Gazeal Opiniões 

Resposta da Gazeal

17/06/2026

Thank you for your review, and for giving us the opportunity to respond.

The Reservation Agreement does not, as you say, give the Seller the right not to be transparent, and it does give you the opportunity to claim the Commitment if the lack of transparency means that you consider that you were wrongly induced to enter into the agreement or you feel that the nature of the claim has changed.

In your case you withdrew because of a survey and because you claimed that the Seller had misprepresented the property.

The agreement provides that it is perfectly legitimate to withdraw because of the condition of the property provided that you demonstrate that the surveyor has identified works that are "urgent" and you have quotes from contractors demonstrating that the cost of their repair was in excess of 1.5% of the Sale Price. Prima facie, if you withdraw without getting the quotes, the cost of the repair of the urgent matter cannot have been in your mind at the time you withdrew. Most people do not have a problem with this concept and regard this requirement as fair.

You withdrew without having obtained quotes.

You also had the opportunity to show that the seller had mispresented the property and therefore that you were entitled to withdraw without payment of the Commitment and to claim the Commitment from the Seller before the Independent Expert.

You declined to do so.

There is nothing one sided about this arrangement, quite the opposite. You had every opportunity to demonstrate that the costs of the repairs were such as to allow you to withdraw, and to show that the Seller had misrepresented the property. You did not do so, and opted instead to pay and to submit a bad review.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Thank you for your comment. The agreement is drafted to be as fair as possible to both Seller and Buyer and therefore provides that if one party is going to withdraw they can do so reasonably on certain grounds but that they have to produce the specified evidence to substantiate this before they do. It is only very rarely that someone finds this unreasonable.

You specified several grounds, and despite having been asked for the evidence, you have not produced it. It is now for the Seller to decide whether they wish to take this forward, not Gazeal, who are the independent, impartial administrators of the agreement and are not a party to it.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Thank you for your review. I am very sorry that you have been left with an unfavourable view of our service.

As you rightly say, the Reservation Agreement provides for disputes between the parties to be resolved by an Independent Expert. This is a quasi judicial process, in which disputes are resolved according to the Law of England and Wales. The Expert appointed for this role is a recently retired Senior Circuit Court Judge and Kings Counsel, and is administered by our legal team of solicitors and barristers.

Under the agreement the parties agree to be bound for a particular term - contract law does not allow parties to enter into an indefinite and possibly never-ending term. At the expiry of the term, the agreement is at an end the parties are no longer bound by it, and are therefore entitled to withdraw from the sale without any of the penalties specified by the agreement.

You are quite correct that the agreement does oblige each party to behave in good faith, so if they have deliberately extended matters beyond the end of the term in order to withdraw, then they will be liable, but the standard of proof for this is higher than simply the fact of their withdrawing. At the very least, the party claiming would have to point to conduct during the Term that would allow the Expert to infer that the Seller was acting in bad faith. I am afraid that in your case the Expert found that this had not been proven.

I am afraid therefore that your complaint is not so much about Gazeal, as about the law itself, and we are bound by this just as everyone else in the country is.

You also state that the Seller only pays their part of the Guarantee Fee on Completion. This is not true. If the Seller and the Buyer agree to each pay half of the Guarantee Fee, as you did, this is payable by both parties before the Reservation Agreement comes into force. In your case, it was a Special Condition of the agreement that the Seller would re-imburse you the half of the Guarantee Fee on Completion - this does not imply that the Seller was only paying on Completion. What it means is that the Seller was willing to pay the entire cost of the Reservation Agreement provided that the sale got to Completion.

Lastly, you are quite right, the Reservation Agreement does indeed concentrate on Exchange. It is not possible, when an offer is made, before brokers, solicitors, valuers, surveyors, etc are instructed, to anticipate what matters will arise that might affect completion timescales. The agreement therefore aims to ensure that both parties take all actions necessary to get to Exchange of Contracts within the Term.

I am sorry that yours is one of the rare cases where a Reservation Agreement did not result in Exchange, but I wish you well with your search for the property that is right for you.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Thank you for your review.

At Gazeal we ensure that the Parties are as informed as possible before they enter into an agreement.

In your case you were informed that your Buyers needed to find a buyer for their property in order to proceed with the sale to you. This presented obvious risks to you as a Seller, which risks you decided to accept.

You also agreed to a Special Condition that specifically provided that if the Buyers had not found a buyer by the end of the term of the Reservation Agreement that they were entitled to withdraw reasonably and without penalty.

The Buyers did not find a buyer, and therefore they were entitled to withdraw. You expressed a wish to claim the Commitment, and we were of course obliged to inform you that this was a risk that you had accepted and had specifically excluded, and therefore any claim you presented would almost certainly fail before the Independent Expert.

I can understand that you are unhappy with the outcome as it did not result in a sale, but you were informed of the risk and you accepted it, you agreed to a special condition in relation to that risk, and this was the reason the matter did not complete and you were not able to claim the Commitment. This has nothing to do with “get out clauses”, as you claim.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Thank you for review, and for giving us the opportunity to to respond.

By the Reservation Agreement, both Seller and Buyer agree that any dispute between them will be adjudicated according to the laws of England and Wales by an Independent Expert, who is a recently retired Senior Circuit Court Judge and Kings Counsel, and the process for doing this is set out in the Rules for Expert Determination.

Under the Rules, both parties have every opportunity to make such arguments as they wish and to present such evidence in support that they think appropriate.

You did so, the Independent Expert read and considered the evidence of both sides, preferred the argument of the other side, found that you had withdrawn unreasonably and therefore that you should pay the Commitment to them.

You may not like the outcome, but this is a question of the application of law and evidence by an independent expert following a fair process, not the Gazeal service. All that Duncan and Willene did was their role, which was to fairly administer the process set out in the Rules to ensure that both parties were able to present their cases.

There is no question of discrimination in any way, and I trust that you will not repeat this.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Adithya, I am sorry to read your review, which you have submitted at the same time as your husband on other platforms, both with regard to the same transaction, no doubt to maximise the effect. I am grateful to you however for the opportunity to respond.

The Reservation Agreement places the burden of proof on the party withdrawing to give one of the five reasons specified as grounds for doing so, and the proof specified, at the time of withdrawal. You decided to withdraw by reason of a physical defect in the property.
The agreement specifies that in such circumstances you should produce a RICS Survey identifying "urgent" works, with quotes (not estimates) for the repairs required, the total of which is greater than 1.5% of the agreed sale price at the time that you withdraw. This is a provision that the overwhelming majority of our sellers and buyers consider fair and balanced.
Were you in the position of the Seller, I am sure you would not consider it fair for your buyer to withdraw having produced only half of the evidence specified, and then produce the other half of the evidence after you had withdrawn.
However, this is exactly what you did. You withdrew by email on 25th March, we reminded you what evidence was required by the Reservation Agreement that you had signed, and you then obtained a quote for the repairs that was dated 30th March, and which was not based on a site visit, but was a desktop estimate. The fact that it was produced after you had withdrawn means, of course, that it could not have been in your thinking at the time that you withdrew.
Not unsurprisingly, the Sellers were less than happy with this approach and obtained quotes of their own, as they are entitled to do.
Under the Reservation Agreement disputes are referred to an Independent Expert, who in this case is a recently retired Senior Circuit Court Judge and Kings Counsel who is completely independent of Gazeal and not part of the management, is not employed by and has no shares in Gazeal. He preferred the evidence of the sellers and found against you.
As to your "Side Note", you are mistaken. It is our policy to refund the Reservation Fee if one party withdraws reasonably, but not if the matter goes through the Dispute Resolution process because, as you rightly say, this can involve months of correspondence to resolve the matter, for which we make no charge to either party. There is therefore no incentive for us to find in favour of the Seller, as you allege, even were it possible for us to influence the decision of the Independent Expert.
In fact, as neither party has to put down a deposit, but instead we guarantee the obligations of each party to the other, the incentive is the other way around - to not find that a withdrawal was unreasonable so as to avoid the risk of being called to honour the guarantee.
In your case, as you refused to pay the Award made by the Expert, we honoured the Guarantee and paid the Commitment of £5,000 to the seller and the costs of the Expert hearing of £500.
However, the important point to note is that the Reservation Agreement is fair to both seller and buyer, that the obligations on each party are entirely reasonable and are agreed by both buyers and sellers to be so in the vast majority of cases, and that Gazeal honours its obligations to both, even if, as in your case, it involves substantial financial loss, because we believe that our word is our bond.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Thank you for giving us an opportunity to respond to your complaint.

The Reservation Agreement is drafted to be as fair as possible between the parties. If you are withdrawing by reason of a survey, you have to show that the survey has identified urgent defects and that the further investigations recommended by the surveyor have been done.

In your case your surveyor recommended a further inspection by a roofing specialist. You did not do this, and instead just got quotes for replacements on the basis of photographs taken by the surveyor. In other words, there was no recommendation by the roofing specialist that this work you had quoted needed to be carried out.

Were you the Seller, I do not think that you would regard this as fair and in good faith.

You were advised of this, and plainly could see the force of this argument, as you paid the Commitment without the matter being referred to the Independent Expert.

I can of course understand that you resent having to pay the Commitment, but plainly you also understand that the Seller would equally have resented your withdrawing in these circumstances, so I am sorry that you have felt the need to file a review in these terms.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Thank you for your review, and for the opportunity to comment.

You are incorrect when you say that you have to pay extra money for the Independent Expert. Costs are awarded by him on the basis of “loser pays” - in other words, it costs nothing to go to the Expert, but the party against whom the order is made is ordered to pay the costs of the hearing.

If you are unsure of the strength of your case, then you have to decide whether you wish to take the risk of a costs order being made against you. That is your choice, but it is not grounds for a disobliging review.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Thank you for your review, and for giving us the opportunity to reply.

On average, 33% of all sales agreed fail to get to Exchange of Contracts and Completion. The Government advises that both parties should consider whether it is appropriate for them to use a Reservation Agreement in their “How to Sell” and “How to Buy” guides. We cannot help it if your Solicitor is unaware of this.

Gazeal Reservation Agreements reduce the proportion of sales that fail to complete from 33% to 5%. This is information that is freely available on our website.

Freedom of Contract means that the Seller is entirely within their rights to consider whether they wish to make it a condition of accepting your offer that you enter into a Reservation Agreement. This is a matter of what your solicitor should understand as “trite law”.

I note that your sale completed. Congratulations and we are very glad to have had the opportunity to be of service.

If the parties have agreed that one party will re-imburse the other for the Reservation Fee on Completion, they are informed by Gazeal that this is a contractual matter between them, and that they have to inform their solicitor of this requirement, who will then make the appropriate arrangements to include this within the Completion Statement and / or the Contract as appropriate.

From what you are saying, either you did not inform your Solicitor, or your Solicitor did not do this.

You complain that no-one at Gazeal took ownership of the issue - this is because you were informed that this was for you to deal with with your Solicitor, and was not the responsibility of Gazeal, at the time that you signed.

Again, congratulations on the completion of your sale, and we trust that you will enjoy your ownership of your property.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Thank you for your review and for the opportunity to comment.

The Reservation Agreement sets very specific and easily proven standard of proof for withdrawing by reason of the survey - that the surveyor has identified “urgent”, Cat 3, Code Red, issues, the cost of repair of which, as evidenced by quotes from reputable contractors, is greater than 1.5% of the sale price. All of our sellers and buyers consider this very fair between the parties.

I am unable to comment on the specifics of your case, as there are not enough details in your review to allow us to identify it, and your name does not appear as a client of ours. However, per the above, if there was a “major issue” then you would have been entitled to withdraw.

The “so called “Expert”” is a recently retired Senior Circuit Court Judge and Kings Counsel who has specialised in property for his career. Plainly he did not consider the matter you complained of as being “major”, reaching the standard set by the Reservation Agreement.

You may not like the outcome, but this does not make the service a “scam”.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Your review does not, I am afraid, contain any information that allows us to identify your matter, and our systems do not contain any mention of the name you have given, however….

The Reservation Agreement allows the Buyer to withdraw for five reasons - bad survey, bad title, change to terms agreed, failure of mortgage finance, failure of chain.

The Reservation Agreement allows the Seller to withdraw for two reasons - change to terms and failure of the chain.

There are therefore significant protections built into the agreement that are there specifically to protect the Buyer. All of our Sellers and Buyers agree that these protections are fair, proportionate and appropriate.

The Independent Expert is a recently retired Senior Circuit Court Judge and Kings Counsel who has specialised in property for his entire career at the Bar, as a Silk and on the Bench, who is not employed by Gazeal, is not part of the management, is not a director of and has no shareholding or options in Gazeal.

Gazeal are independent, and have no financial or other interest in either side. There is therefore no reason, nor would we ever, be “in cohoots (sic) with the expert” to favour either party, not that the Expert would debase himself to do so even if we asked and we are quite sure he would resign from his position forthwith.

Your anonymous, untraceable, unfounded and frankly libellous review is therefore entirely false, and we trust that you will not be repeating it either here or elsewhere.

Resposta da Gazeal

28/05/2026

Thank you for your review Mr Tyrell, and for the opportunity to reply.

The Reservation Agreement is between you and the seller. Gazeal remain independent in any dispute. The £10,000 penalty to which you refer would have gone to your Seller. Gazeal have no interest in it.

Following your withdrawal the Seller referred the matter to mediation, which found that you were likely in breach of the agreement. This is not the forum to go into the evidence, but, fortunately for you, he then decided not to pursue the claim, which brought the matter to an end.

It is our policy to refund the Guarantee Fee when the parties withdraw reasonably, which you were not found to have done, and not when we incurred the cost of mediating a dispute.

HSBC has not contacted this company, and certainly not to ask for any details about your complaint, but I am very happy to explain the matter to them as and when they do. It is not true that this firm gave you a refund. You made a complaint to the card payment provider who refunded you under s78 of the Consumer Credit Act and then debited our account without our authority - this does not mean that they went into any of the merits of your case at all, and does not in any way imply that this firm consented to the refund, which we did not, as having fully investigated your complaint, we regarded it, and continue to regard it, as without merit. It is therefore not true to say that this is an indication that our position is in any way “fragile”.

Alternative Dispute Resolution is a quasi judicial service, involving the application of the rules of evidence, the application of the law, and the following of fair and balanced procedure by qualified lawyers with expertise in conveyancing law and process. It is a serious responsibility. It is, I am afraid, inevitable that on occasion one party will be unhappy with the result. However, I trust that readers of this review will understand that the quality of service that we provide will follow these important principles and will not be affected by pressure from one party, no matter how unreasonable they are.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to highlight this important point.