Nine Listings, One Nervous Vendor
A vendor instructs a negotiator to sell a 22-year-old two-storey terrace, 1,650 sq ft, original condition, in a mature Petaling Jaya neighbourhood. She wants RM1.25 million because 'the agent down the road said so', and needs to complete within four months because of a job transfer. The negotiator's evidence: (i) same street, renovated and extended, sold RM1.36 million two months ago; (ii) next road, original condition, sold RM1.05 million eleven months ago; (iii) a bank auction unit in the same row at RM890,000 three months ago; (iv) new townhouses 3 km away launched at RM1.15 million with a 10% rebate and free legal fees. There are nine active listings on the same street and roughly seven months of inventory.
1. Select and adjust the comparables and give a defensible price range.
Read the worked answer
Comparable (i) - renovated, same street, two months old. Best evidence on location and recency, worst on condition. The renovation and extension are not in this house: strip out their cost at market replacement value (say RM150,000–RM200,000 for a renovation of that type and scale). Adjusted: roughly RM1.16m–RM1.21m. This is the upper anchor.
Comparable (ii) - original condition, eleven months old. Best match on condition, weakest on time. Eleven months in a flat-to-soft market with seven months' inventory means no time uplift, possibly a small discount. Adjusted: about RM1.05m. This is the most reliable central indicator.
Comparable (iii) - auction at RM890,000. A forced sale is not a market sale; it reflects a lender recovering debt, not a willing buyer meeting a willing seller. Adjust upward for the forced element, but do not discard it: it caps what any buyer will pay while a cheaper unit in the same row is on the auction list. Adjusted: roughly RM1.00m–1.05m.
Comparable (iv) - new launch at RM1.15 million less 10% rebate. A different product (townhouse, new, different location, different maintenance profile) and a headline price distorted by incentives. Net of rebate and free legal fees it is nearer RM1.02m in effective terms. Weak comparable; useful only as evidence of what a buyer's alternative looks like.
Range: weight (ii) heavily and (i) as the ceiling. Market value band approximately RM1.05m–RM1.15m. Recommended listing: RM1.12m–1.15m, with a realistic expectation of closing around RM1.08m. Nine listings on the street is the number that decides timing: a buyer chooses the best of nine, and this one is original condition.
2. The vendor insists on RM1.25 million and wants the advert to say 'below market value - bank value RM1.35 million'. How do you handle it?
Read the worked answer
Separate the pricing advice from the advertising instruction.
On price: she may list at RM1.25m; the market will answer. But the instruction has to be met with the arithmetic, in writing: at RM1.25m she is 10% above the top of the adjusted range, in a street with nine competing listings pitched well below, with a four-month deadline. That combination usually produces three months of no offers, then a reduction to where the market was in the first place - after which the listing is stale and buyers assume something is wrong with it. Offer a plan instead: list at RM1.15m with a review date at 30 days, a written log of every viewing and enquiry, and an agreed step-down rule. That gives her control and gives you a mandate.
On the advert: refuse.
- 'Below market value' at RM1.25m, against your own adjusted range of RM1.05m–1.15m, is a misstatement of fact to the public.
- 'Bank value RM1.35 million' is worse: it asserts a valuation figure she has no written valuation to support. Bank values come from a registered valuer's report for a lender; a figure attributed to 'the bank' with no report is unverifiable and, in practice, a marketing fiction. If she has a real valuation report, check whether it is current and cite it accurately with the date and valuer's qualification.
Record the conversation. A file note of the advice given, the range you supported and the client's refusal to follow it protects you when the listing does not sell - and the Board's conduct standards do not permit you to publish statements you know to be untrue simply because the client asked.
3. Three weeks in, the vendor demands you 'just bring any offer, I'll decide later' and a colleague suggests quoting a lower advertised price then adding a 'service fee' at signing. What do you do?
Read the worked answer
The 'bring any offer' instruction sounds like flexibility and is actually a mandate problem. Take it in writing, then manage it: every offer is presented in writing with your recommendation, and she confirms accept or reject in writing. The risk you are guarding against is the classic complaint - 'the agent pushed me into a low price' - three months after a sale she authorised. Your file note and her signature are the answer.
The advertisement-plus-service-fee idea: this is a misdescription of the price of the property. A buyer attracted by RM999,000 who discovers RM30,000 of 'fees' at signing has been misled, and the fact that a colleague suggested it is no defence. It also creates real legal exposure - the SPA price and any financing must match what the buyer was told, and a hidden add-on can be characterised as an undisclosed commission or an attempt to move consideration off the contracted figure. Stamp duty and the lender's valuation both follow the declared price.
How to say no internally: frame it as commercial risk, not moralising - mispricing by hidden fee produces complaints, cancellations at the financing stage, and portal and Board exposure for the firm. Propose the legitimate alternative: advertise a genuine price, disclose the commission rate to the vendor under the agency agreement, and if the vendor wants a net figure, quote it as a net figure openly.
Escalate to the principal registered estate agent in writing if the suggestion is repeated. Junior negotiators are judged on what they did after they knew.