Two agents--One house?

[Soozie]

I want to buy a house, but want to use a different agent than the one that originally showed me the house. Can I do that without getting into trouble with the first agent? I didn't sign a bon de visit, and I didn't make an offer with the first. I just looked around. Thanks!

[Albert the InfoGipsy]

If they've no documentary evidence (bon de visite or whatever) then presumably they can't do much about it. Whether it's ethical for you to use another agent is for you to decide, knowing all your reasons.

[Soozie]

Thanks for your reply. The reason I'm going with agent 2 is that he is actually from the same village as the house and has a lot of connections with the local artisians, being a former builder. The house needs some work. Agent 1 is not from the area, and very inexperienced. I think it's the smart move--I just don't want to get a letter in a few months expecting fees paid by agent 1.

[Jacqui Too]

Hi Soozie

When we view our house it was with loads of agents, 5 I think. On the day of the viewing the 1st agent said she had to collect the keys from another agent across the street, when we put in the offer it went through our agent to the other agent and after that we did all our dealing with the second agent, but the first agent came with us every time we signed and I know that the agency fee was split 50/50, we have continued to stay in contact with the second agent who has been an absolute gem helping us with Artisans and sorting out planning permission and all for only 50% of the fee!

So maybe if you feel bad about letting the first agent down and cutting him out of the fee (which is usually quite large for the amount of work they do) perhaps the 2nd agent could split the fee not necessarily 50/50 but something to keep the peace.

[P-D de Rouffignac]

The agency where I worked often showed properties to potential buyers that we felt we could trust. Sadly, for the sort of reasons given in this post, we had to revise our ideas and insist that everyone signed a 'bon de visite'. However even if there is no 'documentary evidence' the first agent could provide reasonable proof of introducing a client to a property - collection and sign-out of keys, evidence of having spoken of the visit to office colleagues, evidence of the property's owner, his own word against yours etc. Cases have been won on this basis.

In the situation described, you may also be putting the second agent in an awkward position (if indeed he has been informed)., especially if the two agents are members of the same professional association. The second agent will not want to be in the position of being seen to poach a client of another agency and face possible sanctions. Much of this business is based on trust and I feel you should respect that.

Ironical that you mention the second agent's links with local builders etc when half the posters on this forum (a) distrust agents in any shape or form, and (b) ditto anyone recommended by them! Sentiments I do not agree with, of course.

P-D de Rouffignac

www.francemediterraneanproperty.com

[virginia.c]

I'm with P de R on this one.  For me there is a moral obligation to continue with the agent who has first shown you the property

[Soozie]

Okay, so I took the advice and called the first agent back this morning (with a clearer conscience), and the house was sold yesterday PAP.