Connells and Purplebricks face scrutiny over alleged unethical sales practices in UK property market
- Seller Claims Home Was Undersold in Connells’ Branch
- ‘Hot Buyers’ and Conditional Selling Allegations
- Regulatory Gaps and Calls for Reform
- Purplebricks Under Fire for Alleged Overvaluations and Pricing Practices
- Pressure to Sell Add-On Services at Purplebricks
- Implications for Homebuyers and Sellers
- Conclusion and Next Steps
An undercover BBC Panorama investigation has uncovered troubling evidence that major UK estate agencies Connells and Purplebricks may be prioritising corporate profits over clients’ interests, allegedly sidelining buyers who do not use in-house financial services and pressuring sellers into unwanted price reductions. The probe highlights practices that have raised concerns about fairness, transparency, and regulatory compliance in one of Britain’s most significant housing sectors.
Seller Claims Home Was Undersold in Connells’ Branch
Julie Gallagher, a homeowner in Abingdon, Oxfordshire, believes her house was sold below its market potential following Connells estate agents’ management of the sale. Panorama’s undercover reporter spent six weeks working inside Connells’ Abingdon branch and found evidence suggesting the agency favoured buyers willing to use Connells’ in-house mortgage and conveyancing services over potentially higher offers.
Julie stated, “She sat on this sofa… and said she was actually working for me and she obviously is not, she’s working for the company’s ends. How dare Connells do that? Just appalling.” According to Panorama, the buyer ultimately chosen had agreed to an in-house mortgage package, which Connells estimates to be worth around £2,000 in fees alone. When factoring in additional services such as conveyancing and selling the buyer’s old property the total revenue Connells could generate from that transaction may have reached £10,000.
‘Hot Buyers’ and Conditional Selling Allegations
Panorama’s inside investigation revealed a culture where the branch encouraged prioritising “hot buyers” prospective purchasers already signed up to Connells’ internal mortgage and conveyancing products. The senior branch manager candidly acknowledged the commercial benefit of such buyers during secretly recorded conversations.
Estate agents like Connells operate in a highly competitive market and often offer in-house financial products. However, independent financial advisers warn of the dangers posed when agents link property sales to in-house mortgage use, a practice known as “conditional selling,” which is explicitly prohibited by the industry’s Code of Practice for Residential Estate Agents. This code, adhered to by Connells and many other firms, forbids discriminating against buyers who do not use an estate agent’s own mortgage or conveyancing services.
“Our investigation shows that, despite formal obligations, the pressure to upsell services at Connells’ Abingdon branch shapes customer outcomes to the company’s financial benefit,” said the undercover reporter. Phone messages and office bulletins documented by Panorama also listed “hot buyers” for whom the company anticipated earning multiple revenue streams.
Lisa Webb, a consumer law expert at Which? Magazine, described the behaviour as potentially unlawful: “This is absolutely something that should be against the law and something these estate agents really ought to be investigated by the authorities for, because this should not be happening.”
Regulatory Gaps and Calls for Reform
Connells refuted accusations of conditional selling, insisting that “no harm has been caused” and that their accepted offers represented the highest bids. The company further emphasised ongoing staff training to ensure compliance with legal and ethical standards.
However, financial journalist Iona Bain noted a regulatory grey area regarding the sidelining of buyers who do not engage with in-house services. “There’s clearly a grey area here, whereby estate agents are able to accept one buyer that will use the in-house broker and turn everybody else away,” she explained.
Current legislation, particularly the 1979 Estate Agents Act, classifies discriminatory treatment based solely on mortgage arrangements as an “undesirable practice,” punishable through Trading Standards investigations. Still, nuances exposed by Panorama may fall outside strict enforcement criteria, underscoring calls for updated regulation.
Purplebricks Under Fire for Alleged Overvaluations and Pricing Practices
In a separate but related investigation, Purplebricks, a prominent online estate agency, faced scrutiny following disclosures from a former employee. The whistleblower secretly recorded internal meetings and revealed that staff were incentivised to initially overvalue properties to attract sellers, only to subsequently pressure them into reducing asking prices a strategy that generated additional commission earnings.
An agent within Purplebricks candidly admitted in a private message, “We are overvaluing properties massively just to gain instructions.” The whistleblower also described instructions from management encouraging sales staff to “plant the seed” for price reductions if early interest in listings was low.
The estate agents’ industry code states that firms “must never deliberately misrepresent the market value of a property.” Purplebricks responded that it no longer rewards staff for price cuts and does not intentionally overvalue homes to secure listings. The company also acknowledged imperfections and pledged ongoing service improvements following its 2023 ownership change.
Pressure to Sell Add-On Services at Purplebricks
Beyond pricing strategies, the whistleblower further alleged that Purplebricks staff experienced pressure to push additional financial products, such as conveyancing services, which often came at a premium. Buyers Ryan Evans and Olivia Phelps, who purchased a two-bedroom home through Purplebricks, paid £2,820 last year for conveyancing nearly three times the cheapest comparable quote available, according to Panorama’s price comparisons.
Ryan said, “We were none the wiser having never done all this before. I certainly felt like maybe they [Purplebricks] had taken advantage of us a bit because we were first-time buyers.”
Lisa Webb of Which? highlighted the risks of such sales models: “Anyone working in sales is encouraged to sell more, but it is a real issue if an estate agent incentivises someone to make a very quick decision or pressures them into making decisions too quickly… before they’ve had the option to shop around.”
Purplebricks categorically rejected claims of pressure-selling, saying its approach focuses on explaining benefits rather than emphasising price, and maintains a customer-first culture.
Implications for Homebuyers and Sellers
The BBC Panorama investigation shines a spotlight on concerns that certain estate agency practices may compromise market fairness and transparency. With UK homebuyers increasingly reliant on estate agents’ guidance in complex transactions, ensuring robust protections and enforcement is essential.
Analysts caution that these practices can distort property values and cost sellers and buyers alike financially. The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) previously urged reform of estate agency transparency, while consumer groups renew calls for tighter regulation.
Conclusion and Next Steps
BBC Panorama has reached out to Connells and Purplebricks for comments, both companies affirming their commitment to fair customer treatment. Regulatory bodies including Trading Standards and the Financial Conduct Authority have been asked to review findings.
Given the critical role of estate agents in one of Britain’s largest financial markets, ongoing scrutiny will be vital to safeguarding consumer interests amidst evolving industry dynamics.
Para un análisis más detallado y una cobertura continua de los mercados laborales de EE.UU., las políticas comerciales, el gobierno del Reino Unido, las finanzas y los mercados, permanezca atento a PGN Business Insider.
