amideislas

No surprise... I suppose if you were an agent, selling a property would be the last thing you'd want to do. And that would somehow make you a "better" agent.

Ideally, I suppose a "salesperson" should never have to sell anything. Unfortunately, there's this little issue of being able to afford a roof over your head and food to eat. Always gets in the way, doesn't it? Surely another good example of capitalism run amuck.

Moses2013

Offer what you think is right and what you can afford.

EMR

In LAW the agent repesents the seller and if nothing else is morally oblidged to do the best for their client.
But I agree with you the structure of the property market does mean that the needs of the salesperson over ride the needs /wishes of the seller.

By the way I do have a peripheral involvement in property sales and when listing a property try to find out what the client " really " needs rather than what they want.

cricketman

This is simply not true

The estate agent profession is lightly regulated in the UK but there is no regulation at all in Spain. They are simply facilitators to help reach a sale, but they work for themselves first and foremost

There is no law to make the estate agent do anything. The only thing they must do by law in the UK is communicate all offers

EMR

That explains it all !
There is a difference though is passing on an offer to suggesting to the seller that they would be an idiot not to accept it unfortunately for the agent the seller was better informed than he was.
In the case I am referring to agent NO 1 would have cost the seller E27,000.

amideislas

That's actually what agents do. Otherwise, they wouldn't have clients. What is best for the seller is in the eyes of the seller alone. The decision to accept any offer is the seller's alone. I'd never give that final decision to anyone. I don't think many others would either.

Nice flowery sentiment (e.g., salespeople should ideally have no motivation to sell), but somehow, if I were selling a property, I don't believe I'd feel all that comfortable with a wholly unmotivated agent that has nothing to gain from selling my property.

But the notion is consistent with your usual presumption that all things are borne of self-serving intent. I can only presume such conclusions are based on what you would do.

Fair enough, although rather contrasting to your original statement - suggesting that agents act solely in self-interest by offering "what the client "really" needs rather than what they want."

EMR

If you establish what the client needs this gives you a theoretical bottom line NOT a selling price.
The aim of the salesperson should be to maximise their earnings by getting the best price for the client NOT the buyer.
As a sales manager I had no time for salespersons who sold on margin and did not maximise earnings. Apat from earning less they did not last as long,
A good sales person will have sellers approaching them because of their reputation as not just getting sales but also getting better prices.

I know agents who for want of a better word " bottom trawl " looking for properties at the bottom of the market , that have been for sale for some time.
They identify the seller who will take almost any offer. They are looking for the easy sale but to survive as a business they need a higher rate of sales.
These companies and individuals come and go.
Others who charge higher rates , invest in marketing and need to achieve higher prices to cover their overheads.
These tend to be the companies who survive.

cricketman

You can only do that in times of plentiful demand

When there is a shortful of buyers then you need to maximise the number of transactions

It is simple economics

The role of an estate agent is to make enough money for themselves. Ones that provide a good service to buyers and sellers alike will come strongly recommended, but there is no moral obligation to do anything except to perhaps be honest

EMR

You are not being " honest " if you put your requirements above that of your clients.
But then none of can be surprised at what happens when you look at the type of person selling for many agents.
It must be hard for those trying to do a good job.

cricketman

In your example I do not see any dishonesty

The agent cannot predict the future. In times of scarce demand then any offer is worth considering. It is up to the seller to go for it or wait as long as it takes for a higher offer

amideislas

What is dishonest about listing a property, showing it and highlighting every feature and benefit, taking an offer and giving it to the seller? It's the seller's choice, not the agent's.

This is what estate agents do. They have every motivation to sell at the highest price they can get. Unless of course, it's priced out of the market and will never sell.

Presumably, selling at a fair market price is more in the best interests of the seller than not selling at all. It's still up to the seller either way. Nobody holds a gun to their head.

So what exactly, is so dubious? What the hell are you talking about?

EMR

Nothing if the agent is honest in acting for the seller but in a totally unregulated market that can not be the norme.
Human nature is particularly in sales is to take the easy route and not to try and get the best price. The sale comes first.
If there are no sanctions on the salesperson either legally or applied by their employer then the interests of the seller will always for some be way behind those of the salesperson.
It is true however that many sellers particularly those with holiday homes and absent for most of the year will have little if any knowledge of the market and are " guided " by the agent.
In a parallel thread the question was asked about a register of prices for properties sold.
If this existed the sellers would be able to determine if the offer from the agent was realistic or not.

pedro pete

We were assured by the bank that we would receive any surplus they recovered on our house when it was repossessed but that will be some feat seeing as they have it with an agent at 20k less than the deficit in the mortgage. I have no doubt that their agreement not to chase us for the deficit is worth about as much as any other professional Spaniard's word.

I suppose a property is only worth what it sells for. The rest is sheer guesswork and if that appears cliche it is because there are few other certainties in these 'interesting times'.

amideislas

The bank is interested in removing that toxic debt from their books as quickly as possible. They have no motivation to generate any "surplus". The agent has little to do with it, other than their "client" telling them to move it as quickly as possible.

By the way, it wasn't that long ago that there was no obligation of Spanish banks to recover any of the debt. Had you been in that position say, 10 years ago, they may well have foreclosed, sold the house, and you'd still be on the hook for the entire debt.

EMR

Or the property is worth the lowest price that the salesperson can get the seller to accept.
The examples I have given prove this.