EA Requesting an Inappropriate Level of Information

hi! · 14-06-2021 6:32pm

RotaryPhone wrote: »

We're certainly not comfortable with providing this level of personal information to an estate agent just to view a property. Especially over email where we have zero knowledge on how or where that data will be stored. Most estate agents we've dealt with so far have been happy for us to provide an AIP letter with all PII redacted, including the $ amount.

Truly surprised how dismissive some people are being about this.

It’s truly shocking. Asking for bank statements with nothing redacted just to VIEW a show house is madness

14-06-2021 6:38pm

hi! wrote: »

It’s truly shocking. Asking for bank statements with nothing redacted just to VIEW a show house is madness

If the launch the op is referring to is the one in the news today where 5000 registered interest in 44 houses, I completely understand why the EA is looking for those details. Chances are, those 44 houses will sell extremely quickly, so the info is requested from those who are effectively willing to pay the deposit at the viewing to secure the house. With that amount of interest, they don’t give a damn about a letter from D O’Brien, the DPC or any disgruntled viewer, and they will not care in the slightest what level of mortgage approval people have when selling the next 44. 5000 for 44 houses, wow.

14-06-2021 6:52pm

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Just because you believe it possible they are doing this doesn't make it reality. I worked on a project that gets photos of people and stores it for identification. A good friend of mine told me how the gardai had access to these photos and connected to community CCTV to track people. I explained how it was not possible and the gardai can't access one image let alone the entire amount. Wouldn't believe me. You sound like him.

GDPR allows for gathering of data if relevant and this is relevant. They just cannot share it or keep it indefinitely. No laws even vaguely been broken here. People really do make up their own fears

The GDPR says that data can only be held for as long as needed.

The day, or arguably the hour, after the viewing they should delete all that data.

Of course they don't really need the information to begin with so its hard to gauge when they should get rid of it, I don't think that that's a way around GDPR though. "We never needed this information so how can GDPR apply".

It's hard to believe that anybody is defending this, people will defend anything.

Graham · 14-06-2021 6:55pm

Ray Palmer wrote: »

You can gather data all you like if people give it to you. GDPR is basically about what you do with it once you get it.

Sorry Ray, it's pretty clear you misunderstand the data protection legislation.

Ray Palmer wrote: »

So what? He sends them a letter and they still haven't broken any laws.

Apart from those covering data protection?

14-06-2021 6:57pm

Dav010 wrote: »

If the launch the op is referring to is the one in the news today where 5000 registered interest in 44 houses, I completely understand why the EA is looking for those details. Chances are, those 44 houses will sell extremely quickly, so the info is requested from those who are effectively willing to pay the deposit at the viewing to secure the house. With that amount of interest, they don’t give a damn about a letter from D O’Brien, the DPC or any disgruntled viewer, and they will not care in the slightest what level of mortgage approval people have when selling the next 44. 5000 for 44 houses, wow.

Thats just an argument to power. They have to power to do this so they do it. Theres no morality, just naked raw market power.

As for not caring about the DPC, if they are violation, then shut them down. The DPC is not fit for purpose if it can't do that or issue a massive fine.

Graham · 14-06-2021 6:59pm

fvp4 wrote: »

The DPC is not fit for purpose if it can't do that or issue a massive fine.

The DPC can issue a massive fine. It's rarely necessary as an appropriately worded letter from them generally results in a very quick winding in of the neck.

A few EAs appear to have got over excited when COVID restrictions prevented viewings other than in very limited circumstances. I don't expect it to last.

14-06-2021 7:01pm

I cant believe the amount of people who cant believe the amount of people who dont think this is a big deal

Tinfoil hats lads

14-06-2021 7:02pm

Graham wrote: »

The DPC can issue a massive fine. It's rarely necessary as an appropriately worded letter from them generally results in a very quick winding in of the neck.

A few EAs appear to have got over excited when COVID restrictions prevented viewings other than in very limited circumstances. I don't expect it to last.

A massive fine to discourage the others might be useful here.

14-06-2021 7:03pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I cant believe the amount of people who cant believe the amount of people who dont think this is a big deal

Tinfoil hats lads

Three double negatives there and I get lost after two.

Treppen · 14-06-2021 7:03pm

Graham wrote: »

The DPC can issue a massive fine. It's rarely necessary as an appropriately worded letter from them generally results in a very quick winding in of the neck.

A few EAs appear to have got over excited when COVID restrictions prevented viewings other than in very limited circumstances. I don't expect it to last.

You're very trusting.

DPC will do nuthin.

EAs will still be asking what your budget is for the foreseeable future.

RotaryPhone · 14-06-2021 7:12pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I cant believe the amount of people who cant believe the amount of people who dont think this is a big deal

Tinfoil hats lads

There doesn't have to be something nefarious going on for people to not want their sensitive financial and personal information being sent via email. Even a cursory google search will tell you to that email is a huge security risk and to never use it to send sensitive information. Yet here are these estate agents asking people to send their most sensitive info to them.

Hubertj · 14-06-2021 7:26pm

Amadan Dubh wrote: »

A story just published in the IT demonstrating the mania phase of the market cycle we are in. Savills claim it is due to covid restrictions but that is bull at this stage of reopening. It's tragic to see this, lemmings scurrying to the edge of the cliff.

I think a balance is required in terms of what info should be provided in order to filter out time waster or people who do not have funding in place.

I don’t think it is fair to refer to people buying a home as “lemmings”.

Graham · 14-06-2021 7:32pm

Treppen wrote: »

DPC will do nuthin.

That often depends on you (or others) doing something...

From the DPC

Generally, we will require you to have raised the matter directly with the organisation before raising a concern with this office. If you have done this, and are dissatisfied with the organisation’s response (or if you have not received a response from the organisation), you may proceed to raise a concern with the DPC. When you raise a concern with us, we are obliged to provide you with an update or outcome report within three months. Where the matter goes on for longer, we will update you at three month intervals thereafter.

Source: DPC - Complaints handling, Investigations and Enforcement For Individuals

From personal and professional experience, the DPC are pretty good at their job.

AndrewJRenko · 14-06-2021 7:49pm

Ray Palmer wrote: »

GDPR allows for gathering of data if relevant and this is relevant. They just cannot share it or keep it indefinitely. No laws even vaguely been broken here. People really do make up their own fears

That's an over-simplification at best.

"Organisations must only process the personal data that they need to achieve its processing purposes. "
https://itgovernance.eu/blog/en/the-gdpr-understanding-the-6-data-protection-principles

There's a big question as to whether the data they are seeking is the minimum required to achieve the processing purpose.

Ray Palmer wrote: »

You can gather data all you like if people give it to you. GDPR is basically about what you do with it once you get it.

That is untrue.

SmokyMo · 14-06-2021 7:50pm

Cyrus wrote: »

Yet people have also complained on this thread about bids from buyers who didn't have the required funding in place.....

Can you bid on property without providing proof of funds? Or putting deposit?

I think that's a separate process to arranging a viewing.

Amadan Dubh · 14-06-2021 8:17pm

Hubertj wrote: »

I think a balance is required in terms of what info should be provided in order to filter out time waster or people who do not have funding in place.

I don’t think it is fair to refer to people buying a home as “lemmings”.

Yes, it's not so much that they are rodent like, but the analogy was meant more that they are following a group blindly towards the edge of a cliff (i.e. desperation to get on the property ladder, with a stampede of others despite there being a cliff up ahead and the potential to fall off it being a reference to rising interest rates which appears to be entirely off the radar for a lot of people taking on mortgages - it's all about getting to that magic number of a deposit and getting the house that they can; "renting makes no sense compared to a mortgage", "your cousin just bought out in X").

Graham · 14-06-2021 8:18pm

Mod Note

some posts moved from the Property Market Chat thread.

Graham · 14-06-2021 8:19pm

This one is particularly relevant, thanks MacronvFrugals for the earlier post

https://twitter.com/DarraghOBrienTD/status/1404459482613260294?s=20

14-06-2021 8:21pm

Graham wrote: »

This one is particularly relevant, thanks MacronvFrugals for the earlier post

https://twitter.com/DarraghOBrienTD/status/1404459482613260294?s=20

That’ll scare them.

FromADistance · 14-06-2021 8:28pm

https://www.thejournal.ie/savills-proof-of-funds-5466338-Jun2021/

OP, have we got the culprit?

As I said in a previous post, AIP, proof of HTB approval and availability of funds in the case of cash buyers should be more than plenty enough to screen prospective purchasers. Why an estate agent would require proof of savings when a mortgage provider has already provided AIP is curious unless same estate agent was trying to build a data profile of purchasers for subsequent phases under the cover of 'Covid'. No wonder estate agents have the poor reputation they have with carry on like this.

FromADistance · 14-06-2021 8:43pm

Graham wrote: »

This one is particularly relevant, thanks MacronvFrugals for the earlier post

https://twitter.com/DarraghOBrienTD/status/1404459482613260294?s=20

The Property Services Regulatory Authority is a largely toothless regulatory body... I mean they don't even have the power to insist that vulture funds and the like register exactly how much they paid for multiple properties (as in the exact property address and price per property).

Unless people keep holding estate agents to account via the DPC and the DPC act with fines, I doubt this practice will stop even when Covid restrictions are relaxed. Up to now I'd say some estate agents were only too delighted that they didn't have to stand around weekend after weekend showcasing new property.

Graham · 14-06-2021 8:46pm

FromADistance wrote: »

The Property Services Regulatory Authority is a largely toothless regulatory body... I mean they don't even have the power to insist that vulture funds and the like register exactly how much they paid for multiple properties (as in the exact property address and price per property).

Unless people keep holding estate agents to account via the DPC and the DPC act with fines, I doubt this practice will stop even when Covid restrictions are relaxed. Up to now I'd say some estate agents were only too delighted that they didn't have to stand around weekend after weekend showcasing new property.

Can't disagree with any of that really but the more people (particularly those with a large audience) that shine a light on the subject, the more likely the DPC is to step in.

Undoubtedly, individuals holding the EAs to account via formal requests and follow-up complaints to the DPC are the best approach.

Bass Reeves · 14-06-2021 10:06pm

During the last property boom EA's used similar information to push up prices. There was a Prime Time program about it. At the time EA started to set up Mortgage brokers. The information the brokers got regarding the funds available to a client were accessed by sales staff.

scrumqueen · 15-06-2021 11:09am

I can't believe how many people are willing to just hand over that level of information just to secure a viewing.

Also, as pointed out, 44 houses and thousands of interested buyers?

OK, so what do they do after the 44 houses are sold?

The EA with all this data, look at second hand houses they are selling in the area, look at the average amount and ratchet up the prices to meet the funds! Et Voila More commission for the EA! Easy peasy.

The market is already out of control, please lets not make it worse.

Slow down and think about who benefits in these situations, because it wont be joe soap purchaser.

15-06-2021 11:22am

scrumqueen wrote: »

I can't believe how many people are willing to just hand over that level of information just to secure a viewing.

Also, as pointed out, 44 houses and thousands of interested buyers?

OK, so what do they do after the 44 houses are sold?

The EA with all this data, look at second hand houses they are selling in the area, look at the average amount and ratchet up the prices to meet the funds! Et Voila More commission for the EA! Easy peasy.

The market is already out of control, please lets not make it worse.

Slow down and think about who benefits in these situations, because it wont be joe soap purchaser.

Savills stated all data provided by those not successful in buying in this phase is deleted. Given the level of interest, it seems highly unlikely EAs would rely on this data to get paid.

I would say the 44 successful applicants benefit, and anyone who refused the information won’t.

Busi_Girl08 · 15-06-2021 11:26am

scrumqueen wrote: »

I can't believe how many people are willing to just hand over that level of information just to secure a viewing.

Also, as pointed out, 44 houses and thousands of interested buyers?

OK, so what do they do after the 44 houses are sold?

The EA with all this data, look at second hand houses they are selling in the area, look at the average amount and ratchet up the prices to meet the funds! Et Voila More commission for the EA! Easy peasy.

The market is already out of control, please lets not make it worse.

Slow down and think about who benefits in these situations, because it wont be joe soap purchaser.

Savills' claimed in their statement that the info from failed applicants (and does that mean the thousands who don't make the first cut, or those who go sale agreed and have to pull out later on) will be "purged", but no mention of the data of the 44 successful, or what they'll do with the info before it's purged. (Savill's statement here: https://www.thejournal.ie/savills-proof-of-funds-5466338-Jun2021/)

Also, someone could send through their full AIP document, proof of savings, gifts, etc, but their mortgage application could easily fall through at loan offer stage (KBC pulling exceptions, for example, change in circumstances, etc), so the information they're requesting means bupkiss unless you're talking about a cash buyer with the money ready to go, making it very easy for them to cherry pick the "easy" sales. I know this happens already with 2nd hand sales during bidding but this is at a much grander scale and is just a depressing sign of the times.

Wondering have other EAs similar emails ready to go out for their next phases of new builds, but are waiting for DPC clarification and for Savill's to take the brunt of the heat first.

scrumqueen · 15-06-2021 11:31am

Dav010 wrote: »

Savills stated all data provided by those not successful in buying in this phase is deleted. Given the level of interest, it seems highly unlikely EAs would rely on this data to get paid.

I would say the 44 successful applicants benefit, and anyone who refused the information won’t.

[Sarcasm Filter] Oh my god well of course! if Savills said that then it must be true! Because EA's are definitely the most wholesome and rule abiding profession I have ever come across! [/Sarcasm Filter]

Dick Turnip · 15-06-2021 11:35am

Dav010 wrote: »

Savills stated all data provided by those not successful in buying in this phase is deleted. Given the level of interest, it seems highly unlikely EAs would rely on this data to get paid.

I would say the 44 successful applicants benefit, and anyone who refused the information won’t.

They could still build a data set of the max budgets of all 5000 applicants before deleting. Just a simple list of € budget, not linked to any person so no gdpr issue in the list in of itself.

Again, it's not for these 44 houses, they will sell anyway at the price already advertised. It's for subsequent phases, or future properties in the area.

Mainly, it's to make sure this sh1te practice doesn't become accepted as the norm or in anyway acceptable.

scrumqueen · 15-06-2021 11:36am

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

Also, someone could send through their full AIP document, proof of savings, gifts, etc, but their mortgage application could easily fall through at loan offer stage (KBC pulling exceptions, for example, change in circumstances, etc), so the information they're requesting means bupkiss unless you're talking about a cash buyer with the money ready to go, making it very easy for them to cherry pick the "easy" sales. I know this happens already with 2nd hand sales during bidding but this is at a much grander scale and is just a depressing sign of the times.

Sorry now but just no. AIP is all that's needed. Its just a viewing.

Also why on earth would you the purchaser knowing it was outside your price range bother your hoop to go viewing a house during a pandemic?

Also with so much demand, all of this nonsense is just not required, the houses will sell regardless. Its data mining and price gouging. Simple As.

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

Wondering have other EAs similar emails ready to go out for their next phases of new builds, but are waiting for DPC clarification and for Savill's to take the brunt of the heat first.

EA's gunna be EA's and i doubt they really even care that much to wait.

Busi_Girl08 · 15-06-2021 11:44am

scrumqueen wrote: »

Sorry now but just no. AIP is all that's needed. Its just a viewing.

Also why on earth would you the purchaser knowing it was outside your price range bother your hoop to go viewing a house during a pandemic?

Also with so much demand, all of this nonsense is just not required, the houses will sell regardless. Its data mining and price gouging. Simple As.

Oh I 100% agree, and I wouldn't send more than a redacted AIP, and I've been lucky to have never been asked until we were at sale sgreed stage.

I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of it all, and makes it much more favourable for cash buyers.

EA's gunna be EA's and i doubt they really even care that much to wait.

Yep, you're probably right

More of this to come I reckon unless the DPC brings the hammer down hard on them (not likely).

JeffKenna · 15-06-2021 12:31pm

No issue with providing that information if bidding, I don't think it's fair that some can push up a price without having the means to see through the purchase.

For a first viewing I don't think so however.

javaboy · 15-06-2021 1:41pm

JeffKenna wrote: »

No issue with providing that information if bidding, I don't think it's fair that some can push up a price without having the means to see through the purchase.

For a first viewing I don't think so however.

No issue giving your unredacted AIP letter to the estate agent whose job it is to get the best price for the seller?

I'd be all in favour of a system where bidders have to verify they can back up their bids with cash/loan but it would have to be a trusted 3rd party with appropriate privacy & safeguards in place. The seller's estate agent is 100% not that person.

Busi_Girl08 · 15-06-2021 1:43pm

javaboy wrote: »

No issue giving your unredacted AIP letter to the estate agent whose job it is to get the best price for the seller?

I'd be all in favour of a system where bidders have to verify they can back up their bids with cash/loan but it would have to be a trusted 3rd party with appropriate privacy & safeguards in place. The seller's estate agent is 100% not that person.

A letter from a solicitor/broker maybe? Adds extra pressure (and expense) to buyers to have to have a solicitor in place at such an early stage, and some solicitors only talk to you when sale agreed.

javaboy · 15-06-2021 1:50pm

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

A letter from a solicitor/broker maybe? Adds extra pressure (and expense) to buyers to have to have a solicitor in place at such an early stage, and some solicitors only talk to you when sale agreed.

Tbh the mortgage provider should be offering this service. If you have AIP & you've proved your funds to the bank, there should be a simple PDF generator on the bank's portal for any amount you choose (up to your max).

I did the solicitor option when the EA wasn't happy with a redacted AIP (after going sale agreed) and they were ok with it but they thought we were being awkward. FWIW the solicitor told us we were smart not to give it out.

JeffKenna · 15-06-2021 2:03pm

javaboy wrote: »

No issue giving your unredacted AIP letter to the estate agent whose job it is to get the best price for the seller?

I'd be all in favour of a system where bidders have to verify they can back up their bids with cash/loan but it would have to be a trusted 3rd party with appropriate privacy & safeguards in place. The seller's estate agent is 100% not that person.

Nope, no issue. Got a call before from a estate agent telling me a property I was bidding on had fell through. Went back to my previous bid and asked was I interested in it at that price. Sur that price was only inflated by a bidder without funds to actually buy.

Ace2007 · 15-06-2021 2:10pm

javaboy wrote: »

I'd be all in favour of a system where bidders have to verify they can back up their bids with cash/loan but it would have to be a trusted 3rd party with appropriate privacy & safeguards in place. The seller's estate agent is 100% not that person.

Either a system, or a financial penalty if the winning bidder pulls out.

K.Flyer · 15-06-2021 2:13pm

Estate agents being estate agents, what a fcukin' surprise.
Anyone who doesn't believe that they will harvest all that data to set next phase prices is extremely naive.
It has all the hallmarks of the good old pre crash Celtic Tiger days..

I wonder how they would react to being asked for copies of the builders finances to ensure he is in a stable position to fully complete the development without going bust.
Proof of financial contingencies in case his current finance stalls.
Proof that all sub contractors working on site are fully qualified and registered to carry out their work.
Provide certification that there is no trace of pyrite, mica or other contaminants being used during construction and if found later what contingencies are being put in place to rectify same later.
Etc etc etc.. that questionnaire could be a long one.

javaboy · 15-06-2021 3:09pm

JeffKenna wrote: »

Nope, no issue. Got a call before from a estate agent telling me a property I was bidding on had fell through. Went back to my previous bid and asked was I interested in it at that price. Sur that price was only inflated by a bidder without funds to actually buy.

Yeah I get you but if the EA knows your max budget, why wouldn't they just tell the seller what it is and to hold out for that amount regardless of other bidders?

Bidding can be a bit like bluffing at poker. They're asking to see your cards.

I think you're solving one problem while creating another potentially worse one.

Ace2007 wrote: »

Either a system, or a financial penalty if the winning bidder pulls out.

A financial penalty only kicks in when the winning bidder can't back it up. It doesn't do anything about the dodgy bidders who whipped up the price. I also suspect it would be nearly impossible to enforce given all the legitimate reasons there are to pull out of a sale.

irelandrover · 15-06-2021 3:14pm

I might be reading it wrong but isnt it just you have to provide proof of funds. So if funding with a mortgage you provide the approval in principle. If funding from savings you show you have the savings?

this doesnt seem like an over the top request.

SupaCat95 · 15-06-2021 3:22pm

irelandrover wrote: »

I might be reading it wrong but isnt it just you have to provide proof of funds. So if funding with a mortgage you provide the approval in principle. If funding from savings you show you have the savings?

this doesnt seem like an over the top request.

Look at it the other way, ever play cards? You keep them close to your chest. You dont show your cards until the last minute. Once they know your limit that is their goal.

irelandrover · 15-06-2021 3:27pm

SupaCat95 wrote: »

Look at it the other way, ever play cards? You keep them close to your chest. You dont show your cards until the last minute. Once they know your limit that is their goal.

But this is a new development with a set price. So knowing that you can afford more doesn't have any benefit for the EA.

in a situation where you could end up bidding then i agree and a letter from your bank stating you can cover the asking price should suffice.

SupaCat95 · 15-06-2021 3:29pm

irelandrover wrote: »

But this is a new development with a set price. .

No its not just new builds, its rentals and second hand houses too.

RotaryPhone · 15-06-2021 3:32pm

irelandrover wrote: »

But this is a new development with a set price. So knowing that you can afford more doesn't have any benefit for the EA.

in a situation where you could end up bidding then i agree and a letter from your bank stating you can cover the asking price should suffice.

I've been asked for this for 2nd hand properties as well as new builds. One estate agent even went so far as to ask me to provide my pin for my Help to Buy application. All of this over email, which is one of the least secure methods of transmitting information. And this was just for a viewing.

Ace2007 · 15-06-2021 3:57pm

irelandrover wrote: »

I might be reading it wrong but isnt it just you have to provide proof of funds. So if funding with a mortgage you provide the approval in principle. If funding from savings you show you have the savings?

this doesnt seem like an over the top request.

Let's say you are a cash buyer and have 1m in the bank wanting to buy a house. You go to view these new builds, show your bank account statement. The EA now knows your rich. For whatever reason you don't buy the new build, but you see a 2nd hand house that you like that the same EA looks after, he now knows that you have the money to pay over the tops for this house if you really want it. Is this fair?

javaboy · 15-06-2021 4:01pm

Ace2007 wrote: »

Let's say you are a cash buyer and have 1m in the bank wanting to buy a house. You go to view these new builds, show your bank account statement. The EA now knows your rich. For whatever reason you don't buy the new build, but you see a 2nd hand house that you like that the same EA looks after, he now knows that you have the money to pay over the tops for this house if you really want it. Is this fair?

Exactly. And it's not even a far fetched or convoluted example. There are only a handful of estate agents operating in any one area so you're likely to cross paths with the same ones again and again if you're house hunting for a while.

Ace2007 · 15-06-2021 4:01pm

javaboy wrote: »

A financial penalty only kicks in when the winning bidder can't back it up. It doesn't do anything about the dodgy bidders who whipped up the price. I also suspect it would be nearly impossible to enforce given all the legitimate reasons there are to pull out of a sale.

There shouldn't be a legitimate reason to pull out if your serious in the first place. You go to an auction - once the hammer goes down - it's your house - there are no legitimate reasons to pull out then. So if it works in that scenario it could work in this if the will was there.

Second option would be to pay a nominal fee in advance to bid on a house. If you think about buying shares - There is a detailed process involved for account an account from AML to KYC - even if it's just €100 worth of shares, whereas at the the moment any Tom, Dick or Harry can go bidding on a 500k house with no questions asked.

Ace2007 · 15-06-2021 4:04pm

javaboy wrote: »

Exactly. And it's not even a far fetched or convoluted example. There are only a handful of estate agents operating in any one area so you're likely to cross paths with the same ones again and again if you're house hunting for a while.

And more so - Sherry fitz is country wide albeit i'm not sure how they are all connected, but whose to say the systems aren't connected and that everyone in the country could check my budget etc.

average_runner · 15-06-2021 4:06pm

10pennymixup wrote: »

It rules out time wasters and they'll blame the pandemic.

But I wonder do the REITS have to provide such info when they're buying out whole estates.:rolleyes:

Usually all their accounts are published

javaboy · 15-06-2021 4:09pm

Ace2007 wrote: »

There shouldn't be a legitimate reason to pull out if your serious in the first place. You go to an auction - once the hammer goes down - it's your house - there are no legitimate reasons to pull out then. So if it works in that scenario it could work in this if the will was there.

There are loads of legitimate reasons to pull out. So many things would need to be in place before this system could work e.g. 3rd party independent survey paid for by the seller, insurance etc. Banks can decline to provide full loan approval through no fault of the borrower. Buyers can lose jobs unexpectedly or experience any number of unforeseen circumstances.

Ace2007 wrote: »

Second option would be to pay a nominal fee in advance to bid on a house. If you think about buying shares - There is a detailed process involved for account an account from AML to KYC - even if it's just €100 worth of shares, whereas at the the moment any Tom, Dick or Harry can go bidding on a 500k house with no questions asked.

Who receives this nominal fee? I would set my asking price low to collect as many of these fees as possible

Ace2007 · 15-06-2021 4:14pm

javaboy wrote: »

There are loads of legitimate reasons to pull out. So many things would need to be in place before this system could work e.g. 3rd party independent survey paid for by the seller, insurance etc. Banks can decline to provide full loan approval through no fault of the borrower. Buyers can lose jobs unexpectedly or experience any number of unforeseen circumstances.

Who receives this nominal fee? I would set my asking price low to collect as many of these fees as possible

But all those scenarios that you mention could happen when buying at auction, but it's too sh!t. The minimum you'll lose is the deposit and probably more.

EA Requesting an Inappropriate Level of Information

Comments