I REFER to yesterday’s letters by Mr Chua Khim Leng (‘New rules should protect property agents‘) and Mr Jason Sim (‘Zero commission? It’s too good to be true’).
The Institute of Estate Agents was advised by the Competition Commission of Singapore to remove its commission guidelines in June last year. In the commission’s view, the guidelines are ‘harmful to competition, restricting competition in both fee levels and fee structure in the real estate industry, and likely to have the object of appreciably restricting competition among real estate agents in the real estate agency market’.
The commission guidelines were officially removed in September last year. Mr Chua’s suggestion to standardise commission rates is not tenable as it is anti-competitive.
Agencies are at liberty to set their own fee guidelines and compete with each other on value propositions to their clients. This is where agents play a key role in adding value to the services provided. Continue reading
I REFER to the recent debate over the regulation of property agents in Singapore (‘Property agents to be regulated‘, Oct 5) .
As a property agent, I applaud the Government’s plan to set up a regulatory framework for the real estate industry. The proposed framework seems to be protective of consumers. But what about the rights of property agents? Having been in this line of work for three years, I have seen my fair share of how ‘ugly’ this industry can be:
- Clients these days do not give exclusivity to property agents to market their properties. Instead, they take advantage of the resources of the agents who are hungry for their business to market their properties. This is to the advantage of the clients as they get many advertisements and awareness out of this so-called competition among property agents. Continue reading