Approval in Principle to arrange viewing

crumble_15

Is it now standard practice for estate agents to obtain the Approval in Principle letter before they will arrange even an initial viewing of a property? Was in touch about viewing a house I'm interested in and estate agent was looking for this letter before arranging viewing. Seemed so strange to me?
Thanks

Mr Hindley

I had to submit, not just proof of AIP, but of the rest of my funding, for a viewing last week. That was a one-off, but it surprised me - it nearly put me off, but I went ahead, as it was a lovely flat.

Graham

First time I've heard of an EA looking for AIP just to arrange a viewing.

Personally I don't see it as a positive development and I can't imagine for a minute that it's an approach that would stand up-to scrutiny against data protection legislation.

Minier81

If I was providing an aip letter I would ensure the approval amount was obscured. I can understand them trying to weed out timewasters but there is no way they should know your budget.

crumble_15

Completely agree (re. approval amount). I mean you'd have zero bargaining power in that instance.

Canyon86

Should be mandatory imo.

Gets rid of the time wasters and those out for a nose

random_banter

This raises some concern for me as someone who is going into the viewing and buying process at the moment.

Does your AIP letter show the amount you're approved to borrow on it, i.e. the EA will see the amount you have been approved for? I wouldn't be comfortable with that at the start of a process.

Surely it's not in your favour if you're viewing a house of day 300k asking and you're approved to borrow 600k. Would the EA have any motivation to try to spook you into bidding more with phantom bids etc? (Only asking that as I've seen a lot of people here discussing that their EA may be making up bits in order to drive up the selling price). Would he be likely to share that verbally with the seller? Would there be a mentality of "oh they have the money, push the price up" going on? Perhaps that's a very naive view from someone who is new to bidding.

And yes the obvious answer to my post is that it's my choice what I bid at the end of the day.

EDIT: As I was typing, a number of posters raised similar concerns. So we can't all be wrong?

Graham

I understand the need for proof of funds (not necessarily AIP) if they're going to accept an offer. Just don't let an EA pressure you into divulging anything more that proof of funds.

I can't in a fit see how it's proportionate to request this level of information for viewings. You may not even want to proceed to making an offer.

shesty

No, we viewed a house a couple weeks ago, no letter was requested.

If it was, I would have let the viewing go.None of the estate agent's business what we can afford until we make an offer.

Marcusm

Graham wrote: »

First time I've heard of an EA looking for AIP just to arrange a viewing.

Personally I don't see it as a positive development and I can't imagine for a minute that it's an approach that would stand up-to scrutiny against data protection legislation.

Presumably they are trying to reduce the number of tyre kickers given the continuing limitations on having people in a strange house. Should be capable of sifting the through discussions and I would never disclose anything that showed my cards, however. Can’t blame them for trying. Nothing can be done under data protection as they are merely asking for the data to process. They don’t have it and can’t force you to disclose it to them.

Graham

Marcusm wrote: »

Presumably they are trying to reduce the number of tyre kickers given the continuing limitations on having people in a strange house. Should be capable of sifting the through discussions and I would never disclose anything that showed my cards, however. Can’t blame them for trying. Nothing can be done under data protection as they are merely asking for the data to process. They don’t have it and can’t force you to disclose it to them.

I suspect advice from the DPC would be along the same lines as guidance given to landlords seeking similar information prior to viewings. It's not proportionate. It's not appropriate.

There is no exemption to data protection legislation for "makes things easier for estate agents"

I don't see how telling somebody they must provide data to receive a service can be seen as outside the DPC remit. Whether you decide that is forced or not.

Graham

OP, in your position I would be tempted to drop a quick query to the Data Protection Commission here: https://forms.dataprotection.ie/contact

They're pretty good at reminding organisations about their responsibilities and getting them to reconsider how much data is actually necessary.

Queenio

I've viewed a couple of houses recently and been asked what our current situation is. As FTB with no lease we are ready to move and I've no problem disclosing that information. I'd also be more then happy to send them a copy of my AIP letter with the limit blanked out. It's none of their business what my limit it. A limit is not a target to my mind and I won't be pushed to spend more than I am happy to pay for a certain property.

That being said if this helps eliminate tyre kickers I'd be delighted. These high bids with nothing to back them up are driving expectations for a price that isn't always reasonable IMO. But maybe I've just been burned by vendors holding out for high asking prices despite sales and offers at that level repeatedly falling through.

crumble_15

Graham wrote: »

OP, in your position I would be tempted to drop a quick query to the Data Protection Commission here: https://forms.dataprotection.ie/contact

They're pretty good at reminding organisations about their responsibilities and getting them to reconsider how much data is actually necessary.

Funny you say this, I have just submitted a query to them. Will update when I get a response.

Graham

Queenio wrote: »

These high bids with nothing to back them up are driving expectations for a price that isn't always reasonable IMO.

I think most EAs ask for some type of proof of funds before accepting an offer.

IMO that's a reasonable request and covered by the "necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior to entering into a contract"

crumble_15

Graham wrote: »

I think most EAs ask for some type of proof of funds before accepting an offer.

IMO that's a reasonable request and covered by the "necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior to entering into a contract"

Agreed, that to me seems understandable and reasonable.

MudHutInaRut

We've been house hunting for the past month and most EAs have asked us verbally about our mortgage approval situation. Any bids we have placed have been accompanied by a copy of our AIP letter from the bank with all details blanked out (address, interest rate, term, and approval amount.)

Only one EA insisted that we show our AIP letter before a viewing and we refused. I can understand wanting to see some form of proof when lodging a bid, but to view a house is overkill in my estimation. It's also none of their business.

awec

Graham wrote: »

First time I've heard of an EA looking for AIP just to arrange a viewing.

Personally I don't see it as a positive development and I can't imagine for a minute that it's an approach that would stand up-to scrutiny against data protection legislation.

Pretty sure it's purely because of covid. Doing viewings is a lot more effort than it used to be, from a safety perspective better to only do it for serious buyers rather than tyre kickers.

LuG123

This is definitely covid related. I've been house hunting since the end of last year and they always asked if we were approved but never asked for proof. I've recently been asked for my AIP letter to make a viewing with one EA and when bidding for another and I blocked out the amount. They want to know if you are approved as there is a lot of demand for viewings at the moment and with the restrictions they can only have one couple in at a time for either 10 or 15 min. They just want to make sure the people viewing are not taking up time slots for people who are actually ready to buy. Again you do not need to let them know the amount you have been approved and for most EA just saying you have approval is enough but I have had to send AIP letter to one for a viewing. When our bid was accepted they then needed to see the AIP letter with the amount and the proof of funds which is understandable as they want to make sure they are accepting a bid from someone who has the funds and I had not problem with that. I don't think there is anything underhand really about this, they are just trying to make the most of their time. I would def say block out amount though. They should not have an issue with that and if they do then that's not ok in my opinion.

Homer

Graham wrote: »

OP, in your position I would be tempted to drop a quick query to the Data Protection Commission here: https://forms.dataprotection.ie/contact

They're pretty good at reminding organisations about their responsibilities and getting them to reconsider how much data is actually necessary.

And the EA would just say no a redacted version is fine. Absolutely nothing to do with GDPR. Its getting rid of time wasters and tyre kickers as previously mentioned. And if you or anyone else doesn't want to provide a redacted AIP letter for a property you are genuinely interested in then jog on. Market forces will prevail over that nonsense.

Graham

Is there some "permitted for the purpose of excluding tyre kickers" clause that's been added to the data protection legislation recently?

Homer

Graham wrote: »

Is there some "permitted for the purpose of excluding tyre kickers" clause that's been added to the data protection legislation recently?

No. but if the prospective purchaser redacts their name from the AIP document then GDPR is not an issue.

crumble_15

Homer wrote: »

No. but if the prospective purchaser redacts their name from the AIP document then GDPR is not an issue.

But if you redact your name from the document, they cannot prove it relates to you?! So what's the point of looking for it?

Graham

Homer wrote: »

No. but if the prospective purchaser redacts their name from the AIP document then GDPR is not an issue.

I don't think data protection prevents you from volunteering any amount of your personal data so if you're happy to hand it over, you're free to do so.

Of course it would probably be prudent for the receiving organisation to decline it for data protection reasons

guyfawkes5

LuG123 wrote: »

When our bid was accepted they then needed to see the AIP letter with the amount and the proof of funds which is understandable as they want to make sure they are accepting a bid from someone who has the funds and I had not problem with that.

In this case, I would still say to tell them to email your bank advisor or broker who would then confirm you can pay the given bid without revealing your approval limit. There is still a small possibility the seller may try to push for more money after accepting (it happens, but maybe not necessarily in today's market) or the sale could fall through and you could get the same EA on a different property.

Homer

Well you're the one who was banging the GDPR drum a minute ago telling them to get in touch with the data protection commissioner. Why do people have to complicate simple things? If you are genuinely (and that's the important bit) interested in buying a particular property and have AIP and are asked for it then redact your name/address and supply it That will be more than enough for most EA in my experience.

Graham

Homer wrote: »

Well you're the one who was banging the GDPR drum a minute ago telling them to get in touch with the data protection commissioner.

Correct, because I don't think an EA has any legal basis/justification for requesting such information for arranging a viewing.

At the same time I accept you're free to print out your bank statements and hand them to the staff in your local Centra should you so chose.

My opinion hasn't altered.

Darc19

Can anyone who has brought up the catch all "gdpr" issue, please explain to me what exactly is the gdpr issue in question and what part of the gdpr legislation is it in regard to.


Because so many people have zero idea of the precise nature of gdpr and what it relates to, others trot the phrase "gdpr" in every situation possible, but I've yet to see one of these people explain precisely what the gdpr issue is and back it up with a link.

Graham

Have a read of the guidance to Requesting Personal Data from Prospective Tenants it's a really good summary.

I know it's geared to estate agents/landlords and tenants but the data protection principles are the same.

Darc19

Graham wrote: »

Have a read of the guidance to Requesting Personal Data from Prospective Tenants it's a really good summary.

I know it's geared to estate agents/landlords and tenants but the data protection principles are the same.

Can't see anything there relevant to this thread. That's about landlords and letting agents.

Here the agent simply wants to see bona-fides of the viewer.

The agent is not looking for pps or addresses or bank accounts or utility bills and does not seem to be looking to hold the information.

So I can't see any gdpr issue.

At the same time, the agent shouldn't need to see the amount either and maybe the banks should have a letter that can be used which does not have any figures.

liam7831

Darc19 wrote: »

Can't see anything there relevant to this thread. That's about landlords and letting agents.

Here the agent simply wants to see bona-fides of the viewer.

The agent is not looking for pps or addresses or bank accounts or utility bills and does not seem to be looking to hold the information.

So I can't see any gdpr issue.

At the same time, the agent shouldn't need to see the amount either and maybe the banks should have a letter that can be used which does not have any figures.

You can just cover the amount and scan letter then to EA no hassle I did it for a house fee months ago. Think it should be mandatory as at least your not bidding against a clown with no money then

Seems ridiculous to me, and not something I'd been keen to offer up.
We bought our first house last year. At the start of the process, we organised viewings of a few houses within what we expected to be our price range. We hadn't even met a broker yet.
We wanted to get an idea, if nice houses existed within our price range, or whether we had better save for a longer period of time

Graham

Darc19 wrote: »

Can't see anything there relevant to this thread. That's about landlords and letting agents.

Here the agent simply wants to see bona-fides of the viewer.

The agent is not looking for pps or addresses or bank accounts or utility bills and does not seem to be looking to hold the information.

So I can't see any gdpr issue.

If I were an EA (I'm not), I'd be concerned about asking for AIP to facilitate viewings for 2 main DP reasons.

1) data minimisation. This requires that any personal data collected be adequate, relevant and, significant to this context.
2) consent. I don't think any consent given by an individual would be valid as there is an imbalance in power such that the consent is not freely given.

As a general rule, the GDPR prescribes that if the data subject has no real choice, feels compelled to consent or will endure negative consequences if they do not consent, then consent will not be valid.
12 If consent is bundled up as a non-negotiable part of terms and conditions it is presumed not to have been freely given. Accordingly, consent will not be considered to be free if the data subject is unable to refuse or withdraw his or her consent without detriment.

Article 7(4) GDPR indicates that, inter alia, the situation of “bundling” consent with acceptance of terms or conditions, or “tying” the provision of a contract or a service to a request for consent to process personal data that are not necessary for the performance of that contract or service, is considered highly undesirable. If consent is given in this situation, it is presumed to be not freely given (recital 43).

As AIP is clearly not necessary for the provision of the service (viewing a property), I would suggest tying the unnecessary provision of AIP leads to a presumption that consent has not been freely given.

Take away consent and necessity, I don't see what other provision an EA could rely on for collecting the data.

Graham

Graham wrote: »

Take away consent and necessity, I don't see what other provision an EA could rely on for collecting the data.

Surely the legal basis of processing they're relying on would be public interest/vital interest rather than consent? Limiting viewings to people who are ready to make a purchase is protecting the health of the EA, the viewer, and the public at large.

I do think evidence is a reasonable ask, as long as you dont have to provide the amount of the approval. It's definitely something people will lie about otherwise.

Graham

true-or-false wrote: »

Surely the legal basis of processing they're relying on would be public interest/vital interest rather than consent?

I'm not convinced to be honest:

It is most relevant to public authorities, but it can apply to any organization that exercises official authority or carries out tasks in the public interest.

The processing must be necessary. If the controller could reasonably perform the tasks or exercise its powers in a less intrusive way, this lawful basis does not apply.

If the public interest argument were to be relevant, one could argue supermarkets should be able to check your bank balance prior to you entering the store.

Lolle06

Graham wrote: »

If I were an EA (I'm not), I'd be concerned about asking for AIP to facilitate viewings for 2 main DP reasons.

1) data minimisation. This requires that any personal data collected be adequate, relevant and, significant to this context.
2) consent. I don't think any consent given by an individual would be valid as there is an imbalance in power such that the consent is not freely given.





As AIP is clearly not necessary for the provision of the service (viewing a property), I would suggest tying the unnecessary provision of AIP leads to a presumption that consent has not been freely given.

Take away consent and necessity, I don't see what other provision an EA could rely on for collecting the data.

What if it is a case of the vendor telling the EA that he/she doesn’t want tyre kickers and time wasters trawling around their property during Covid-19 times?
Does the vendor have the right to make this stipulation?
And if someone is not forthcoming with the information one will have to wait at the end of the line, or will not even get to see the property?

Graham

Lolle06 wrote: »

What if it is a case of the vendor telling the EA that he/she doesn’t want tyre kickers and time wasters trawling around their property during Covid-19 times?

A vendor absolutely has a right to stipulate no viewings. I assume this can be done on a case-by-case basis.

I don't think a vendor has a right to instruct an EA to ignore DP regulations in order to collect data in order to decide who gets to view.

dotsman

Guys, this has been around for decades. Dodgy/poor EA's look for it, and fools hand it over.

Never, ever give the EA the Approval in Principle Letter, nor tell them the max you can afford. They are, quite literally, the last person who you should give this info to.

If they ask for it, simply say that you are "approved for the asking price". If they ask again/insist, inform them that you will not be proceeding due to their extremely unprofessional behavior. And, if you can, inform the seller.

Claw Hammer

because of Covid, EAs can no longer do group viewings. In addition they now have to supply rinses and PPE to viewers. It is now not possible to offer every enquirer an appointment at an open viewing and sounding them out.
A viewing is now a significant overhead for an EA and it is reasonable to limit viewing to enquirers who have at least started the ball rolling with a bank and still have approval.

Just blank oust the amount on the letter that is a given, I had an offer that never progressed on a house the EA told me about the offer and also said she won't follow through, the EA just knew, they have years of experience remember they are selling houses every day be we might only buy 1,2, or 3 houses in our life time.

Its also to the buyer advantage it says the buyer is serious.

quokula

dotsman wrote: »

Guys, this has been around for decades. Dodgy/poor EA's look for it, and fools hand it over.

Never, ever give the EA the Approval in Principle Letter, nor tell them the max you can afford. They are, quite literally, the last person who you should give this info to.

If they ask for it, simply say that you are "approved for the asking price". If they ask again/insist, inform them that you will not be proceeding due to their extremely unprofessional behavior. And, if you can, inform the seller.

Well isn't this the whole point of it - to get people who were never serious anyway to walk away and not attend the viewing. Thus saving the vendor and EA time and money, allowing people who are serious the opportunity to visit, reducing the potential spread of any infection and maybe even saving a few lives in the process.

crumble_15

quokula wrote: »

Well isn't this the whole point of it - to get people who were never serious anyway to walk away and not attend the viewing. Thus saving the vendor and EA time and money, allowing people who are serious the opportunity to visit, reducing the potential spread of any infection and maybe even saving a few lives in the process.

OP here - from my point of view, I have the AIP letter, can afford the house, am serious about buying, etc., but a demand to show the letter before they would even show me the house completely turned me off.

House viewings are part of the selling process. I did it, it's a pain, but you do it because you want to sell your house for the best possible price. You have to accept that some people will be there for a nose. Let's face it, Mary and John down the road are going to go online and look at your house pics when your house goes on the market.

With COVID likely to have an impact on the market for quite a while, EAs and sellers will need to adapt to suit the changing environment. Conduct virtual viewings if you are concerned about numbers of people entering your home. If the potential buyer is interested after virtually viewing, you should accept they are serious. But to demand AIPs before showing a house will turn a lot of people off.

Also, to note, I have viewed other houses recently. The EAs conducted a scheduled open day. People given a 15 minute slot and no brochures provided. Very well run and people are far more likely to be receptive to this.

random_banter

If the buyer was a cash buyer, would they be asked to show a bank statement showing their balance?

Proof of "approved for the asking" would seem like a reasonable type of document to produce in order to avail of a viewing, but sure what party is going to be up for doing that extra paperwork, and it would maybe cost the buyer money just to get that kind of letter from a solicitor, no?

cruizer101

Deleted User wrote: »

whether we had better save for a longer period of time

And you are exactly the kind of viewer the estate agent is trying to eliminate.

Because of covid they are limited in the number of viewings they can do, and there is more expense to doing them.
So of course they are only want to show to people who can actually buy.

Don't get me wrong I understand your point of view that you want to view houses to start getting an idea, I did the same myself 3 years ago.
But we still have a global pandemic going on.
Its no different to the way shops are discouraging browsing, its just EA's have a way of actually checking if someone has the money and so is a serious buyer.

Personally I don't see an issue with it, its crappy but I understand their point of view. I also don't see it as a GDPR issue, in order to effectively run their business and carry out as many relevant viewings as possible they need to filter tyre kickers and this is a way that allows them, it is a legitimate business usage. (Caveat, I'm no expert on GDPR but neither are the majority of people here).

awec

random_banter wrote: »

If the buyer was a cash buyer, would they be asked to show a bank statement showing their balance?

Proof of "approved for the asking" would seem like a reasonable type of document to produce in order to avail of a viewing, but sure what party is going to be up for doing that extra paperwork, and it would maybe cost the buyer money just to get that kind of letter from a solicitor, no?

Generally you just get a solicitors letter stating that you have sufficient funds to meet the purchase price. There's not really paperwork involved. You show solicitor proof of funds, they write a pretty standard letter.

Graham

Claw Hammer wrote: »

because of Covid, EAs can no longer do group viewings. In addition they now have to supply rinses and PPE to viewers. It is now not possible to offer every enquirer an appointment at an open viewing and sounding them out.
A viewing is now a significant overhead for an EA and it is reasonable to limit viewing to enquirers who have at least started the ball rolling with a bank and still have approval.

That certainly appears to reflects the opinion of the EA the OP was dealing with.

Fortunately I don't see how it's supported by existing data protection legislation.

Many businesses are facing increased costs as a result of social distancing/additional hygiene requirements. Most still have to operate within the law.

Maybe the DPC will come back to the OP and tell them that GDPR has been suspended or is not being enforced in the current environment. You never know.

If an EAs costs have increased as a result of measures taken, I would have though it more appropriate to either increase charges to vendors or charge for viewings. No unnecessary personal data required for either of those options.

awec

Graham wrote: »

That certainly appears to reflects the opinion of the EA the OP was dealing with.

Fortunately I don't see how it's supported by existing data protection legislation.

Many businesses are facing increased costs as a result of social distancing/additional hygiene requirements. Most still have to operate within the law.

Maybe the DPC will come back to the OP and tell them that GDPR has been suspended or is not being enforced in the current environment. You never know.

If an EAs costs have increased as a result of measures taken, I would have though it more appropriate to either increase charges to vendors or charge for viewings. No unnecessary personal data required for either of those options.

I don't understand how showing a redacted letter saying you have mortgage approval has any GDPR implications?

Graham

awec wrote: »

I don't understand how showing a redacted letter saying you have mortgage approval has any GDPR implications?

I'd ask how do you share that personal data with the EA anonymously?

i.e. in a way that it cannot be connected to you yet still satisfies the EA?

awec

Graham wrote: »

How do you share that personal data with the EA anonymously?

i.e. in a way that it cannot be connected to you yet still satisfies the EA?

Just because it has your name on it does not mean that there is automatic GDPR implications. You don't have to share it anonymously.

Graham

awec wrote: »

Just because it has your name on it does not mean that there is automatic GDPR implications. You don't have to share it anonymously.

Personal Data

‘Personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person.

Any Information

This element is very inclusive. It includes “objective” information, such as an individual’s height, and “subjective” information, like employment evaluations. It is also not limited to any particular format. Video, audio, numerical, graphical, and photographic data can all contain personal data. For example, a child’s drawing of their family that is done as part of a psychiatric evaluation to determine how they feel about different members of their family could be considered personal data, insofar as this picture reveals information relating to the child (their mental health as evaluated by a psychiatrist) and their parents’ behavior.

awec

Yes, that is what personal data is.

My point was just because your name is on it does not mean there has to be some explicit GDPR clause for them to request it. That would be insane, and impossible to enforce.

So when you asked earlier in the thread if there was a GDPR exemption for estate agents to do viewings, the answer is of course there isn't, that's not how GDPR works.