I would avoid buying a property from Breckon and Breckon. We had 3 viewings on a property with 3 different people and not one of them was able to answer any of our (usually basic) questions. This was not a brand new property on the market so there was plenty of time to find out as much as possible about it and provide clear, details information to buyers. Additionally it turned out it was being missold under the wrong category which some simple due diligence from their side could have avoided. When it became clear, no apology was made, nor offer to refund any losses. Additionally, the lack of forthcoming information caused us to doubt the entire process. Ultimately it wastes everyone's time. I would recommend a comprehensive, honest and straightforward approach to these major lifetime purchases for people. Ultimately it will work in the seller's favour as well. Finally, we were charged a lot of money for ID/ money-laundering checks and it was a round-about process with various apps. With other estate agents these checks are free and it's extremely straightforward.

Applied to view a house, and got shortlisted for a viewing. Drove all the way out there and the estate agent no showed. They called me the minute I pulled up with excuses about having a problem with the key, and that we would have to reschedule - after I had already arrived to view the property. Totally unprofessional. I'm sick of having to rely on estate agents to get a roof over my head. They don't even have the courtesy to show up to a scheduled property viewing.

If I could this review a zero stars, i would. Shocking and Misleading Service. I was repeatedly pressured by a representative called Carly to place a bid on a property, receiving around 18 calls insisting that the seller would accept almost any offer. I placed two reasonable bids within my budget, but was continually told that the seller was expecting more and that if I did not bid again the property would be removed from auction indefinitely. The auction was originally due to end at 12:00, but it was extended by three hours specifically so I could place another bid. During this time I was repeatedly told that this would be the final opportunity and that the seller was waiting for my offer. Based on these assurances I placed another bid and ended up winning the auction, although I felt heavily pressured and misled throughout the process. Before making any payment I made it clear that obtaining the remaining funds within such a short timeframe would be difficult. I was reassured that there would be flexibility and time to complete the payment. However, after they took £5,000 from me, the property was placed back into auction just two days later without proper explanation. At no point before paying was I told that this would happen or given any realistic opportunity to resolve the situation. They are now refusing to refund the money. I believe I was misled and pressured into bidding under false information, and I am now seeking legal advice and preparing to take legal action against Pattinsons. I would strongly advise others to be extremely cautious when dealing with this company.

I would strongly advise anyone considering using Pattisons to think very carefully before signing a Sole Selling Rights agreement. After I terminated their instruction due to what I considered to be poor service, the company later attempted to claim a full commission fee on a sale that completed after they were no longer under contract (7 months after notice given). No offer was generated during their agency period, no sale was agreed, and no memorandum of sale was issued while they were instructed. The eventual purchaser did not make an offer during their term, and there were no concluded negotiations in place at the time they were disinstructed. Despite this, they later asserted that simply “introducing” the buyer was enough to entitle them to a fee — even though, in my view, they were not the effective cause of the sale. I was particularly disappointed with how this matter was handled by Danielle Aitman. In my experience, her tone was unnecessarily aggressive and confrontational, and I did not feel the situation was dealt with professionally or constructively. Rather than attempting to resolve the issue sensibly, the approach taken was to threaten legal action. Instead of addressing the service concerns that led to their disinstruction in the first place, the matter escalated unnecessarily. This was a stressful and frustrating experience. I would strongly recommend that sellers obtain independent legal advice before entering into any Sole Selling Rights agreement and ensure they clearly understand under what circumstances a fee may later be claimed. Based on my 19 years experience in property, I would strongly recommend avoiding this company at all costs **REPLY** Thank you for your reply. I fully understand the general principle of a Sole Selling Rights agreement. However, my concern remains that the specific circumstances in this case do not justify the fee you attempted to claim. No offer was made, no sale was agreed, and no memorandum of sale was issued during your period of instruction. The eventual purchaser did not negotiate or agree terms while you were acting, and there were no ongoing or concluded negotiations at the time I terminated the contract. The sale completed seven months after notice was given and after you were no longer instructed. In my view, this does not constitute being the effective cause of the sale. Simply asserting that an “introduction” occurred, particularly when the buyer did not view the property through your agency in the context of an agreed transaction, does not fairly reflect the reality of how this sale progressed. My dissatisfaction also relates to the manner in which the situation was handled. Rather than constructively addressing the service concerns that led to your disinstruction, the matter escalated quickly to threats of legal action. This approach felt disproportionate and unnecessarily confrontational. I maintain that greater transparency around fee triggers, particularly where a purchaser may later re-engage independently would significantly benefit sellers considering a Sole Selling Rights agreement.(the client did not even view the property though you, sending a client details of my property does not warrant a case for introduction) I stand by my recommendation that sellers seek independent legal advice and ensure they fully understand the potential implications before signing.

Shocking from start to finish. Won't go into detail as this is already on Lovelle Gainsborough review however didn't want to assist with anything during the purchase even though the progression team stated originally they would help. House …

Phoned in to ask about viewing a property I liked. They asked all the usual questions, and then told me I had to fill out a full tenant application form, employer details, the whole lot. After I sent it back, they told me the landlord doesn’t accept single occupiers. Which, fine, whatever, but I told them that over the phone in the first place. So either they’re on some side mission to collect as much personal info as possible to sell off to scam call centres, or they’re just plain stupid. Neither option is great. I was speaking to Katie Jones, their “Lettings Branch Manager” (if you can believe that). Honestly, you'd expect someone with that title to at least listen to basic information before wasting people’s time. Anyway, best to avoid these mouth breathers altogether.

Very unprofessional agents. Poor marketing, communication and due diligence. Viewings conducted in a random and uninformed manner, Communication semi-literate.

This is an anonymous review - upon viewing I was assured that I will be taken care of and amenities provided will be received in the Berkeley development. Everything seemed to be fine up until one week after move-in, where the behaviour of …

Very bad attitude