It was an expensive house - so we're talking about a considerable amount of commission, shifted to Hamptons in the Court of Appeal a couple of days ago. Why I am I writing about this? Because the story's interesting - in a technical kind of way - and might have repercussions for estate agents in the future. A Mrs Bicknall appointed Foxtons to sell her rather expensive house. When they didn't... she enlisted the help of Hamptons, and changed the Foxtons agreement from sole agency to multiple. While Foxtons were sole agents, they'd shown the house to a Mr and Mrs Low... but the Lows hadn't bitten. When Hamptons showed the Lows around, they did bite, and eventually exchanged. Foxtons caught wind of this later, and demanded their kickback commission, pointing to a clause in their contract that stated she'd be liable if she sold the house to "a purchaser introduced by them". Foxtons took her to court, and won. And it's that decision that was overturned a couple of days ago. The appeal judge based his decision on the definition of "purchaser". A purchase is apparently a purchaser when he decides to purchase. When Foxtons introduced the Lows, they weren't purchasers... they became purchasers afterwards. Interesting. You can read the full report - if you can be bothered - here.

Technorati Tags: estate agents, Foxton's, Foxtons, real estate agents