Do I have to pay EA

A

adm1

Registered User
Messages
43
Last year I put a property on the market. The chosen estate agent was dreaful - he did things such as, told us lies about the amount of viewing, which we caught him out on. Arrange appointments for viewers and didn't tell us or turn up himself, forget to advertise it on particular dates. he was eventually replaced with an equally bad EA, however she really just lacked experience more than anything. So we decided to sack them and no have someone else selling it for us, its still no sold yet. This is one of the big estage agents in dublin by the way.

We have since recieved a bill from estate agent 1 looking for payment for advertising cost etc. Do i have to pay this? They sent me a contract but it was never signed by either party. I feel really annoyed with the mess they made of dealing with our sale, they really made no effort and from what i can see its a badly organised office, i personally don't think i should give them a penny?
 
Perhaps you should put these points to the estate agents themselves in a letter?
 
Legally I'd imagine you are liable for any third party outlay such as advertising costs. Any of their own costs for advertising ( if any) you could try to negotiate.
 
I think you have to pay for what was agreed , even if not in writing . You probably agreed a task ( advertise +take calls+ show the house to all interested parties ) , he did not do this task .... he wasted your time ... he damaged the street cred of your property ( been knocking about for a while!) .The adverts are of no use to you later on. The only purpose of the Ads was to attract purchasers to his phone # , to be followed up by visits to the house . You probably had a meeting where you discussed when to advertise and how he would notify you and access the house , the matters are linked .
pjq
 
I wouldn't pay. If you went to a hairdresser and they made a mess of your hair you wouldn't feel obliged to fork out. You engaged them to act as an intermediary in the selling of your home and they were completely incompetent.

Make sure and write them a detailed letter outlining why you feel you shouldn't pay - be very specific in your references. Ask for a response from them justifying their desired payment. I wouldn't say anything about "not signing anything". They sent you a letter indicating the terms of the contract and you never mentioned you were unhappy with the terms so there was an agreement in principle.

I'd take it from there. Chances are if their office is a disorganised mess, they will simply let the letter slide and not bother you again.
 
The OP is not referring to the agent's fees, but the marketing costs incurred on their behalf.
Yes they have to pay.
Please be aware that not paying for marketing fees incurred on your behalf can result in legal action against you.
 
Please be aware that not paying for marketing fees incurred on your behalf can result in legal action against you.
Click to expand...
But realistically , he may threaten legal action ( and EA are well able to bluff and probably have friendly solicitors who will send threatening letters) , but the bottom line is its always cheaper to settle out of court where there is no risk of a by-line in the local newspaper.
pjq
 
The OP engaged the services of an EA to market their property on their behalf.
The EA advertised and marketed the property on their behalf.
The property did not sell.
The EA wants to reclaim the costs of advertising the property on behalf of the vendor.
The OP will probably have to pay for these costs.
If the OP is disputing the costs, they should liaise directly with the EA in relation to their concerns. The fact that the property didn't sell through the EA is immaterial, the marketing costs still have to be paid. The vendor was aware that these marketing costs were incurred on their behalf whether or not they signed terms. They were advised of the terms and didn't stop the EA marketing the property.
Suggesting that the EA might be prepared to settle out of court isn't answering the OP's question.
 
you've got to agree these things with E.A. in advance. ie. agree that if property does not sell there will be no charges, if I get a buyer myself, no charges etc. etc. If E.A. does not agree with these simple conditions , move on to another E.A. After all, there are plenty of them ................
 
He did not do a professional job and lied to cover up,
he did things such as, told us lies about the amount of viewing, which we caught him out on. Arrange appointments for viewers and didn't tell us or turn up himself, forget to advertise it on particular dates
Click to expand...
He wasted the marketing and advertising spend when he did not turn up for appointments , this is not brand awareness advertising , if the follow-up is not adequate the advert is wasted .
The bottom line here is that somebody is going to be out of pocket for the advertising spend ... and mo3art is very determined that it wont be the unprofessional EA .
pjq

disclaimer - nothing in the above should be construed to imply that "Estate Agent" is a profession .
 
I'm pointing out the facts of the matter. I already stated that if the OP was unhappy with the advertising charges the EA was now holding them liable for then they should talk directly to the EA and negotiate this.
 
bear i mind Mo3art is an EA or very much alligned towards them.

As far as the legal terms Im surprised you are advised that the fees should be paid. Surely the incompetence of the EA terminates any contract ( paper or otherwise ) as the marketing costs were squandered by the EAs incompetence.

The other point of just saying you are not going to pay should also work. Its an overhaed of the EA trade.. 1 in every x properties goes this way, they often just pass the cost on to their suppliers.
Do you really think the Sign guy ( who may be in house salaried any way ) is gonna argue too much with his main client similarly with any other fees.

No EA manager with any cop on is gonna try and expend too much effort trying to get ad costs from you if they know that you can prove poor performance and subsequent sacking. The letter is often just a mail shot any way....Certainly any EA I have spoken too ( when talking as a friend etc with no EA hat on will say the same ) as I know a few.
Just name n shame em if they do!
 
Originally posted by mo3art I'm pointing out the facts of the matter.
Click to expand...
Mo3art , What irritated me is that in your list of "facts" you omitted the facts of "deception" and "carelessness" on the part of your fellow EA .
pjq
 
I posted a similar thread to this a while back. The only difference is we never had any kind of paperwork from the EA or anything. Anyway after I sold it myself for 30,000 more than he was trying to force us to take and a few months of his frustrating incompetance, the EA e-mailed me pretending to be friendly and just wondering had we sold, stupidly I told him what price we got. He sent us two letters to the address of the house we sold (both redirected only because we paid the An Post redirection charges). The last one was received about 3 months ago. 200 euro for advertising and signs. My OH said no way are we paying them, I was unsure. Anyway so far no comeback. The EA caused us months of stress and worry and I did most of his work for him. If I had not had the confidence, I would have settled for 30,000 less than I got myself so why should I (or you, in your case) pay for his incompetance.

He's just chancing his arm trying to get the money back, he should be apologising for the mess he made of things never mind trying to squeeze money out of us. Not sure if we've heard the last of it yet though.
 
Firstly I'm not an EA, although I do work with them, sorry if that's confusing you.

Secondly I'm not ignoring the fact that the EA was bad/negligent/failed to sell the property.

The costs of marketing a property are there whether the property sells or not. When a client agrees to market a property with an EA, the marketing costs should be set out for them and the client is liable for the marketing costs incurred on their behalf. They are normally agreed before the marketing campaign commences.

While the OP didn't sign the terms they received from the EA, it is likely (although bear in mind I'm going on limited information) that the marketing expenses were laid out in these terms or told to them in advance of the campaign. In any case, by allowing the EA to market the property - place signboards out front, advertise in press, place the property on myhome.ie/daft.ie - the client had some form of agreement with the EA, verbal or otherwise. Lets face it, if you don't want your property marketed, you're not going to allow anyone to put boards outside the house or stick it up on a website.

It is normal for an EA to charge the marketing expenses in the event that the property fails to sell or the client decides to change EA. This should also be set out in the terms the client receives.

To go back to the OP - the OP feels that they have justification that the EA didn't act properly on their behalf and did a bad job. They did remove their property from the EA books and the property is still on the market. If the OP feels that the marketing costs should not be paid by them, they should discuss this with the EA, express their dissatisfaction and explain why they do not want to pay the marketing costs.

You should be aware that many EA will bill for marketing expenses in the event that properties are taken off their books and/or do not sell. They may also bill for fees if a property sells through another estate agents in the period that they have sole agency rights or if the client sells privately when they have sole agency rights. Many EA will also chase a debtor who is not paying fees/expenses through solicitors and ultimately the courts if they feel it is warranted. I'm not saying that it's an acceptable manner to treat your clients, just that this is how it works for an EA.

In my opinion, marketing costs should be clearly set out in advance for the client and written acceptance of this should be obtained from the client before marketing of any property starts. I'm aware that many commercial EA companies in Ireland get marketing monies in advance and will not start a campaign without signed terms and marketing monies to avoid any confusion. Another way to tackle this would be to ask an EA to take on a "no foal, no fee" marketing campaign where the marketing costs are only payable in the event that a property sells. I'm aware of at least 3 EA who are now operating in this manner.
 
Well i have spoken to some friends in the legal profession and they have all advised me to ignore this request from the EA, As far as i'm concerned they did squander all marketing money and they didn't play fair with use in any way. They were an utter joke of an office
 
adm1 said:
Well i have spoken to some friends in the legal profession and they have all advised me to ignore this request from the EA
Click to expand...
Try getting them to put that advice in writing on a solicitor/client basis and see what they say.
 
At the very least, you need to let the EA know in writing the reasons that you are disputing their costs. You also want to get an acknowledgement that they have received your letter.
 
Well i have spoken to some friends in the legal profession and they have all advised me to ignore this request from the EA,
Click to expand...

To be fair to the OP what we are given here is a very short and incomplete representation of what happened. Perhaps if we knew the full story we might have a different view. However my view, based solely on what the OP has said, is that the Estate agent is entitled to recoup third party outlay- and if he took a case to court it is likely he would win that case. If there was any element of fees for the EA himself then that could be arguably defended on the basis of the bad performance of their duties. But, as I said, that's my view based solely on the little information in this thread.

By the way I have seen EAs pursue former clients for fees in the district court plenty of times, though again, if the OP has a sorry tale to tell, it might be that this particular EA would think twice before airing it in public.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top