Comparing London agent fees after 33 days

[readTheEcho]

The low-fee proposal looks economical, while the inclusive one looks easier to manage; after 33 days of comparing them, I am not convinced either impression reflects the final value. This is for a London condo expected to sell at about £916,500.

I want each agent to define the same scope in writing: photography, buyer qualification, viewing and offer handling, negotiation, post-offer work and support if a deal falls through. I also plan to ask who will actually manage the file, how quickly enquiries and offers are reported, which comparable sales support the valuation, and whether any referral or other conflict will be disclosed. What measurable questions would expose a well-presented proposal that is weak in practice?

 

[bakesAndView]

Put every proposal into one table before comparing the headline fee. Record whether it is fixed or percentage-based, what price it applies to, whether anything is charged separately, and every excluded task. Then ask who personally handles viewings, offers and post-offer coordination. A named senior contact is not useful if the file moves to someone else immediately after listing.

 

[LightJournal]

The missing detail is what “excluded” means in practice. Do you perform those tasks yourself, appoint another provider, or pay the agent extra later? Ask the cheapest agent for a written price and responsibility against every exclusion. Otherwise you cannot compare its total cost with the inclusive proposal.

 

[bakesAndView]

Agreed. I’d also give more weight to achieved comparable sales than to presentation. Ask for recent comparable London condos, why they consider them comparable, the original asking price, achieved price and how long each took. For response time, request a specific commitment for acknowledging enquiries and offers rather than accepting “we respond promptly.”

 

[EasyPage]

I would not lean too heavily on a raw fall-through rate. Different properties and buyers create different risks, so the number can flatter or punish an agent unfairly. Ask what buyer qualification actually involves, when it happens, how an offer is reported to you, and what they do if progress stalls. Also ask them to disclose any interest or referral relationship that could affect their recommendations.

 

[gate.strong]

Give each agent the same hypothetical: two close offers arrive, one higher but with more uncertainty and one lower but apparently simpler. Who verifies the information, who calls you, what gets put in writing, and who negotiates? Their answers should expose the offer process better than a polished brochure. Get the escalation contact too, not only the person who wins the instruction.

 

[jade_details]

After 33 days, beware choosing simply because you want the comparison finished. Model the fee at a few possible sale prices around £916,500 and compare estimated proceeds after every listed extra. The cheapest percentage can cease to be cheapest once photography or transaction support is added, while the highest fee still needs to justify itself through a clear service commitment.

 

[GreenPost]

Photography needs its own questions: what is delivered, who approves the images, whether revisions or a reshoot cost extra, and whether the agent can replace weak images promptly. For buyer qualification, avoid accepting the word alone. Ask what they verify, at what point, who records it and whether the same process applies before every offer is presented.

 

[GreenPost]

One addition: make them define “closing coordination.” Does the named contact remain involved after an offer is accepted, how often will you receive an update, and what action do they take when one party stops responding? I’d shortlist two agents and send both the same written questions. Comparing specific written answers should make the service gap—and whether it merits the fee gap—much clearer.