Cases - Knight Frank & Rutley v Randolph

Record details

Name

Knight Frank & Rutley v Randolph

Date

[1991]

Citation

1 EGLR 46

Keywords

Estate agency

Summary

The defendant vendor refused to pay commission to the plaintiff agents, alleging that a higher price could have been obtained but for the agents' negligence or breach of contract. The essence of the claim was that the agent had not informed a Mr Potter (the eventual purchaser) of a higher offer.

In evidence it was established that Potter had said to the agent that he would 'not be budged' from his offer of £805,000 and was not interested at £900,000. He had stated that he would not increase his bid but wished to be kept informed. So when another person offered £875,000 and eventually agreed to buy for £900,000, the agent did not inform Potter of this. With hindsight the agent admitted that it was probably wrong not to inform Potter, but in the circumstances the judge found that she believed quite reasonably that Potter was not interested at that price. In the view of the judge, Potter, an astute businessman, had cleverly played a waiting game - keeping his cards close to his chest. In fact he played almost too well, as he nearly lost the purchase and only came in at a late stage with a bid for £925,000 resulting in the other bidder being gazumped. In any case, the judge found that £925,000 was a good price and that the defendant's hope of achieving the magic £1m was 'never on the cards'. The guide price was £900,000 and there were few bidders in a poor market. The judge wholly acquitted the agent of negligence or breach of duty of care and stated that the litigation and the large costs incurred should have been avoided.