Comparing agent fees and actual transaction support for Bengaluru student housing

K

kit_reese

Homeowner
Established
The cheapest Bengaluru proposal stopped looking cheap when I saw how much work sat outside its quoted fee. The property is student housing expected to sell for around ₹75,150,000, and another proposal charges more but folds in photography, buyer screening, negotiation and coordination through closing.

I want to compare measurable service rather than presentations or dashboards. What should each agent commit to regarding photography output, response times, handling offers, support after a buyer withdraws and disclosure of conflicts? I also want the named contact for each stage, because clean handoffs matter more to me than a vague promise of a dedicated team.

My tentative rule is to choose the lower fee if the excluded work can be priced and managed without gaps; otherwise, pay more only if one person is clearly accountable through completion. Are there Bengaluru-specific questions or recent comparable-sale evidence that would change that approach?
 
First put every proposal on the same fee basis. Ask each agent to show the total amount payable at ₹75,150,000, what triggers payment, what costs are separate and what happens if the transaction does not complete. A low headline fee can stop looking cheap once excluded work is priced separately.
 
Who is the named contact after the listing goes live? I’d ask whether that person handles enquiries, qualification, visits, offers and closing coordination, or whether each stage moves to someone else. Also request promised response times for buyers and for you. “Dedicated service” means little without names and handoff points.
 
I wouldn’t give much weight to a fall-through rate unless everyone defines it identically and has enough relevant transactions. An offer that collapses during early discussion is not the same as an agreed transaction failing near closing. Recent comparable student-housing sales in Bengaluru may be more revealing, especially if the agent explains why each is genuinely comparable.
 
Photography needs its own scope rather than a single tick box: who arranges it, what is delivered, whether floor plans or editing are included, and who approves the final materials. For buyer qualification, ask what information is obtained before a viewing and again before an offer is treated as credible. That should expose whether “qualification” is meaningful or just collecting contact details.
 
The offer process would decide it for me. Ask for a step-by-step explanation: how offers reach you, whether terms are recorded alongside price, who negotiates, how competing offers are handled and how updates are documented. I’d also ask how they disclose any conflict if they have another relationship connected to a prospective buyer. The answer should be specific, not merely “we manage everything.”
 
You could turn all of this into a one-page comparison table: total fee, excluded costs, named contact, response commitment, photography deliverables, qualification steps, offer handling, negotiation responsibility, fall-through support and closing coordination. Then ask each agent to correct their column and reflect the agreed scope in the engagement terms. I’d choose the clearest accountable chain over the longest feature list.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top