How much should I pay for an estate agent? My friends say my £6,000 quote is extortionate
It wasn't the cheapest of the three quotes we got, but we thought the agent really knew his stuff.
We opted for a package at £5,000 plus VAT, so £6,000.
There was a cheaper option at £3,500 plus VAT, but our 'enhanced' option included a video, social media promotion and drone footage.
We also thought that, if we paid more, the agency would be more likely to prioritise our sale.
But after speaking to two sets of friends who have recently sold, they think we've paid over the odds. Have we?
Ed Magnus of This is Money replies: You have done the right thing to have met with different agents before picking one.
The fact the selling agent you met made a good impression is a positive, but he may not be that involved in actually selling your home.
Typically, a branch manager will come to value your home and once instructed it will be left up to their team of sales negotiators, who get paid commission when they sell a property.
If it was me, I'd be more interested to know who those negotiators are, rather than relying entirely on my first impressions of the manager.
The fixed fee structure you have been offered certainly differs from the norm. Whether or not it is good value or not depends on what your home sells for.
Most estate agents charge a percentage fee of the selling price, rather than a flat fee. This, in theory, incentivises each agent to get the best possible price.
However, depending on the value of the home, this could also mean shelling out a vast amount. The percentage typically ranges between 1 and 3 per cent of the selling price, often with VAT on top.
Someone selling their £250,000 home with an agent charging a 3 per cent fee plus VAT would end up paying £9,000 in agency fees, for example.
For those selling more expensive homes, even a fairly standard 1.5 per cent plus VAT fee (totalling 1.8 per cent) can eat up more than £10,000. Sell a £750,000 property with that fee and the agent will take a £13,500 cut.
On that basis, your £6,000 flat fee inclusive of VAT may be deemed low if you are selling a property worth £500,000 or more.
But if you're selling a property worth £200,000 for example, that would equate to 3 per cent, which is at the pricey end of the scale.
For expert advice, we spoke to Angela Kerr, a director at property advice website HomeOwners Alliance and Jeremy Leaf, north London estate agent and a former Rics residential chairman.
Is this estate agent fee good value?
Angela Kerr replies: Estate agents usually offer a commission model, which charges you a percentage of the final sale price.
At the moment, fees average 1.42 per cent including VAT and in today's climate we advise home sellers to negotiate with the aim of paying 1 per cent.
On that calculation, if you're paying £5,000 plus VAT as a flat fee, it only really stacks up if your property is worth £500,000 or more. Below that, it does start to look expensive and your friends have a point.
Jeremy Leaf replies: I believe a fixed-price arrangement may not prove to be in the best interests of seller or agent.
The amount could be influenced by the value or saleability of the property and its context.
For instance, does the £6,000 flat fee represent approximately 1 or 1.5 per cent of likely sale proceeds?
Commission based on a percentage of the purchase price may give the agent added incentive to achieve the best possible deal.
There's another issue with fixed fees – they don't suit all properties and market conditions.
A set amount may be suitable when marketing identical-sized flats in a large block of flats or similar houses in a substantial development, where differentiation can be tricky.
However, in this scenario, the seller would want to stand out even more so motivating the agent to send buyers in a particular direction can be a sensible approach.
Will the 'enhanced' add ons help to sell?
Angela Kerr replies: Most flat-fee estate agents are online agents, with packages typically around £1,000 to £2,000. Some high street agents offer fixed fees too, but it's less common - and these deals are often paid upfront, whether they sell your home or not.
So while you might think paying more will get you better service, if they've already banked the fee, I'm afraid there's not much of an incentive to prioritise your sale.
As for all the marketing bells and whistles, without knowing the property, it's hard to say if it's value for money.
Drone footage is brilliant if you're by the coast or selling a country pad with acres and a pool, but I'm not sure it's worth it if you're selling a semi in Surbiton.
I do love a virtual tour though, for giving you the real feel of a property - that's genuinely useful for most buyers.
As for social media promotion, it depends. If they're popping your home on an Instagram page with 500 followers, that's unlikely to shift the dial.
What other advice would you offer them?
Jeremy Leaf replies: I do not believe sellers should over-concentrate on commission, provided the fee is competitive and relates to the estate agent's work.
It generally represents only a small proportion of the total price of the property, and the sale of their home can be life-changing, in terms of job, family or other reasons.
What we find is of most importance to sellers currently is listing their property in this buyers' market at the right price, as so much stock is available across most price ranges.
It's essential that each property stands out, so the right pricing and marketing is even more vital than usual. Get it wrong and the property could languish on the market.
If possible, choose the agent with the best recent track record of selling similar properties, agree on a marketing programme and a relatively short period before amendments are considered if you have had no success.
A fixed-term agency agreement including a notice period which allows the seller to change agents if necessary, before the property goes 'stale', is a good idea too.
Angela Kerr adds: You mention the selling agent really knew his stuff which is good news.
It's important you can work with your agent and that they have a good knowledge of the local market.
Valuing your house right is an important first step to selling quickly at the best price.
How to find a new mortgage
Borrowers who need a mortgage because their current fixed rate deal is ending, or they are buying a home, should explore their options as soon as possible.
Buy-to-let landlords should also act as soon as they can.
Quick mortgage finder links with This is Money's partner L&C
> Mortgage rates calculator
> Find the right mortgage for you
What if I need to remortgage?
Borrowers should compare rates, speak to a mortgage broker and be prepared to act.
Homeowners can lock in to a new deal six to nine months in advance, often with no obligation to take it.
Most mortgage deals allow fees to be added to the loan and only be charged when it is taken out. This means borrowers can secure a rate without paying expensive arrangement fees.
Keep in mind that by doing this and not clearing the fee on completion, interest will be paid on the fee amount over the entire term of the loan, so this may not be the best option for everyone.
What if I am buying a home?
Those with home purchases agreed should also aim to secure rates as soon as possible, so they know exactly what their monthly payments will be.
Buyers should avoid overstretching and be aware that house prices may fall, as higher mortgage rates limit people's borrowing ability and buying power.
What about buy-to-let landlords
Buy-to-let landlords with interest-only mortgages will see a greater jump in monthly costs than homeowners on residential mortgages.
This makes remortgaging in plenty of time essential and our partner L&C can help with buy-to-let mortgages too.
How to compare mortgage costs
The best way to compare mortgage costs and find the right deal for you is to speak to a broker.
This is Money has a long-standing partnership with fee-free broker L&C, to provide you with fee-free expert mortgage advice.
Interested in seeing today's best mortgage rates? Use This is Money and L&Cs best mortgage rates calculator to show deals matching your home value, mortgage size, term and fixed rate needs.
If you're ready to find your next mortgage, why not use L&C's online Mortgage Finder. It will search 1,000's of deals from more than 90 different lenders to discover the best deal for you.
> Find your best mortgage deal with This is Money and L&C
Be aware that rates can change quickly, however, and so if you need a mortgage or want to compare rates, speak to L&C as soon as possible, so they can help you find the right mortgage for you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
23 minutes ago
- Reuters
UK hedge fund Marshall Wace posted mixed returns for July, source says
LONDON, Aug 4 (Reuters) - British hedge fund Marshall Wace returned mixed results in two of its funds in July, a source close to the matter told Reuters on Monday. Co-founded by British financier Paul Marshall, the $76.9 billion firm returned 1.6% in July culminating in a 6.1% performance for 2025 so far in its Eureka Fund, the source said. The hedge fund's Market Neutral Tops fund returned -0.22% for July and is up 10.99% year to date the source added. Systematic stock trading hedge funds, like Marshall Wace, are up roughly 10% for 2025 so far, said Goldman Sachs on Monday.
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Why has Kemi Badenoch fallen out with Liz Truss?
Dearie me, they're at it again. Former Tory leader Liz Truss and current Tory leader Kemi Badenoch are involved in another nasty spat, mainly about the infamous mini-Budget introduced by then Prime Minister Truss in September 2022. Badenoch has invoked that calamitous – and deeply Conservative – fiscal event in an otherwise routine attack on the government. Truss, ever ready to defend her record, because no one else will, has hit back and told Badenoch she's wrong and needs to do some more thinking, a particularly hurtful jibe when Badenoch thinks herself one of the brainier kids in the Westminster playground. Amusing and mildly diverting as it may be, this minor row also tells us some much bigger things about the Tory dilemma. What did Badenoch say? That Labour is even more incompetent than Truss was: 'For all their mocking of Liz Truss, Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves have not learnt the lessons of the mini-Budget and are making even bigger mistakes. They continue to borrow more and more, unable and unwilling to make the spending cuts needed to balance the books.' Is that new? Not really. Only a few weeks ago, the shadow chancellor, Mel Stride, evicted from ministerial office by Liz Truss when she formed her short-lived government, laid into the mini-Budget and apologised for it. Badenoch, meanwhile, has said she doesn't know whether Truss is still in the Conservative Party, and implied she doesn't really care either way. She's long let it be known she'd prefer Truss to just go quiet for a while. Badenoch has also been disobliging about the Sunak administration 'talking right but acting left'. But Sunak, like Johnson, May and Cameron, has, so far, preferred to ignore the present controversies and policy shifts, such as Badenoch's 'net-zero sceptic' stance. What's the Truss defence? The usual – her supposedly brilliant plan to turbocharge the British economy was thwarted by a terrible econo-bureaucratic blob and those, to the visionary Truss, idiots at the Bank of England. But increasingly she is having to adapt her line because of attacks from her own party (if she is indeed still in it), which means slagging off the administrations that came before her – Cameron, May, Johnson – and after, Sunak and now Badenoch's performance as leader of the opposition: 'It is disappointing that instead of serious thinking like this, Kemi Badenoch is instead repeating spurious narratives. I suspect she is doing this to divert from the real failures of 14 years of Conservative government in which her supporters are particularly implicated.' Er... weren't they both members of these dreadful governments? Yes. Truss continuously from 2012 to her ousting in 2022, and Badenoch from 2019 to 2024. Indeed, it was Truss who promoted Badenoch to the cabinet as international trade secretary. Neither showed much dissent, publicly or privately. Why are they scrapping? Neither wants to take responsibility for their own failures as a party leader, and that can inevitably lead to blame throwing for their disastrous showing at the election, and subsequently. But all politicians in all parties who find themselves thrashed by the voters are faced with this excruciating dilemma as they enter the wilderness of life in opposition: Do they denounce the record and policies of the government they were apparently happy to be a part of? Or do they defend their record instead? Do they agree with the voters' verdict or not? And if they want to, or have to, admit 'mistakes', are they going to be big or smaller ones? How to play it? By ear – there are no hard rules. Back in the 1970s, Margaret Thatcher, as leader of the opposition, did well out of renouncing most of what the Heath government had done because it ended in such chaos, and Thatcher was (like Badenoch today) a relatively junior cabinet member who could claim some innocence. In due course, because public opinion had shifted during the Blair years, David Cameron found that he'd have to criticise Thatcher herself, so he declared that 'there is such a thing as society' and told his fractious party to 'stop banging on about Europe'. Ed Miliband, after Labour's defeat in 2010, never seemed able to make up his mind about whether the Brown administration (in which he served) had failed, and, if so, how and why. Try as he might, Nick Clegg could never grovel sufficiently for what he did on tuition fees in the coalition government, and the Lib Dems were so punished at the 2015 general election that they were left with eight MPs compared to the 56 elected in 2010. At the moment, the Conservative-led government of 2010 to 2024 has few friends and many critics, the most vociferous being some of its leading lights. In this respect, the party is behaving more like Labour traditionally does after a defeat. Thus, after the 1974-79 Labour government fell from power, it was attacked by the Bennites on the Labour left for being too right-wing, and by the social democrats on the right for being too left-wing. Eventually, the long passage of time made arguments about pay policy, union power and unilateralism irrelevant. One day, when people have forgotten who Truss and Badenoch were, they may be ready to give the Tories a hearing. But, with Farage on their right flank, with no qualms about slagging off the last government, the Conservatives may not have the luxury of time to settle their differences and focus their attacks on him.
Telegraph
26 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Bank ‘must cut rates six times' over next year to boost ailing economy
Andrew Bailey must slash interest rates six times over the next year to bolster flagging growth, economists have warned. The Bank of England Governor and his colleagues on the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) are expected to cut borrowing costs from 4.25pc to 4pc this Thursday. But a growing cohort of economists predict Bank officials will be forced to go much further over the next 12 months. Six cuts would take the base rate to 2.75pc next year – the lowest level since late 2022. Peder Beck-Friis, an economist at Pimco, an investment company, said higher taxes, slower growth and the weakening jobs market will all push the Bank to cut rates further next year. 'While inflation has been surprisingly firm, we see good reasons to expect a slowdown. Regulatory price hikes, including in employment taxes, have pushed prices up, but wage growth is softening and the labour market is weakening,' he said. Companies are passing the £25bn increase in employers' National Insurance contributions on to customers, but 'once this tax shock fades, we expect inflation to ease, as seen in other developed countries'. 'We expect the Bank to accelerate rate cuts later this year, with the policy rate settling near 2.75pc next year,' he said. Michel Nies, from Citi, predicts rate cuts in August and November before an acceleration from December in the wake of 'very likely tax increases in the autumn Budget', taking the base rate to 2.75pc. He cites the weakening jobs market as the critical factor. The economy has lost 178,000 employees on payroll over the past year. Businesses in particular are taking a beating: 'The divergence between public and private sector employment growth continues to widen with the former still masking a sustained contraction in the latter,' Mr Nies said. Bruna Skarica, at Morgan Stanley, also expects cuts to 2.75pc because unemployment has risen to 4.7pc, the highest rate in four years. 'The build-up of slack in the labour market ... can only result in pay and price disinflation over time,' she said. 'The laws of economic gravity can be delayed, but not denied.' These economists remain in the minority, and even this week's anticipated rate cut will not be entirely uncontroversial. Policymakers are cutting interest rates even though inflation, at 3.6pc and rising, is well above its 2pc target. However, monetary policy takes as long as two years to feed through to consumer prices, meaning this week's rate decision will only fully pass through to inflation in mid-2027 - and will have little effect on the rise in living costs this year. Jack Meaning, a former Bank of England economist now at Barclays, forecasts a three-way split on the MPC. He anticipates that two policymakers will vote to hold rates, two for a double cut to 3.75pc, and the majority of five backing a move to 4pc. 'Despite these divergent views on both sides, we think the centre of the committee, and ultimately the decisive bloc, will continue on a gradual and careful quarterly rate cutting path, until it reaches 3.5pc in February 2026,' he said. The most recent three-way split came in May, when external MPC members Swati Dhingra and Alan Taylor voted for a half percentage point rate cut to 4pc.
