Real estate agents are reviving the proposal for a 'viewing fee system,' which would allow them to charge for property showings and site visits, even if no contracts are signed. This comes as demand for viewing multiple properties without the intention to purchase has increased, prompting calls for compensation for the time and costs involved in the brokerage process. However, the Korea Association of Realtors stated that there are currently no concrete plans to implement such a system, and the president's comments reflect personal opinions rather than official policy.
During a press conference on August 26, held ahead of the launch of a legal entity, the association highlighted the necessity of introducing a viewing fee.
Kim Jong-ho, president of the Korea Association of Realtors, stated, "When agents review property registration documents and explain rights, as well as show homes using their vehicles, it is essentially working for free if no contract is finalized. We will provide services that are worth the viewing fee to ensure customer satisfaction."
The push for a viewing fee stems from the current brokerage fee structure, which makes it difficult to recoup time and expenses if a transaction does not occur. Industry insiders argue that the rise of 'viewing crews'—individuals touring properties for educational purposes or content creation rather than actual purchases—has increased the burden on agents.
Last year, during a Q&A session, Kim proposed a 'prepayment and deduction method,' where a viewing fee would be charged upfront and deducted from the brokerage fee if a contract is signed. This approach aims to recognize the value of services provided before a contract is finalized, such as site visits and explanations of rights.
However, the existing brokerage fee system presents challenges. The Real Estate Brokerage Act distinguishes between brokerage fees and actual costs incurred for verifying rights. Under the current system, it is difficult to uniformly charge a basic fee for standard site visits, indicating that further discussions on the scope of fees and costs are necessary to formalize a viewing fee.
Consumer acceptance is also a variable. Given the existing perception that brokerage fees for home transactions are already substantial, there may be backlash against requiring payment from the outset of the viewing process.
Competition among brokerage firms poses another practical obstacle. If one agency begins charging a viewing fee while others do not, consumers are likely to gravitate toward those offering free showings. Even if a system is established, it may be challenging to implement in the market.
On the other hand, there is a belief that the introduction of a viewing fee could be more feasible for transactions involving land or factories, where site verification requires significant time and costs. This is particularly true for properties that necessitate long-distance travel or are difficult to access.
Seo Jin-hyung, a professor of real estate law at Kwangwoon University, noted, "Brokerage fees are fundamentally success-based, making it difficult to receive payment when a transaction does not occur. Recently, there seems to be a movement to explore charging a portion of the fee to prevent excessive demands for information."
Meanwhile, the Korea Association of Realtors clarified that there are currently no specific plans or official procedures underway regarding the introduction of a viewing fee, and the president's comments reflect personal views.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.