A triumph of corporate marketing over delivery
We chose Knight Frank alongside a local agent to sell our property. Initial meeting was upbeat and positive, however, the portal/paperwork was extremely clunky (it’s a useful idea but I was unclear about which site [Knight Frank or the Home Owner Passport site] to use which then required a couple of resets and a Kafkaesque encounter with the Compliance Department requiring the intervention of the Office Partner.
Moving on to brochure production - the photographer and floor plan provider were excellent and we were extremely happy with the pictures chosen. I did, however, have to rewrite the text of the brochure myself due to inaccuracies and poor grammar. From this point on there was virtually no communication about how the property was being marketed, what publications etc. etc. which had been part of the initial sell and the reason we chose a global firm alongside a local one. After a few weeks with nothing forthcoming, I contacted them to get an update, however, still no details were provided. I was then advised that a new member of the team had been recruited and would be handling the sale. Following another introductory meeting communication was a little better, however despite being assured of marketing activity and promotion none of this produced a single viewing! The suggestion was then a reduction in price. By contrast the local agent generated roughly 12 qualified viewings, telephoned with an update every week (sometimes more) and secured a cash buyer. When I advised Knight Frank about the exchange and completion dates I was made aware (for the first time) that the individual who had been recruited to manage my property was no longer with the business.
I should give credit to the Office Partner who agreed to reduce their contractual share of the fee from the joint agency agreement in favour of the local agent as given the performance of Knight Frank it felt much fairer. Would I recommend or use Knight Frank again? Definitely not!
.
