Integrity of Estate Agents

KOR101

Here's an estate agent who has an approach I admire.

Issues to be noted with the property:

- Boundary of property is as per folio KY55869F. The house is within confines of folio. Sections of the surrounding footpath are not in main folio map.
- No certificate of planning permission compliance available.
- No certificate of building regulation compliance available.
- No registered right of way from the property to the public road ( N70 Kenmare / Sneem Road).
- The common areas contained in folio KY30076F are still in the name of the original developer Trentdale Ltd.
- The official management company that was set up to manage the common areas of the Ring of Kerry Golf Village (ROKGV) development was struck off the company register.
- Currently the common areas are being managed by “Trident Holiday Homes ltd” .They have been appointed by the current owners in the ROKGV to manage the common areas within ROKGV
- Currently the annual management fee for ROKGV is €1,350. This payment covers the following.
Public liability insurance, pump house maintenance, electricity, up keep of common areas grounds, general repairs, refuse collection, management fees.

https://www.myhome.ie/residential/brochure/15-ring-of-kerry-ring-of-kerry-golf-club-templenoe-kenmare-v93-pf99/4301846

zig

Dav010 wrote: »

Op, just ask yourself, why do you never hear sellers complaining that they are unhappy with the way their EA got they a good price for their property?

Disgruntled buyers will post on here about phantom bids and wrong doing, the fact is that like every profession there are good and bad. The poster above said they were asked for €10k cash, is that the EA asking? No, that is the seller asking.

Never once that I have read, has a poster been able to post verifiable evidence of wrong doing. I am not an EA, but I am experienced in buying/selling property. I may not like paying an EA to sell a property, but I understand the skills and methods they use to achieve the highest price, and as s seller I have no problem with that. As a buyer I know the EA works for the seller, not me, and I trust them about as much as I trust anyone else selling something to me, in other words I don’t trust them because so understand that I don’t need to trust them,

Well I definitely agree that its very easy for a disgruntled buyer to come to a conclusion without any evidence. And nothing more annoying than people who basically dont know what theyre talking about coming to conclusions. I was genuinely hoping a bunch of EAs or people in the business would come on here and point out that its nonsense.

Also as someone else pointed out I know that when I really want a house, its not because I have some unique ability to spot something in a house that no one else can, point being, someone else really wants it for the same reason. So if I am willing to bid there's lots of reasons another like minded bidder exists also.

So yea I can trust EAs to be EAs, i.e. not really trust them. The problem I have with that is to me thats not really good enough as we are talking about houses not second hand cars or concert tickets.

I guess I would like reassurance that everything that they are doing, trustworthy or not, is at least above board. I am also curious if they are doing things that are technically above board but not very ethical (e.g. my example of an EA taking my bid even though we didnt provide proof of funds.)

In my case, I will get over that the EA has lead is on this far. Admittedly they played on the obviousness that we really want the house. We were kind of done "playing it cool" on previous houses.

Those things are on me, I dont have to take the house.

What I would not get over is believing that other bids may not be real or if they are real they are just real in the sense that they are meaningless but technically down on paper.

antiskeptic

gmisk wrote: »

It doesnt matter if the seller asked for the EA to do that he shouldnt have agreed to do it that is my point....
10k in a brown envelope for the seller so the bank dont get a hold of it...nope that doesnt sound dodgy at all.


I didnt say that.....I was just stating that the house sold for 100k more than I was sale agreed at...chill out.

I've often wondered how this brown envelope is supposed to work. Clearly we need exclude the solicitor being involved ((or else head to a conspiracy theory forum.

So the buyer gives the e.a. 10k to hand onto the seller at close of sale. The buyer and seller need to trust a bent e.a. to hand over 10k at some point.

The e.a. risks his livelihood and prosecution and a tax audit for buttons. In an age where anyone can video his illegal activity?

gmisk

antiskeptic wrote: »

I've often wondered how this brown envelope is supposed to work. Clearly we need exclude the solicitor being involved ((or else head to a conspiracy theory forum.

So the buyer gives the e.a. 10k to hand onto the seller at close of sale. The buyer and seller need to trust a bent e.a. to hand over 10k at some point.

The e.a. risks his livelihood and prosecution and a tax audit for buttons. In an age where anyone can video his illegal activity?

It happened believe me, I even posted about it before here including posting the name of EA (which was removed obviously by a mod - no complaints there).


Obviously as I also said someone went for it and gave the 10k in cash as it appeared on the PPR later for 110k (despite being on at 140k).

lawrencesummers

Bought a house over a year ago. Us and a cash buyer apparently the last two bidders. We went up 10k on EA advice to secure house. Didn’t hear anything for a week, got a friend to phone and inquire about viewing house and EA told them it was closed, but we hadn’t heard anything. Got a call a few days later to say we had got the house, the seller was checking a few things on their side.

I don’t believe there was any cash buyer, and the auctioneer wasn’t willing to allow anyone else in to view the house, which suited us but meant the seller may not have gotten highest price.

I just presume not trusting them is normal. They lack any regulation and make up the rules as they like, they have a cartel on fees as well.

The entire model for selling houses should change. The EA should put a value on the house and once that’s reached they have to sell, this blind bidding is rife for abuse

zig

lawrencesummers wrote: »

The entire model for selling houses should change. The EA should put a value on the house and once that’s reached they have to sell, this blind bidding is rife for abuse

Agreed on changing the model, but what happens when 3 people offer the same amount on the house?

I think all that would happen here is that the initial asking price would start at silly money and everyone would know its never going to be reached.

E.g. A house worth €300K might be listed for €600K.

Then again, perhaps the agents evaluations could be audited or something to ensure they are doing correct and fair asking prices.

beauf

I have experienced an EA who didn't seem to be showing a property to prospective buyers, yet telling the seller there was no interest.
The seller asked myself and couple of others to act as a buyers (curious why there was no interest) and it was obvious the EA was not offering the property.
Switched EA and lots of interest. I assume the EA was driving the price down so to buy themselves and flip it.

JohnnyChimpo

This thread is just the Battle of the Anecdotes. Perhaps it's better to just abide by the inviolable ordering principle of "Cui Bono?". I think it's safe to say that an EA's interests can be arranged into a rough hierarchy of :

EA>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>the seller>the bidder>>>>>randomers viewing the house

beauf

Its obvious the system can be abused. Most systems can be. That's life, and people should toughen up and deal with it.

Thinking it can be stamped out is as naive as thinking it doesn't happen.

lawrencesummers

zig wrote: »

Agreed on changing the model, but what happens when 3 people offer the same amount on the house?

I think all that would happen here is that the initial asking price would start at silly money and everyone would know its never going to be reached.

E.g. A house worth €300K might be listed for €600K.

Then again, perhaps the agents evaluations could be audited or something to ensure they are doing correct and fair asking prices.

The first to offer the asking price gets it.
If an EA wants to overvalue a house they will only piss off the sellers.


The other thing that needs to happen is transparency in fees and competition between auctioneers. They operate a cartel lacking competition.

lawrencesummers

beauf wrote: »

Its obvious the system can be abused. Most systems can be. That's life, and people should toughen up and deal with it.

Thinking it can be stamped out is as naive as thinking it doesn't happen.

If the sector was properly legislated and regulated by the government then it could be, but auctioneers don’t want that.

mariaalice

Estate agents have been doing their job for years they can spot in an instant who is serious or not from viewings, they know almost the exact price the property will go for and how long it will take to sell the moment they come to value the property they are doing this day in and day out.

When I sold my house back in 2012 I go an offer very quickly the EA told me of the offer which was good but the EA said they won't follow through and sure enough a week later they withdrew.

They are far more knowledgable than any buyer will ever be.

beauf

lawrencesummers wrote: »

If the sector was properly legislated and regulated by the government then it could be, but auctioneers don’t want that.

Successive Irish Govts have shown themselves to not to take any legislation, or regulation seriously. We've had one scandal after another of lax enforcement and policing across every sector. But endless new legislation and regulations.

So it illogical to suggest anything is likely to change, unless there is a huge change in political and public will to change the status quo. Public demonstrations have been almost none existent across a range of issues.

beauf

mariaalice wrote: »

...
They are far more knowledgable than any buyer will ever be.

You have good and bad in every industry.

Some developers/buyers are far more canny than most EA. You don't make lots of money by accident.

Nekarsulm

The solution is simple.
If you want 170,000 Euro for your house, just stick it on Daft etc and state that price.
Don't accept any higher bids, no matter how many have viewed it and like it.
You have saved yourself anything between 1700 and 3000 euro, and cut out the EA.

lawrencesummers

Nekarsulm wrote: »

The solution is simple.
If you want 170,000 Euro for your house, just stick it on Daft etc and state that price.
Don't accept any higher bids, no matter how many have viewed it and like it.
You have saved yourself anything between 1700 and 3000 euro, and cut out the EA.

It always surprises me that more people don’t list their house privately, the engineer and solicitors have a level of professional responsibility to the process that auctioneers don’t. They are nothing more than glorified key holders and guides.

zig

Tbf its easy for some people take good photos, find the time to have viewings, discuss offers, bids, not to mention evaluate the price themselves. But for alot people it simply may be waay too much hassle.

downtheroad

I know of a couple who put a bid on a house despite both having mortgage approval (they were hoping to get it after). Say the bid was at 400, they offered 410 and then the person who had bid the 400 went up to 420 at which point this couple dropped out.

The EA in this case cost somebody 20 grand because they didn't simply ask for evidence of mortgage approval.

I wouldn't trust any EA as far as I could throw them.

EstateAgent

zig wrote: »

Hi,

Im currently in the buying process as are others I know and the general consensus seems to be one of a lack of trust of estate agents, a lack of trust towards bids, motives and things they say. I have to admit I feel the same about this myself.

But do you think this is just one of these unfair urban myths because we feel bitter about being outbid or being sold something for higher by a sales person?

I am wondering does anyone here know EAs (or are EAs) who could say the opposite side of it.

Basically I hear people being convinced they are up against a fake bid, or strange stories about the top bidder pulling out and the EA going back to the other person, making the buyer wonder what was going on all that time.

The EA we're currently dealing with has lead us on quite a bit, implying the seller will accept pretty soon only to introduce a new bidder out of nowhere. (this has happened 3 times on the same house).

I also happen to know that I was able to put on a bid on a house and I didnt have official approval from the bank yet. Now the bank had told us it was as good as done and they just needed to do the credit check but still this was enough for the EA to take a bid from us and subsequently drive up the price. In hindsight I dont know if it was fair for them to accept that bid even though we were genuine in how close we were to getting approval.

I also happen to know another situation where buyers had sale agreed on a house, in the mean time were viewing another house with the same auctioneer after this and the buyers placed a bid on this other house, they would clearly not have had enough to buy the two houses but the bid was noted anyway.

Do they go as far as getting fake bidders or at least getting someone they know to bid so they are still technically marking it as a real offer?

Or is it all just something in mine and my friends heads because we're trying to buy houses and its pissing us off and that the reality is that perhaps EAs are equally fed up of being accused of BS?

Ok I'm an estate agent - take it easy on me...!

To be honest (yes EA's can be honest sometimes) I think people let their imaginations get away with them and most conspiracy theories are way off. Estate agents are regulated, which many people don't know. All offers received have to be logged on an internal system and legally have to be passed on to the seller. If a buyer has a suspicion he/she can make a complaint to the Property Services Regulatory Authority who then have the power to inspect the log of offers for any inconsistencies. Penalties and potential revoking of the agent's licence can then be enforced.

However I completely understand the process of buying a property is a very stressful experience for most and I can see why people would be suspicious. As a potential buyer you are meant to just believe a complete stranger that "an offer of x amount has just been placed on the property". It's natural that you'd question whether this is true or not, especially if you don't get a generally good feeling from the agent involved.

All I can say (with around 15 years experience in the industry) is that hand on heart I have never fabricated or seen a colleague fabricate an offer in my life. It simply doesn't happen in my opinion. Maybe there are some dodgy agents out there, like there are dodgy bankers, solicitors, accountants etc. but if you are dealing with a reputable brand I could almost guarantee that "phantom bids" are just not happening.

In saying all of that, I take your point in relation to allowing offers to be made by people who don't have finance in place. This is definitely more common and if you want to call this a fake bid, then fair enough. Any agent worth their salt will vet a potential bidder and ask about their finances and seek proof of same. If someone tried to make an offer to me and told me their finances aren't in place yet what I would do from there would depend on the property I'm selling. If I was selling a property that had loads of interest with strong viewing numbers and multiple offers, I would speak to my client and tell them about this person that wants to make a bid. I would advise my client that we shouldn't allow any offers from this person as they could potentially end up as the successful bidder and I wouldn't be comfortable proceeding with them. If we were to then go to a lower bidder and accept their offer, they would be extremely suspicious and may not proceed at all. I would then go back to the bidder in question and tell them that until they have their finance in place we can't allow them to make any offers.

Now if I was selling a property and struggling with it and someone came along to make an offer but said their finance isn't in place yet, I would have a much different view of that. I would enquire as to when they expect to have their finance in place and potentially speak to their bank manager/mortgage broker to get some assurance on it. If I felt confident that they will get their finances together I would speak to my client and advise that they are worth a punt, given the lack of other interest.

Some agents may be allowing all offers to be placed without vetting them properly and just seeing where the chips fall and take it from there. That is an issue to be fair but I'm not sure what can ever be done about that. There's nothing illegal happening but I can see the issue - it's driving the price up for everyone else.

One thing I hate is when bidders bid on multiple properties at the same time. People often try to play hard ball with us when it comes to negotiating for a property and will quickly tell us that they're bidding on multiple properties and need an answer asap. Let me tell you now that this is the worst thing you can do when dealing with an EA. The second I hear that I challenge the person as to why we would entertain his/her offers when there's no guarantee they'll even buy our property. I'll often remind them that they are driving the price up for people just like them on several properties, even though they only intend to buy one. Once I challenge them on this the penny usually drops that these hard man tactics are somewhat flawed and they quickly retreat saying that my property is their number 1 option. Anyways that stuff really does bother me as someone who is bidding on multiple properties at the same time is worse for this industry than any dodgy estate agent in my opinion.

In relation to some of the anecdotes here - the €10k that was being discussed separate to the sale could have been for contents? I'm not sure but what was probably happening there was the sale was a forced sale with the bank receiving all proceeds. I would say the owner was looking to do a deal on contents to get something out of the sale.

Also I would say the EA had no idea a bank was involved in that sale that closed a year later. It's happened me many times that I have taken a property to the market on the instruction of the owner, only to find out at a much later date that a bank needs to approve the sale. Honestly it is so frustrating as you do all the work to end up with a buyer and then it all comes to light that the owner doesn't even have the authority to sell. We get no fee from that and it's just a big waste of time. No way the EA was declining to mention that a bank was involved - why would he hide that? Who's he trying to fool and for what reason?

Sorry for the long winded post - you were looking for feedback from an EA and so I felt the need to set up an account and respond! If you have any other queries let me know.

EA

gmisk

EstateAgent wrote: »

Ok I'm an estate agent - take it easy on me...!

To be honest (yes EA's can be honest sometimes) I think people let their imaginations get away with them and most conspiracy theories are way off. Estate agents are regulated, which many people don't know. All offers received have to be logged on an internal system and legally have to be passed on to the seller. If a buyer has a suspicion he/she can make a complaint to the Property Services Regulatory Authority who then have the power to inspect the log of offers for any inconsistencies. Penalties and potential revoking of the agent's licence can then be enforced.

However I completely understand the process of buying a property is a very stressful experience for most and I can see why people would be suspicious. As a potential buyer you are meant to just believe a complete stranger that "an offer of x amount has just been placed on the property". It's natural that you'd question whether this is true or not, especially if you don't get a generally good feeling from the agent involved.

All I can say (with around 15 years experience in the industry) is that hand on heart I have never fabricated or seen a colleague fabricate an offer in my life. It simply doesn't happen in my opinion. Maybe there are some dodgy agents out there, like there are dodgy bankers, solicitors, accountants etc. but if you are dealing with a reputable brand I could almost guarantee that "phantom bids" are just not happening.

In saying all of that, I take your point in relation to allowing offers to be made by people who don't have finance in place. This is definitely more common and if you want to call this a fake bid, then fair enough. Any agent worth their salt will vet a potential bidder and ask about their finances and seek proof of same. If someone tried to make an offer to me and told me their finances aren't in place yet what I would do from there would depend on the property I'm selling. If I was selling a property that had loads of interest with strong viewing numbers and multiple offers, I would speak to my client and tell them about this person that wants to make a bid. I would advise my client that we shouldn't allow any offers from this person as they could potentially end up as the successful bidder and I wouldn't be comfortable proceeding with them. If we were to then go to a lower bidder and accept their offer, they would be extremely suspicious and may not proceed at all. I would then go back to the bidder in question and tell them that until they have their finance in place we can't allow them to make any offers.

Now if I was selling a property and struggling with it and someone came along to make an offer but said their finance isn't in place yet, I would have a much different view of that. I would enquire as to when they expect to have their finance in place and potentially speak to their bank manager/mortgage broker to get some assurance on it. If I felt confident that they will get their finances together I would speak to my client and advise that they are worth a punt, given the lack of other interest.

Some agents may be allowing all offers to be placed without vetting them properly and just seeing where the chips fall and take it from there. That is an issue to be fair but I'm not sure what can ever be done about that. There's nothing illegal happening but I can see the issue - it's driving the price up for everyone else.

One thing I hate is when bidders bid on multiple properties at the same time. People often try to play hard ball with us when it comes to negotiating for a property and will quickly tell us that they're bidding on multiple properties and need an answer asap. Let me tell you now that this is the worst thing you can do when dealing with an EA. The second I hear that I challenge the person as to why we would entertain his/her offers when there's no guarantee they'll even buy our property. I'll often remind them that they are driving the price up for people just like them on several properties, even though they only intend to buy one. Once I challenge them on this the penny usually drops that these hard man tactics are somewhat flawed and they quickly retreat saying that my property is their number 1 option. Anyways that stuff really does bother me as someone who is bidding on multiple properties at the same time is worse for this industry than any dodgy estate agent in my opinion.

In relation to some of the anecdotes here - the €10k that was being discussed separate to the sale could have been for contents? I'm not sure but what was probably happening there was the sale was a forced sale with the bank receiving all proceeds. I would say the owner was looking to do a deal on contents to get something out of the sale.

Also I would say the EA had no idea a bank was involved in that sale that closed a year later. It's happened me many times that I have taken a property to the market on the instruction of the owner, only to find out at a much later date that a bank needs to approve the sale. Honestly it is so frustrating as you do all the work to end up with a buyer and then it all comes to light that the owner doesn't even have the authority to sell. We get no fee from that and it's just a big waste of time. No way the EA was declining to mention that a bank was involved - why would he hide that? Who's he trying to fool and for what reason?

Sorry for the long winded post - you were looking for feedback from an EA and so I felt the need to set up an account and respond! If you have any other queries let me know.

EA

Considering the place was entirely cleared out nope.
Forced sale I think most likely money from sale was going to bank - hence the seller wanted the 10k himself.
Surely and EA facilitating this is illegal? that was my point.

EstateAgent

gmisk wrote: »

Considering the place was entirely cleared out nope.
Forced sale I think most likely money from sale was going to bank - hence the seller wanted the 10k himself.
Surely and EA facilitating this is illegal? that was my point.

Yup that doesn't sound right. If the €10k wasn't legitimately for something then it does sound dodgy. Definitely a forced sale and the owner looking to get something out of it. If I was the EA on that and my client was looking for a €10k side payment just to keep it off the books, I'd run a mile.

Dav010

downtheroad wrote: »

I know of a couple who put a bid on a house despite both having mortgage approval (they were hoping to get it after). Say the bid was at 400, they offered 410 and then the person who had bid the 400 went up to 420 at which point this couple dropped out.

The EA in this case cost somebody 20 grand because they didn't simply ask for evidence of mortgage approval.

I wouldn't trust any EA as far as I could throw them.

How did the EA cost someone €20k?, The couple may have been able to get a mortgage to cover their bid, and more. They dropped out at €410k and someone else bid €420k, no one forced them to.

This just shows how little knowledge people have of the bidding process and how eager they are to blame the EA. Silly stuff.

zig

EstateAgent wrote: »

Ok I'm an estate agent - take it easy on me...!

To be honest (yes EA's can be honest sometimes) I think people let their imaginations get away with them and most conspiracy theories are way off....

Thanks, this was the kind of response I was hoping for. May i ask you something in relation to bids that may not be favourable/finances not in place. Does this apply to someone that needs to sell their house to make the bid?


What I mean is, is it standard to accept bids if a house needs to be sold for it?



And on that topic, would it be appropriate for me to ask the EA about this in relation to the other bidder?


My point being, it may not be a phantom bid per say, but its still kind of a bid without proof of funds in a way. Im sure the agent doesnt want to show their cards but I am just wondering could I probe them on that much to make a case that we are a better buyer?


Sorry its slightly off topic on the whole integrity conversation

gmisk

EstateAgent wrote: »

Yup that doesn't sound right. If the €10k wasn't legitimately for something then it does sound dodgy. Definitely a forced sale and the owner looking to get something out of it. If I was the EA on that and my client was looking for a €10k side payment just to keep it off the books, I'd run a mile.

Thank you!
Thats all I was trying to say here.
The fact that it later appeared on the PPR sold for 110k make me think the EA convinced somebody to hand over the 10k the owner wanted.


I have no doubt the majority of EAs are decent and do things by the book but some are seriously dodgy.

mariaalice

Well, when the EA was selling my house and got the offer that was withdrawn, it was still an offer and he could have in all honesty gone to another bidder and said there is an offer of X on the house, notwithstanding the fact that from years of experience he was certain they were not going to follow through he had no evidence they were not going to follow through just a gut instinct base on working as an EA for years.

The only way around that would be that no one could make an offer unless they had finance in palce to follow through, but that would be impractical and the offer migh still be withdrawn.

EstateAgent

zig wrote: »

Thanks, this was the kind of response I was hoping for. May i ask you something in relation to bids that may not be favourable/finances not in place. Does this apply to someone that needs to sell their house to make the bid?


What I mean is, is it standard to accept bids if a house needs to be sold for it?



And on that topic, would it be appropriate for me to ask the EA about this in relation to the other bidder?


My point being, it may not be a phantom bid per say, but its still kind of a bid without proof of funds in a way. Im sure the agent doesnt want to show their cards but I am just wondering could I probe them on that much to make a case that we are a better buyer?


Sorry its slightly off topic on the whole integrity conversation

Ok so this happens a lot. That's called being in a chain and is very common. If your offer is subject to the sale of another property you are definitely at a disadvantage. The stage at which the sale of your property is at is integral to quantifying the quality of your bid. I'll often receive calls from other agents looking for assurances in relation to clients I am selling for. They may be bidding on a house with that agent and I will be asked how their sale is progressing.

So if someone makes me an offer and once I quiz them on their finances they inform me that they are subject to sale, I will immediately start asking questions as to what's happening with their own sale. I'll usually look for their EA's or solicitors details (although solicitors are far less helpful at times like this) to verify what they tell me. So if they are subject to sale and their property is only just on the market I would consider that a very weak bid and I likely wouldn't consider it (unless I was REALLY struggling to sell my property). If the bidders property was under offer with loads of interest, I would consider this a slightly stronger bid but wouldn't be entirely comfortable with it. If the bidders property was sale agreed but at the early stages (contract not issued yet, or maybe just issued), I would consider this a reasonably strong offer - I would let them bid on any property at this stage to be honest - however if there was very little between the bids at the end of the bidding process I may look more favorably at another bidder if they are ready to go. Finally if the bidders sale is at an advanced stage (contracts signed, or about to be signed) then I would consider this as strong an offer as any other (subject to the adequate proof of finance backing up their whole offer).

You are absolutely within your rights to question the EA on other bidders offers. People question me all the time and I answer them honestly. Ask the EA how is the other bidder financing their bid, are they subject to sale, are they cash etc.

The truth is the EA may still put a spin on it and talk up the other bidder but it's hard to know. As I said before if you are dealing with a reputable firm you won't be victim of any underhanded tactics. I don't want to paint a brush over all EA's and say they are the most honest of individuals but the conspiracies we all hear are completely exaggerated most of the time.

As someone else said above - the newer breed of EA has to go through far more study and training to get their licence, so I think the 'integrity' of the profession will only go up in peoples estimations. However given the product we are dealing with and the amount of money involved there will always be conspiracies and horror stories.

Mad_maxx

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

It's a bit of a myth as there aren't that many people around who can buy so much property that just happens to be sold through the same estate agent.

While the estate agent represents the seller, in reality they need to get there property sold as quickly as possible but at the best price, so it's on their interest to not hold out waiting for higher bids that may or not materialize. Ski there is some semblance of balance.

Auctioneers are hustlers, getting a higher bid is part of the game, there is also competition within their industry to achieve a better result than the guy the other end of town, bragging rights

Your first paragraph is dead wrong, auctioneers don't like to see strangers get properties they have in line for buddies, especially the case in difficult markets when property is cheap

Dav010

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Auctioneers are hustlers, getting a higher bid is part of the game, there is also competition within their industry to achieve a better result than the guy the other end of town, bragging rights

Your first paragraph is dead wrong, auctioneers don't like to see strangers get properties they have in line for buddies, especially the case in difficult markets when property is cheap

Can you offer any proof for your second paragraph or is this more speculation?

Yip, they are paid by the seller to get the highest price for a property, what use would an EA be to the seller if they didn’t get the highest price?

Mad_maxx

Dav010 wrote: »

Whenever I read posts like this, I always wonder how the poster knows this, do lots of EAs tell the poster? Does the poster know lots of property investors who told him they bribe EAs?

So mad_maxx, what evidence have you of this? Or is this just the usual speculation that people who paid more than they wanted to, or didn’t get the property they wanted, post on here?

Is this speculation, or do you have evidence that this is especially common in “rural Ireland” where people are less honest than urban folk?

Personal experience in Limerick city, tried to buy three different properties, offered the asking price, no answer for three months on each property, both sold for less than I offered, that was in 2014 and 2015 when stuff was still very cheap in Limerick, they didn't want the cheap assets getting taken by someone they didn't know

In the end I bought at an allsop auction in 2015

Dav010

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Personal experience in Limerick city, tried to buy three different properties, offered the asking price, no answer for three months on each property, both sold for less than I offered, that was in 2014 and 2015 when stuff was still very cheap in Limerick, they didn't want the cheap assets getting taken by someone they didn't know

In the end I bought at an allsop auction in 2015

Earlier you posted this was rife around the country, what proof have you for this? Still waiting.

Properties could have been sold for less than you offered to cash buyers.