Sole agency vs multi-agency: An investigation of agency practice across England and Wales

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of different agency practice on agency fees, business efficiency, and housing market liquidity. Design/methodology/approach: The paper studies the effect of sole and multiple agency practices on estate agent efficiency, housing market liquidity, and commission fee levels. The analysis uses the survey data from 2000 to 2006 to investigate the different agency practices across England and Wales and their effect on estate agency business efficiency, housing market liquidity, selling price, and fee levels. Findings: The empirical analysis confirms that agency practice has a locality bias, that is, some regions are more likely to adopt sole agency practice than other regions. The estate agents with a sole agency practice charge a lower agency fee, help clients to achieve better selling price and are more efficient; whereas multiple agency practice facilitates liquidity in the housing market, but experiences higher fall-through rate. Research limitations/implications: The research focuses on estate agent rather than consumers due to the limitation of the data based on a research project concerning transaction costs designed prior to this analysis. Originality/value: There is little other research that investigates the residential estate agency practice and its impact on housing market in the past three decades in England and Wales. The findings are a useful guide for practitioners to better understand the issues associated with different agency practices and should enhance business efficiency and performance.

Constructive trusts, illegal purpose and locus poenitentiae

Analyses the Family Division decision in Q v Q on the competing claims of a father and son to beneficial ownership of a house in which the father sought to on a secret agreement entered into with his sons when transferring the property into their joint names, intended to subvert the inheritance tax rules on lifetime gifts by retaining the right to have the property transferred back to him, and the son relied on a later agreement with his brother to transfer the house into his sole name, in reliance on which he and his wife had acted to their detriment by paying for its upkeep and renovation.

No more nonsense

Discusses the approach of the courts to the quantification of beneficial interests in the family home in the event of a relationship breakdown. Assesses the clarification provided by the Court of Appeal ruling in Fowler v Barron on whether the respondent was the sole beneficial owner of a property purchased with his former partner, by means of a significant cash contribution from him and a mortgage in both their names, focusing on whether he could rebut the presumption that they held the property as joint tenants in equity where it was registered in joint names. [From Legal Journals Index]

Back to the bad old days?

Reviews the Court of Appeal decision in James v Thomas that a cohabitee had not acquired an equitable interest in a property registered in her former partner's sole name through a constructive trust, based on express or inferred common intention, or by proprietary estoppel. Highlights the inconsistent approach of the courts to cohabitee disputes. Outlines the Law Commission's proposals in its 2007 report, Cohabitation: The Financial Consequences of Relationship Breakdown, notes the factors to be taken into account by the courts, and speculates on the case's outcome if the proposals were applied. [From Legal Journals Index]