Who Is A “Rogue or Dubious” Estate or Lettings Agent?
There is nothing wrong with the formation of self regulatory
bodies in any professional capacity.
Most professional people associate themselves with one form of
association or another. It could be because they provide a platform to share
ideas, clarify opinions and sometimes innovate. Or because they provide access
to information relevant to their specific industry. They may also assist in
ensuring compliance to minimum working standards. In this respect, the UK property profession is
no different in principle to, for example the accounting or legal sector. The
problem with industry associations is their over rated worth of self importance.
Each association hold to the claim that their primary objectives
are usually to support and streamline members’ professional competence through
an associated code of conduct, newsletters and training opportunities.
This principle is laudable. But if the mantra behind one
association and another is more or less similar, then there would be cohesion to
deliver the best service for its membership. There wouldn’t be the need for
splinter groups. Would there?
Let’s now explore a little further what the words “rogue”,
“dubious” really mean.
Common English definition describes “rogue” as a dishonest
or unprincipled person. This accommodates any act construed as insincere,
unethical and not playing within set rules of engagement by any person or group.
Dubious, on the other hand is a qualifying adjective for any
act that would cause doubt; of doubtful quality or propriety; questionable!
Simply put, both words suggest dodgy, deceitful behavioural
act either by commission or intent.
With a broad definition as this, who then is a rouge or
dubious agent? And what qualifies a safe agent?
There is none more suitable candidate to provide such
unbiased appraisal than the last client who actually used the service on offer.
Every client deserves a reasonable level of good service.
But since there is no such thing as a definitive perfect service, someone
somewhere would always have a rant and a moan, even if it’s only for the heck
of it. That’s human behaviour!
Then again, there are very bad services around. So to try and
convince a client who strongly believes that they have been poorly served by an
agent would be like asking the proverbial mountain to move to the left.
Justified or prejudiced, each client reserves the right to
have an opinion of the service they received, as long as it is fair and does
not cross the mudslinging slander/libel line. However, mere perception is not
proof enough. Why? Unless you have used
a service, your opinion could only be based on third party information, not
your personal experience.
Service in this context is reminiscent to having agreed with
applicable terms and conditions of that service, the subsequent signing of a
binding contract and accepting keys for possession at check-in. To phone an
agent for the purpose of comparing service charges would therefore not count as
a fulfilled service. It’s only a conduit for information gathering.
If then you have never used a particular agent’s service,
how would you determine whether they’re the best or rubbish in what they do? Are
all service levels the same across estate/letting agencies? Absolutely not!
Same goes for every other commercial business model, whether
it’s a Doctors’ surgery, or a fish mongers. You can only make like-for-like
comparisons in order to obtain a fair conclusion.
Anyone with some sort of reasoning and intent could presently
set up an estate or letting agency and consequently make success of the
business. Similarly, any one could set up a used car lot. They don’t have to
gain any ‘superior’ qualification to make a success of that business model either.
Reasoning, in this context is the ability to interpret the
right thing, as opposed to that which is not right. Intent is the ideal to make
a profit, possibly provide employment and potentially enjoy the eventual
benefits which success brings.
So why do property agents have so much head battering in the
public domain as ‘rogues with dubious intent,’ while the very important role they
play is genuinely to strive to bridge and more often than not, hasten the
process of providing essential accommodation in a professional manner for those
who need it, and for a service fee?
There is currently no legislation determining minimum entry level
qualification as base requirement to be identified as a scrupulous estate/letting
agent, or to set one up. There is none for the motor trade either. Should there
be one? Most agents who have been through any committed level of study and
written examination would drum its benefits. Reason being that such dedicated
study affords invaluable depth of knowledge that is essential to stay at par
with the ever changing regulations covering the UK housing act. Currently it looks
like a mine-field.
The onus therefore rests with the industry’s Mr Bigs to
initiate a collective framework necessary to formulate and implement industry
accepted minimum entry levels.
Currently, associations like the RICS (Royal institution of
chartered surveyors,) National Association of Estate Agents (NAEA), Association
of Residential Letting Agents (ARLA - wrapped up under the banner of National
Federation of Property Professionals – NFOPP), UK Association of Letting Agents
(UKALA), The Guild of Property Professionals (TGP), National Approved Letting
Scheme (NALS), Association of British Property Professionals (ABPP), provide
some sort of leadership initiatives on matters concerning the industry.
Membership is not cheap though. What really is being paid
for in disguise is this ‘great opportunity’ to use affiliation branded stickers
as identification marks of participation on shop-fronts, printed materials or
websites. What is being missed but equally
important is the fact that registration with the property ombudsman (TPO) and adhering
to its code of conduct is even a better option. Where there’s a dispute, a
contesting client tends to feel more confident bringing matters to a head with
an independent redress scheme than to a member only association.
The fact that some associations appear to be tougher in
executing the principles of their applicable code of conduct, bottom-line is - most
are in it to make a profit. Unfortunately, profits are not ploughed back
necessarily to support the general membership.
Die hard members would affirm, even swear to the beneficial sentiment
what joining one association or another has brought to their balance sheet.
Others may tell of significant increase in their portfolio or landlord/vendor
clients. However, based only on the simple matter of joining a pressure group? It
would be difficult to prove.
Association membership has its place in the wider scheme of
things. It serves a purpose for people wishing to belong to a group. It may also
be a good place for networking and passage of industry news, encourage structured
training opportunities and maybe more.
What it doesn’t do is; stop the agent with dishonest intent to
defraud, regardless of how many membership stickers they display on shop windows.
It all comes down primarily to that simple matter of honesty, fair play and
decency. All things being equal, (they never usually are) nobody really needs
the whip of a certain code of conduct hanging over them to do the right thing. If
you ever find yourself at the point where you must, it would be worth
reappraising your intentions.
The question that bothers me though is this; if the common goal
is geared toward the benefit of their members, especially for the small
independents, why are there so many property associations? And how is it that over
the last twenty-five years or more, none of them have been able to come
together as a strong force to combat the rip-off advertising portals? Surely
this is what most agents would want. Why have agents continually paid high
prices to keep property portals afloat? Agents keep portals in business. Without
agents feeding portals, portals have no business. That’s fact. With the money
wasted by those running NFOPP, shame Property live didn’t work for its members.
Regardless of spurious claims of influencing government policies
on industry specific matters, the property sector with its numerous pressure
groups, time and again have failed to make any significant gains either by standing
up against the monopolistic pride of portals or influence any policy changes to
legislation that may allow those who operate within the private rental sector boot
out defaulting tenants without costing the landlord a fortune in lost revenue while
the lengthy judicial process slowly grinds to obtain possession.
Why is it that all the associations covering lettings have failed
to stem the tide where recalcitrant tenants are being encouraged in certain
quarters to remain in properties, rack-up rental arrears and in some cases cause
damages, until the day the bailiff turns up at the door.
The real losers are not the associations, nor the portals, but
the long suffering landlord client and the distressed agent.
All said, how then do you then define a rouge agent?
Is he the one who levies a potential tenant a necessary administration
fee to process their application, which generally involves obtaining the tenant
client to complete a tenancy questionnaire, send out for references, check IDs
and proof of addresses just to make sure people are who they claim to be?
Agents should be highly commended for this sort of due diligence. The point
remains, it is a payable service.
Is it the one who charges for services rendered to cover his
ever rising operation cost?
How about the agent who slips a note wherever there’s a
notice, indicative of an empty property available for sale or for let, and
tries to steal custom from another agent? Would this deplorable agent fall into
the rogue agent classification? Think about it. Some agents are worse at this than
others!
Is it the one who trawls the internet seeking out recently
advertised stock from the competition, then rings up pretending to be an
interested party just to obtain the property’s address, and then deceitfully
tries to plunder the lead?
Oh, how about the agent who liberally offers over inflated property
appraisal in order to obtain an instruction? If he does not achieve the quoted
price, does he qualify as a rogue agent or will he just walk away with a
dishonest badge?
Now, as a customer, you probably wouldn’t have given this a serious
thought. You probably have followed the trend and scorned off on the usual
suspects. But with a little insight to
the daily duties of an estate/letting agent, I am sure you may have a different
opinion as to who a rogue agent might really be, or do you?
Who’s a safe agent? More like asking who is a safe goal-keeper.
There’s no such thing. Good agents know their
craft and always eager to support their clients with knowledgeable advice to
help. No bull-crap, just plain raw honesty based on fact. Funny thing is; most
clients still prefer the bull-crap with a smile than be told what they’d prefer not
to hear – the truth. But that’s life!
Chidi Duru
is managing director at Samanthajane Ltd.
A real
estate business covering sales, lettings and property management in South East
London
#020 8836
8800