Who introduced the buyer to the purchase?
This is the first question we consider when deciding whether an agent is entitled to their commission on the sale of a property
It is not enough for an agent to introduce a buyer to the property. They must introduce the buyer to the purchase.
This means that a potential buyer who contacts an agent to ask questions about the property, or even to just view the property alone, will only be indicative of the agent introducing the buyer to the property, but not the purchase.
They must have viewed the property and, in an ideal situation, made an offer to purchase the property. This shows clear intention and active interest in the purchase.
This area is complex as it can be difficult to decide at which point the buyer was introduced to the purchase.
We would want to see that a viewing was booked, confirmed in writing to both the buyer and seller, and that it took place. A viewing which took place more than six months before the contract ended with that agent, with no continuity of interest, will not be viewed as an effective introduction
All agents are expected to keep thorough written records of all communications between all parties, including any interested parties, and these should be provided to Property Redress when raising a complaint.
Our investigation and resolution will decide whether there is a link between the introduction and the purchase of the property to the buyer, showing the introduction as the ‘effective cause’ of the purchase.
They introduced the buyer to the property
They introduced the buyer to the purchase of the property
They emailed the buyer about the property, but the buyer did not view it
To reach a resolution, we will consider:
when did the viewing take place?
how many viewings took place with the eventual buyer?
was the buyer showing active interest, by asking questions and providing positive feedback?
was the buyer in the financial position at the time to make the purchase? For example, did they have a mortgage in principle, and/or had the agent checked they had sufficient funds, if a cash buyer?
whether the buyer’s interest extinguished at any point and then reignited at a later date and if so, what was the course of events?
This is important as case law shows that the buyer needs to show active and continuing interest
what was the timeline of events?
This is important as proximity is a consideration
Was there a gap in the timeline of events? For example, did the seller pursue another buyer, whose offer was accepted, but this later fell through? Did the buyer then make a new (later) offer a long time after their initial interest?
were there any underhanded practices?
For example, in Charania v Harbour Estates Ltd, the court found that the buyer had:
shown a lot of interest in the property (viewing it four times with the agent)
not expressed any negative comments
intentionally waited until the seller ended their contract with the agent before placing an offer, and hoping to negotiate and get the best deal, thinking the seller would not pay commission
The court found that despite there being a long gap between the original viewings and the offer, the seller was responsible for commission:
as the buyer showed reasonable and active interest and the only reason he did not make an offer at that time was to try to negotiate on the price, based on the lack of a commission fee
