Approval in Principle to arrange viewing

[Deleted User] · 29-06-2020 11:42pm

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 · 29-06-2020 11:51pm

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.

[Deleted User] · 30-06-2020 8:38am

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 · 30-06-2020 8:53am

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 · 30-06-2020 9:01am

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 · 30-06-2020 9:05am

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 · 30-06-2020 10:55am

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 · 30-06-2020 11:03am

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.

mariaalice · 30-06-2020 11:10am

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 · 30-06-2020 11:17am

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 · 30-06-2020 11:26am

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 · 30-06-2020 11:45am

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 · 30-06-2020 11:49am

bazwraf 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 · 30-06-2020 12:01pm

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 · 30-06-2020 1:19pm

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 · 30-06-2020 1:20pm

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 · 30-06-2020 1:22pm

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 · 30-06-2020 1:23pm

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 · 30-06-2020 1:28pm

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 · 30-06-2020 1:31pm

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.

Graham · 30-06-2020 1:34pm

awec wrote: »

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.

Because generally an EA will only request the information necessary to facilitate a viewing (the service being provided).

Financial documents of any variety are not necessary to facilitate a viewing.

awec · 30-06-2020 1:38pm

Graham wrote: »

Because generally an EA will only request the information necessary to facilitate a viewing (the service being provided).

Financial documents of any variety are not necessary to facilitate a viewing.

They aren't asking for a document with finances on it, they are asking for a document that states you are in a position to buy a house, so that they can ensure that viewings are performed safely in this current environment.

I notice you linked to an earlier GDPR case regarding tenants and having to hand over a whole manner of personal information to prospective landlords. I don't believe it's in any way comparable, since in that case the landlord was demanding specific financial data, across a wide range of areas, for every potential tenant. The EA isn't asking for bank statements or your mortgage amount.

In this case they literally want a letter saying you're in a position to buy a house. They likely aren't storing it anywhere. So long as they don't use this data for any other purpose (for example to stick you on some marketing email list for would-be buyers), then I think you'd have a hard time arguing that it's an unreasonable request or a superfluous collection of data.

hots · 30-06-2020 1:42pm

awec wrote: »

In this case they literally want a letter saying you're in a position to buy a house. They likely aren't storing it anywhere.

The letter does contain financial information in the maximum amount you can draw down and that's not info I would want to share with them. You're also being very generous that they aren't storing it anywhere.

That said, cover the amount and send it and move on. It's a good idea to weed out timewasters in general and there isn't a better way to do it for now.

Graham · 30-06-2020 1:57pm

awec wrote: »

I think you'd have a hard time arguing that it's an unreasonable request or a superfluous collection of data.

I'd welcome links to any authoritative source that supports your argument.

Genuinely. The above is all just my opinion, all be it that I think it's supported by the links and quotes I've submitted over the course of the thread.

givyjoe · 30-06-2020 1:59pm

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.

I've been asked for proof twice in 2 of about 30 viewings. One other consistently asks of AIP is in place as a viewing wont be arranged without one. That particular one doesn't actually look for a copy, just asks if it's in place.

awec · 30-06-2020 2:01pm

hots wrote: »

The letter does contain financial information in the maximum amount you can draw down and that's not info I would want to share with them. You're also being very generous that they aren't storing it anywhere.

That said, cover the amount and send it and move on. It's a good idea to weed out timewasters in general and there isn't a better way to do it for now.

I do not believe they expect you to share this with them.

crumble_15 · 30-06-2020 2:01pm

givyjoe wrote: »

I've been asked for proof twice in 2 of about 30 viewings. One other consistently asks of AIP is in place as a viewing wont be arranged without one. That particular one doesn't actually look for a copy, just asks if it's in place.

That's been my experience too. Have always been asked if mortgage has been approved, but never asked for written proof.

Lux23 · 30-06-2020 2:30pm

I can understand wanting to weed out 'tirer-kickers', but how many people at the moment are going to viewings just for the sake of it? I don't think that is all that likely.

givyjoe · 30-06-2020 3:04pm

Lux23 wrote: »

I can understand wanting to weed out 'tirer-kickers', but how many people at the moment are going to viewings just for the sake of it? I don't think that is all that likely.

Probably not that many as such, but definitely some who haven't got their AIP yet, which are effectively useless to the EA/Vendor.

Claw Hammer · 30-06-2020 3:45pm

Graham wrote: »

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.

An ea can only charge one side of a transaction either vendor or purchaser but not both. Other than the amount of loan approval there is little or no significant personal data. X is approved in principle for a mortgage of some unknown amount with a particular bank is not a serious amount of personal data particularly since it ought not be retained after the viewing.

Approval in Principle to arrange viewing

Comments