When a campaign like this is shown to the prospective sellers, it is delivered to the seller with certainty, confidence and an insistence that every aspect is necessary to ensure that the best buyer is found.

​

Now imagine it's a month down the track and the auction has just gone silent. The price the seller was promised hasn't been reached and now there is a crowd of buyers and curious neighbours waiting outside. The agent walks in and proceeds to tell the seller how "you need to meet the market" and "if we don't sell now we will need to run a new advertising campaign". They are essentially being given two choices:

​

Accept a lesser price than you were promised or pay the $9000 advertising bill. 

 

If they accept less and sell, they can move on. If they hold their ground and refuse to sell, then they must pay the current agent out, find a new agent, and potentially, go through the same process again.

​

The pressure is so high at this stage that most people give up and sell for whatever the market provided them on the day.

​

What if you refuse?

​

There are some circumstances where a seller, so incensed by what has happened to them, stands their ground and tells the agent that they refuse to take the lower offer and also refuse to pay the marketing bill. They do this because they feel justified - "the agent didn't fulfil their promise, so why should we have to fulfil ours?"

​

This is where the relationship between the agent and seller can really take a turn. The unethical agent now has one last trick up their sleeve that will turn the screws on the seller and force through the sale. The threat of debt collectors and the lodgement of a caveat on the property.

​

Below is a letter that was sent to a lady who had been through the scenario detailed above and decided to hold her ground.  When you read letters like this, there it is no suprise that agents have developed a bad reputation: 

​