Selling a house, just the one estate agent?

I

inittowinit

Registered User
Messages
5
I'm selling a house, for the first time. My peak-of-the-boom house will probably just about come close to what I paid for it with luck. I have been advised by a friend to have at least 2 or maybe 3 estate agents as that will help maximise the price. I would have thought that having 1 estate agent would have been normal. Any thoughts on this? Is there a danger that a single estate agent might not pass on bids so as to keep the property for a preferred client? I know these are noob questions, thanks for the patience!
 
More than one agent would be v unusual and most would run a mile from the idea as it could cause all sorts of confusion.

Nope never heard of a agent keeping a house for a preferred bidder. One way of making sure is to get a pal to make a offer which they will of course withdraw once the agent has disclosed it to you…..

Go with a popular agent but I would suggest ringing a few enquiring about houses on their books and see what you think of them. Some are incredibly lazy……
 
Thanks for the reply. What you said about the more than one agent thing makes a lot of sense. I'm thinking you are right about trying to avoid a lazy agent being important. They will all have similar reach with the internet, it's who makes the effort re photos and viewings and customer service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jim
I think you have to sign a contract with the estate agents so you might end up with extra fees - they usually charge for advertising in addition to the % fee.
 
There's a few previous AAM threads on estate agents which you might find of interest. Not sure if any of them are about using 2 agents.
 
Have a walk around your area or check online and see who is the most popular EA. Might be worth asking some of them who have sold houses in the area recently if they have any underbidders. In my case, last time I sold a house, we used the same EA who had sold a house across the road(a better house in fairness) and he sent the underbidders over to us and between all of us, we did a deal on fees that suited everyone
 
An agent isn't going to sign up with you if there is 2-3 other agents. They get paid for selling your house. They could put in loads of work only for another agent to get another €500 and they end up with nothing.

Add in how confusing it would be for any particular buyers with 3 separate ads for the same property.

And how are you going to keep track of the bids? I contact EA 1 and he tells me there's a bid already in, and I need to bid €210,000. Meanwhile, agent 2 tells me that €205,000 will have me at the top of his pile.

There are agents who will sell the property for a fixed fee. My sister used one recently and was very happy with them. With a market as buoyant as this one, the market will take care of the bids.
 
inittowinit said:
I'm selling a house, for the first time. My peak-of-the-boom house will probably just about come close to what I paid for it with luck. I have been advised by a friend to have at least 2 or maybe 3 estate agents as that will help maximise the price. I would have thought that having 1 estate agent would have been normal. Any thoughts on this? Is there a danger that a single estate agent might not pass on bids so as to keep the property for a preferred client? I know these are noob questions, thanks for the patience!
Click to expand...
Don't beat yourself up over it. Seems you have a 1.2% tracker.
If your mortgage was 400k in 2007 your total interest paid for the past 15 year would have been under €75,000.

If you waited and bought in 2011 and only needed a 300,000 mortgage, you would have paid min 60k in rent for the 4 years and also about €140,000 in interest based on PTSB average of 3.8% since 2011.

In above scenario the 2007 peak of market purchase was cheaper than the 2011 purchase @ 25% price drop. It even worked out better than a 30% price drop due to the tracker and how ptsb and others charged handsomely for those on fixed and variable rates from 2011 - 2020 (and ptsb still charge existing customers handsomely)

So you did better on your purchase than you think.

as for agents - one agent. But have 2 or 3 come out and give their opinion.
 
Just to add to what's already here, joint agents would generally only be used for specialised sales where one might bring in locals and the other have international reach, that approach will cost you more.

The standard EA contract here states that their full fees are payable in full if you sell the house within a set period of the contract being terminated. So don't try sign up to two sole agency contracts unless you want to pay double the fees.
 
peemac said:
Don't beat yourself up over it. Seems you have a 1.2% tracker.
If your mortgage was 400k in 2007 your total interest paid for the past 15 year would have been under €75,000.

If you waited and bought in 2011 and only needed a 300,000 mortgage, you would have paid min 60k in rent for the 4 years and also about €140,000 in interest based on PTSB average of 3.8% since 2011.

In above scenario the 2007 peak of market purchase was cheaper than the 2011 purchase @ 25% price drop. It even worked out better than a 30% price drop due to the tracker and how ptsb and others charged handsomely for those on fixed and variable rates from 2011 - 2020 (and ptsb still charge existing customers handsomely)

So you did better on your purchase than you think.
Click to expand...
Superb post.

All the wrong lessons of the house price boom have baked into current policy and are crippling young people. This post shows why buying in the boom may have been an excellent thing.

It is more generally applicable than just PTSB.

And OP I also suggest 1 agent. And look at the house price index and get your own idea of what your house is worth. Prices have not moved up since early Spring as far as I can see.
 
elcato said:
I think he forgot a disclaimer such as "figures may not be right"
Click to expand...
true, but they won't be too far off. I did the actual figures for someone who thought they made a big error buying in 2006 and 1% tracker. She paid 240k (Clondalkin), price dropped to 150k in 2011. Yet the 240k she paid was not far off the 150k in 2011. A combination of rent she would have paid (at a low estimate), interest relief and tracker compared to standard variable and fixed rates from 2011 showed she made the correct decision to buy in 2006.

I believe she will have her mortgage paid off in 9 years time.

What the post is saying is that the interest rate is probably far more important that the headline price you are paying for the house. Back then it was the tracker product. Today its a long fixed rate that is the value. A 25 year fixed rate for a 400k mortgage will cost €138k in interest @ 2.5%. If the average variable/short term fixed rate was 4.25% over the next 25 years (the ecb has a target of 2%, so this is a very realistic figure) , you'd be paying an extra €115,000 for that exact same house.

Hence the current low long term fixed rates are almost a buffer to any downturn in the same way tracker rates were the buffer from the 2005-2008 buyers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top