Buyer pays Tecnocasa €3,000 for an offer the owner rejected

Tecnocasa charges €3,000 for an offer the owner turned down

A buyer hands over €3,000 plus VAT to Tecnocasa so the owner will consider his offer on a flat listed well below the going price in the area. Fifteen days later, the answer is no — a relative wants to sell it for more. The money comes back. And the flat is still on the market.

The case, told step by step on a consumer forum, describes a mechanism several participants say they recognise: the agency sets a bait price, demands a deposit to "formalise" the offer, and leaves the buyer waiting while the owner decides whether to raise the price. The deposit is refunded, but the time and the information are not.

What the €3,000 deposit is and who pays it

The deal begins with a flat that Tecnocasa is offering well below what other agencies in the area are asking. The buyer views it, is interested, and the agent tells him that a deposit of €3,000 plus VAT is required to make the reservation. He was not told this over the phone. The buyer suggests deducting that amount from the final price, so that the seller effectively covers the commission. The next day he pays and gets a receipt: the owner has 15 days to consider the offer. If the buyer backs out, he loses the money. If she rejects, it is refunded.

Some argue that this amount is not a deposit in the legal sense, but the agency's commission disguised as a reservation fee. Others point out that a binding offer is formalised with an earnest money contract: if the buyer withdraws, he loses the deposit; if the seller withdraws, the buyer can claim double. There was no earnest money contract here. Just a receipt.

The pattern that repeats: low price, wait, then a raise

The buyer's account fits a script that several participants describe independently. First, a bait price below the competition's. Second, a two-week wait that generates anxiety. Third, the rejection of the offer with a fresh excuse: a relative appears who wants to sell for more, when on day one there was only one owner. Fourth, the invitation to raise the offer "a little bit". The buyer doesn't budge. He asks for his money back and walks away.

The agency returns the €3,000 and says it will call him if something similar comes up. It hadn't called in fifteen days. The buyer replies that he works with serious people, even if they sometimes make mistakes.

Commissions of 3% for the buyer and 4% for the seller

The underlying issue is the commission model. One participant recounts that in 2003, when completing the purchase of his home through this network, he discovered that in addition to the 3% they charged him, the agency was charging the seller 4%. A total of 7% on the transaction. The buyer is the only one putting money on the table; the other two split what he pays.

Another case described by a participant: a flat the owner listed at €70,000 that the agency advertised at €75,000 plus €5,000 commission. Ten thousand euros' difference on the same property. The figure is unverified, but the mechanism described is the same: the agency takes on the listing, marks up the price and charges both sides.

Exclusivity and the contract the seller signs

The other battleground is exclusivity. An owner signed up until October with an agency that valued her penthouse at €220,000 when units in the same development had sold for under €200,000, the last one for €187,000. The agreed commission: 4%, nearly €9,000. Two months later, with barely any viewings, she cut the price by €10,000. The agency accepted the reduction, but the commission was already signed: still €9,000. She absorbed the cut.

Some argue that exclusivity protects the seller from wasting time on time-wasters. Others respond that it ties the flat to an intermediary who may take months to sell it, while the owner bears the cost of every price cut.

What the buyer can do before paying anything

The most repeated advice is not to hand over any money before having the price accepted in writing. The suggested alternative: agree on a notary and a signing date, and hand over the full amount at that moment. If the seller genuinely wants to sell, they'll get moving. If not, the buyer risks nothing.

Before signing, several participants recommend requesting the property registry extract, talking to neighbours and the residents' association president, and checking for charges, outstanding community fees and occupants. The flat is to be handed over empty and tenant-free, and that goes in writing. Trusting the agent because he looks like a nice person appears in no protocol.

The outcome: money refunded, flat lost

The buyer got his €3,000 back. He lost fifteen days and his hopes. The agency lost a sale and a customer who won't be back. The flat is still on the market, now more expensive, with a relative in the equation who didn't exist on day one.

How many deals fall through like this every month in Spain without anyone keeping count?