Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The US it is more expensive.


You asked why people moan, and I explained its because they are dishonest as real estate agents in other countries who are more honest are not hated in the same way.


I'm glad you prefer the system we've got but I hope you understand now why agents here are hated...

Just thought I would add my thoughts on this thread having sold my house recently. We put our property (5 bed house) on the market in January 2014 with KFH, they were very slick with their sales pitch and promised me the world, in my heart of hearts I knew they were over valuing my house but like so many people I got blinded by the pound signs in front of my eyes! Well I went with them none the less and had a really bad experience, they had one nice agent who was very helpful and she knew from the start it was priced too high but couldn't admit it. The other agents that showed clients round were useless, on the times I was there in the background I was shocked by their lack of knowledge about the area and their rush to get clients onto the next property. We had one offer which was not serious and way below the asking price and this was after 12 weeks with them. I switched to Property In Dulwich and they were brilliant (I can't recommend them enough)they are local and know the area inside out and managed my expectations well. They marketed the property with a guide price which was well below the original asking price KFH had suggested and within two weeks it went to sealed bid and went much higher than we expected. Our plan was to move to Norfolk but we got cold feet and have decided to stay in London. We are moving at the end of this month (we are moving into a flat for a short period) and have been looking at other properties in SE22. What I have noticed it has really calmed down since we sold our property at the end of March. We have had a couple offers accepted in the last two months which were well below the asking the price however they didn't workout. Prices are definitely levelling off and it some cases starting to fall, people are not prepared to pay the silly prices anymore and I think sellers have to be more realistic about what they are going to get regards asking prices. I feel fortunate to have sold when I did as I know I would not get anywhere near the price my house achieved in March if it went back on the market now. All in all whether you like them or not using estate agents is a lottery my only bit advice is to manage your own expectations as too often you get carried away which can lead to frustration and stress!
  • 2 weeks later...

It's very simple: the UK is one of the few countries in the world without meaningful laws to govern property conveyancing.


Depending on the situation, the buyer or seller can nail the other party and hold them to ransom for no better reason than because they can.


If there were stricter laws covering the conveyancing process, everyone would seem more honest. When the opportunity arises and in the absence of legislation preventing it, people almost always revert to the worst versions of themselves.

Yes and no. Those willing to exploit the weakness of the system will do best and the industry will be full of scoundrels. However, not everyone automatically behaves badly (just the most successful within the industry). The fact that the legal structure gives scoundrels and advantage doesn?t negate the fact that these people as individuals are scoundrels!

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yes and no. Those willing to exploit the weakness

> of the system will do best and the industry will

> be full of scoundrels. However, not everyone

> automatically behaves badly (just the most

> successful within the industry). The fact that

> the legal structure gives scoundrels and advantage

> doesn?t negate the fact that these people as

> individuals are scoundrels!


Sorry but who are you referring to as scoundrels? Estate Agents, Sellers, Buyers? I think people need to start taking some personal responsibility when it comes to buying and selling property and not just blaming it all on the agents or the unsatisfactory nature of the English conveyancing system.


If you are talking about gazumping and gazundering then, whilst an agent can facilitate that, he cannot force a buyer to reduce his offer or a seller to increase his asking price - that is a personal choice of the buyer/seller facilitated by perhaps, but in no way caused by, the conveyancing system we have here or estate agents per se.


As far as inflated pricing is concerned greed is the principal factor. If you are offered a selling price for your home that seems too good to be true then it is probably because it is too good to be true - and it does not make it any less so just because a range of agents (who are competing against each other for your property) tell you the same thing. Ask them for the evidence. Also, in these days of Rightmove and Zoopla it is perfectly possible, unless you own some kind of unique dwelling (which is not common in ED and surroundings), for you to come to a relatively informed view as a buyer or seller of what a reasonable buying/selling price for a particular property is. All you have to do is look at similar properties close by that are up for sale or, more usefully, have gone under offer. Frankly, if people fall for an estate agent telling them they can get an inflated price for their property, without having done some homework themselves, they are at least as culpable as the agent in my view.

worldwiser Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> in the absence of legislation preventing it, people

> almost always revert to the worst versions of

> themselves.


I'm not sure this is true. Gazundering and gazumping is not something which most people do. Most people have principles and act decently. A significant minority don't, but it is a minority.

Exactly rahahah-- despite the system, people choose how to behave and most sellers and buyers do behave well.


My post Toldyouso did refer to estate agents. As my previous post discussed, I dealt with an agent who lied to me and the seller, and we both were outraged to learn what he had done. That sort of behavior can't be blamed on the buyer or seller, the agent was simply lacking any sense of morality.

Good post from Toldyouso above I think. Buyers and sellers are often equally badly behaved, selfish and greedy. Very few take responsibility for their own actions. It's a stressful transaction for many and whether you are buying or selling, sticking to your word on a deal makes the world a better place. Ditto in business generally.

I am in such a quandary and have heard so many conflicting opinions that I am going to throw this out.


We have sold our house in principle. For ?25k less than the asking price (so ?750k for a three bed house on Maxted Road off Bellenden Road). We took the lower price as we'd found our dream home and we wanted a quick sale (we had loads of interest and it sold in just over a fortnight - unusual considering we went on the market in August when it's traditionally quiet.)


Our dream house turned out to have ?50k worth of dampwork and needed major work - not part of our plan. So we have to pull out. Do we still continue with the sale of our house?


Some have said that we should bide our time - we sold to a young girl moving in with her mates - ours is a family house and with an excellent school about to open on our road (a free school managed by Dulwich Hamlet) families are very likely to be interested.


Others say house prices are falling and we should take the money, and go rent, ready to purchase when the moment arrives. But rent would be considerably more than our current mortgage and would then begin eating into our deposit for our next home.


Neighbours have told me we undersold - and we were happy to because the figures worked for the house we thought we wanted to buy.


Wise forumites - what to do?!

I think you need to just do what is right for you. Has the buyer done any survey etc yet? If you are worried about what she has invested so far, I'd understand. I'd be the same. However, it's a big decision to leave your home and if prices are to fall, they will fall across the board I imagine.


I'm thinking of selling, but know where I stand, that is, I know the net I need before it will be worth it for what I want to do next. Otherwise I will just stay put. I couldn't give up what I have, unless I was sure about my next step.


I do hope it works out for you, and you may well be better off holding on to what you have - renting may leave you feeling in a state of limbo, if that makes sense. It was suggested to me that I sell and rent after here by a bank manager where I am thinking of moving to, but I couldn't get my head around that - I'd be left renting in London (costs money), purchasing a house to be left empty where I want to move to (potentially costing money too if it needed doing up)! Renting wouldn't feel right! It's all a personal choice and we all feel differently about different things!

Muffins78 - thank you for your reply.

No - the buyer hasn't done a survey. She doesn't intend to - that was part of the deal with the ?25k off. She's a cash buyer so is in the position to call the shots and to walk away, with no cost to her if necessary.

Bellenden Belle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> Others say house prices are falling and we should take the money, and go rent, ready to purchase

> when the moment arrives.


Prices aren't falling. According to people tracking these things, they are just not rising as fast as they were.

Loz is right and probably it's just the market not moving as fast as it was!


I'm glad you've come to some decision - a young girl as a cash buyer sounds mad! Also mad on another sense that she wouldn't so a survey - a bit dodge making such a large investment. I make that comment in general not about your home Bellenden Belle!


I hope you get the 50k off if you are looking to so that now and/or find a more perfect place for you :) It all happens for a reason, everything does :)

Sorry Alice for not replying earlier.

We haven't as yet because we are waiting for a hard copy of the survey (due Thursday) so we can quote and give accurate quotes (though we have had an indepth discussion with the surveyor so we know the contents already).


I don't imagine someone taking off 50k and we just can't afford to meet them halfway as is the usual case when you buy a period house. But we will ask....

Regarding comments about KFH in East Dulwich, we bought a house here last year and the KFH agent was so bad with us, lying to us and putting words in the sellers' mouths, that the sellers apologised to us and told the agent to stop any further communication with us without their approval. I certainly won't go near KFH when I get round to selling.
New tactic being used by Winkworth to make people believe that house prices are still at May/June highs = leave a house as 'under offer' on your website even though the buyer retracted their offer 2 weeks ago and the seller has taken the house off the market market. Genius. Fool people into believing you've managed to sell a house at a super high level when in fact you haven't.
  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...