to a drunk head.
Well said Eamonn
There is a one word definition that might have got more attention sooner. FRAUD.
You can be assured, AI – that particular definition has been yelled from the rooftops from Day #1.
Eamonn
I can’t speak for Chris – don’t need to as he is perfectly able to do so himself and will be far more tactful and eloquent in any event.
Here’s my take on it…
‘Gaming’, as the portals call it (…and you have a problem with OUR name for it?!) is nothing new. It was there long before portals were even thought of.
Then, you would take a property off one week; re-list it the next – call it ‘NEW’ in the next couple of adverts. It was the ‘best’ way (actually – the ONLY way…) to keep a stale instruction when a vendor talked about withdrawing.
For good measure, Letraset a couple of trees into their photo in front of the looming pylon as well – caveat emptor and all that.
At the time, in order to call a property ‘New’ it must have been off-market for a minimum of eight weeks (at least that’s what I was told while being dragged through the ranks of Corporate Agency.
Then – we were all given a new toy to play with – t’interweb.
And look what it allows you to do. Freehand, wholesale pulling wool over the eyes of whoever you want to – for whatever agenda you have.
Our group came together as a result of one Tweet, from an Agent who may well not want to be named so I won’t who was frankly wazzed off with a competitor he’d noticed re-listing property after property, time and time again.
That competitor just happened to be a Call-Centre Agent.
And so the investigations began.
At the time I started collecting examples of certain Agents ‘gaming the system’ (just in case you like that better) for onward transmission to, among others, the relevant hosting portal, my own market was 100% unaffected by these actions.
Now – a handful of instructions giving them something like 2.7% of the total local market and 1.1% of the ‘Sold’ stock – they’re hardly giving me or anyone else sleepless nights – except maybe their clients… who are seeing ‘Sold’ boards going up all around them.
But evidencing the apparent wrongdoings of the few who make such a big thing of it that it’s easy to spot has highlighted the large number of other Agents – High-Street Corps and Independents alike – who seem to have taken the “if you can’t beat them, join them…” route.
I am currently sitting on 8800 files – that’s over 10Gb of data. Couldn’t tell you how many Agents – several hundred I reckon.
Whether or not you give a shizzle, I’ll expand a bit on the practice.
There are at least eight different identified forms (we argue as to whether one type is too closely related to another to give its own category) of #portaljuggle – and we already know what the ninth and tenth will be before they are even tried out by whichever perpetrator thinking they’ve invented it…!
Was my agenda one of competitive jealousy? Not even maybe. Nor, I would happily wager, was that of any of those who have pro-actively supported and contributed to what has turned into a year-long crusade for action – the first result of which you’ve read about in the article above.
There’s a long way to go – but the first few bites of the elephant have been taken.
Try some – you might like it! ;o)
Beautifully put
Who – ME?
That’s a first! Cheers, bud ;o)
Belated good news for estate agency. I can t help thinking two things.
A) “portal juggling”.
What a stupid a name…….. What wholly came up with Portal juggling? . No wonder it took two years for trading standards to look at it. Hardly sounds a critical or even a public problem calling it portal juggling. I guess calling it that was mainstream before many got to learn of it.
B) lets be real for a moment. lets move forward into the future.
Will this announcement really stop the practise? NO IT WONT! and deep down we all know it WONT, All The NTSEAT are going to able to do, is tell offenders please refrain from taking such steps before you get fined.
Big stock exchange listed agencies will take the heat, any pressure and any fines and end up saying, it was an unfortunate isolated incident”. This is because the cost of not being able to do ” portal juggle” is too expensive not too.
The only people able to police this practise is the portals themselves. And let’s face it, it’s hardly an big problem for them when agents provide them new fresh content that improves the SEO.
If you can’t beat them join the, if every agent today was en made load a massive load of properties and in the description write.
THIS LISTING IS IN PROTEST OF FALSE PROPERTIES LOADED ON RIGHTMOVE” they would soon stand up and police it.
How obvious are you making it that you yourself ‘portal-juggle’ Eamonn!!
Frown, Please read my post again. Im saying that this statement is nothing more than foreplay. Nothing news has changed. The only way to change it is too force the Portals .
If every agent was to load a load of obvious fake listings and in the description clearly state it was in protest then RM & Z would have to treat it more seriously
Actually I don’t portal Juggle. Im dead against it.
I CANT TYPE ON THE PHONE
MY POST SHOULD HAVE READ
If you can’t beat them join them?, if every agent today was en-mass too load of lots of properties and in the description write.
Eamonn
What would you have called it? Something that is descriptive; to the point, memorable and useable – as the Tw@tter campaign has proved beyond doubt.
It hasn’t taken Trading Standards two years – nowhere near that in fact. Just a lot of hard work from a group of individuals who have all pulled together to take steps improve the industry to get them to listen and realise the scale of the problem and the damage it can – and is – causing.
With regard to what will stop the practice – I think we all know the answer to that. US. And I mean the industry. Those that actually do something about it – thereby eating the elephant one small bite at a time. Those that report offenders to the portals (who WILL now have to do something about it – there’s no doubt about that), and who contact NTSEAT… ASA… TPO/PRS… NAEA… RICS… the list goes on.
It’s those that let it happen who are as bad as those who do it, frankly.
PeePee
I would have called it “Deceitful Property Listings” rather than Portal Juggling. My only point is I’M not in love with the name.
That’s different from being in love with the principle of getting it stamped out. I am struggling with people who are so hormonal that they cant see that. . Naming the practise “portal juggling” is, fairness, weak and benign. No doubt thought up by someone who wanted to sound cleverer than they really are.
As for other comments on stamping it out, I somewhat agree.. But here’s the real question that people are missing. Is the NTSEAT bark louder than its bite. Or more appropriately does the determinate of fines etc deter those smaller independent agencies rather than those faceless large corporates so heavily reliant on the process that are willing to take the heat and consequences. In other words the ends justifies the means.
deterrent NOT determinate
“No doubt thought up by someone who wanted to sound cleverer than they really are.”
Which leads me to think you know exactly who that person is and you’re simply trying to bait them.
Good luck with that.
? lost me on that comment
Your heads gone. .
Well… if that comment is genuinely lost on you, it’s best forgotten – innit.
And, for info, my head hasn’t moved a nanometer.
<…tees up smart@$$ comments as to exactly where it is currently located…>
<…tees up smart@$$ comments as to exactly where it is currently located…>
F…Earth are you talking about, Heads Gone…
PS I gave you a like not a dislike.
PS thanks, if that’s a hint – but I don’t count ‘Likes’.
They’re not usually a sign that the message is getting through to the right people.
PS thanks, if that’s a hint – but I don’t count ‘Likes’.
They’re not usually a sign that the message is getting through to the right people.
Great news to wake up to on holiday, and a HUGE thank you to PIE for helping with this campaign. Rightmove have permitted this practice to continue with some PLC level persistent offenders. Hopefully prosecutions will now follow.
This is excellent news for the industry and EYE is delighted to have played a small part in bringing it about.
This story is likely to get a lot of reads today so I am going to unashamedly ask that to celebrate the ‘victory’ you pop over to the ‘Catfest’ auction and place a bid for one of Julian O’Dell’s wonderful drawings. All proceeds are going to Macmillan Cancer Support. Please help us to help them.
Here is the link: http://www.propertyindustryeye.com/roll-up-roll-up-for-the-catfest-art-auction/
Email your bids to me: nick@propertyindustryeye.com
Shamless Salmon they should call you. But still for a great cause. Unfortunately my highest bid has already been beaten, significantly! I would have really liked to hand Paul McCartney in my living room 😉
*hang!
Your uncorrected first comment has brought a vision that I really could do without! :-0
You never know, if the eventual winner picks one of the other drawings we may well be able to broker a deal with Julian for you to buy the McCartney ‘by private treaty’.
Reading back both of them they sound pretty unsolicited! The corrected one sounds like capital punishment!
Oops, sorry Paul.
I don’t have any issue with anyone not liking something I may say in relation to EYE or the industry – or not liking me personally.But it is beyond my ability to fathom why an appeal for one of the most worthwhile of charitable causes should cause 3 dislikes. Funny old world.
Just had a marvellous bid of £500 from Kevin Hollinrake and team at Hunters.
Do keep those dislikes coming; they seem to be working rather well…
Excellent news – now enforce it please
Now for the next campaign
Can something please be done about agents who breach the Town and Country Planninv Act by multi-boarding – a huge problem in our area that our council have blatantly refused to deal with!!!!!!
Agree with that. Quite a lot of it goes on in our area. We used to have a local agent who acted as a ‘board policeman’ but since that stopped, no-one seems bothered.
So – pick up the baton that has been dropped, and run with it!
It’s good news. Well done to all who have campaigned to highlight this. Of course, trading standards resources are stretched so surely the portals support would be more effective in stopping this practice. It may extend further if it is shown that agents deliberately exaggerated market share to attract investors whether private or public. If so, the city watchdogs may look into this as well. Nevertheless, it’s a good result.
‘Sean Hooker, of the Property Redress Scheme, said: “Agents who… advertise non-existent deals or offer properties they clearly cannot deliver, are cheating the public.
“It is poor practice, unfair and could ultimately be deemed illegal.” ‘
Actually, it IS illegal, Mr Hooker. Should we be worried that apparently you’re unaware of that?
That’s going to upset at least one call centre agent!
It’s going to upset an awful lot of Agents – but, to be fair, I’m saddened to say many of them with swanky branches.
Only took two years of campaigning…
And it’s been worth every minute!