Property Viewings: 8 Risks Agencies Underestimate
Most industries with a serious lone working problem know they have one. Property is unusual in that the exposure is embedded in the core commercial activity, happens dozens of times a day, and is rarely described as lone working at all.
An agent arranges to meet a person they have never met, at a building neither of them occupies, often empty, sometimes without power, frequently outside normal hours, having told a colleague roughly where they are going. The transaction is routine. The situation is not.
This applies to residential and commercial agency, lettings, property management and surveying alike, and it reaches anyone attending premises on behalf of a firm rather than only the people with "agent" in their job title.
Eight risks, and the eighth explains why the first seven persist.
1. Meeting someone you have not met, alone
The core exposure, and the one the industry has organised itself around not naming.
Regulation 3 of the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 requires assessment of the risks to employees. Where a role systematically involves meeting unknown members of the public alone in private spaces, that is a foreseeable risk requiring assessment and controls, not an unavoidable feature of the job.
The practical controls are well established and cheap: verified identity before a viewing is confirmed, a recorded appointment with a named contact, a stated position on which viewings are not done alone, and an accompanied policy for anything that does not meet the criteria.
HSE publishes guidance on lone working and on violence at work, and both are directly applicable rather than adjacent.
2. Buildings nobody controls
The second exposure, and it is physical rather than interpersonal.
An empty property is an unassessed workplace. Services may be off or faulty, the electrical installation may be old or interfered with, floors may be damaged, stairs unlit, and in vacant or repossessed properties there may be debris, damp, mould or evidence of unauthorised occupation.
Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 requires the employer to ensure the health and safety of employees so far as is reasonably practicable, and it does not carve out premises the employer does not own. Section 3 extends duties to others affected, which reaches the members of the public being shown round.
The workable control is a short pre-visit assessment of what is known about the property's condition, and an explicit position that an agent may decline to enter or may end a visit.
3. No power, no light, no heating
Need Expert H&S Guidance?
Our qualified consultants can help you implement the right health & safety measures for your business.
A specific case of the above, and the most common.
Vacant properties frequently have the supply disconnected. That produces viewings conducted by phone torch, on unfamiliar stairs, in unfamiliar layouts, with no working alarm system and no lighting on external approaches.
Where a property has no power, that fact should be known before the appointment is made, and it should change what is agreed: daylight hours only, a torch provided rather than a phone, and an accompanied visit if the layout warrants it.
4. Winter, and the hours that go with it
The seasonal dimension, which the industry absorbs rather than manages.
Viewings continue into the evening because that is when working people can attend. In winter that means arriving and leaving in the dark, at unlit properties, on unfamiliar approaches, with fewer people around.
This is not an argument against evening viewings. It is an argument for treating a dark, empty, unfamiliar property as a different proposition from the same property at two in the afternoon, and having a stated rule about which is accompanied.
5. Driving between appointments
The risk that produces the most serious injuries in this sector and receives the least attention.
Agents drive constantly, between appointments scheduled tightly, often in their own vehicles on mileage. That is a grey fleet, with everything that follows: licence and insurance verification, business use cover, roadworthiness, and scheduling that does not require people to make up time on the road.
HSE publishes guidance on driving for work, and the specific failure in agency work is schedule density rather than driver behaviour. Appointments booked back to back across a wide area produce speed, and the organisation set the diary.
6. Keys, access and what happens afterwards
An operational and personal security question combined.
Key handling, key safes and access codes create a chain of custody problem, and they also create a personal risk where a member of the public knows an agent will attend a specific empty property at a specific time.
Establish who knows what, how codes are changed and when, and how an appointment made through a portal is verified before anybody attends.
7. Nobody actually knows where people are
The control that most agencies believe they have and usually do not.
The diary shows appointments. It does not show whether somebody arrived, whether they left, or whether the two o'clock overran because the buyer was interested or because something went wrong.
A workable system has four elements: a record of where each person is expected to be, a check-in when they arrive and leave, an agreed response if a check-in is missed, and somebody whose job it is to notice. That last element is where most systems fail, because the responsibility sits with a branch manager already doing three other things.
The response also has to be defined in advance. "Somebody would ring round" is not a procedure, and the moment it is needed is the worst moment to design one.
8. Self-employed, franchised, and the assumption that duties transfer
The structural point, and the reason the other seven persist in so many firms.
Property businesses use self-employed agents, franchise arrangements, associates and referral models extensively. The commercial logic is clear and the safety consequence is that nobody owns the exposure: the network assumes the individual is responsible, and the individual assumes the brand's systems cover them.
Two things are worth being clear about. Whether somebody is genuinely self-employed is determined by the substance of the arrangement, not the label, and if the relationship is in reality one of employment, the duties attach in full. And section 3 duties towards people who are not your employees apply regardless, which reaches associates working under your brand and the public they are showing round.
For a franchised network, the practical answer is a system provided centrally that individuals can actually use, rather than a policy stating that safety is the individual's responsibility.
What a workable system contains
| Element | Weak | Adequate |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | Name and phone number | Verified before the viewing is confirmed |
| Property condition | Unknown | Known before the appointment is agreed |
| Power and light | Discovered on arrival | Established in advance, changes the arrangement |
| Timing | Whatever the client wants | Dark and empty triggers an accompanied rule |
| Driving | Individual responsibility | Realistic scheduling, licence and insurance checked |
| Location awareness | The diary | Check-in and check-out, monitored by a named person |
| Escalation | "Somebody would notice" | Defined response, agreed in advance |
| Coverage | Employees only | Everyone attending under your brand |
Rows six and seven are the ones that convert an incident into a manageable event rather than a search. They are also the two most commonly assumed to exist.
For international and multi-branch groups
Two considerations.
Multi-branch and franchised networks tend to have systems that vary by branch, which means the group cannot say what its actual exposure is. A common check-in and escalation standard, applied everywhere, is achievable and is the single most valuable thing a network can standardise.
And where a group operates internationally, lone working and violence at work are regulated differently. Several jurisdictions covered in this series address them expressly: Finland requires advance procedural instructions where work involves an evident threat of violence, Chile requires prevention protocols covering violence from clients and users, and Sweden and Denmark regulate the organisational working environment directly.
Holding assessments, check-in records and incidents across every branch in one register is where health and safety consultants and software are worth more together than either alone, and periodic health and safety audits establish whether the system described centrally is the system operating locally.
Where Arinite fits
Arinite works with organisations whose people spend their working lives in buildings the organisation does not control, which describes property and real estate precisely. We support 1,500+ businesses across 50+ countries and protect 100,000+ employees, with 95%+ client retention over 15+ years. Our health and safety consultants work with property and real estate businesses alongside professional services and finance and banking organisations facing the same lone working and travel exposures.
Where a network spans several countries, our global health and safety consultants establish what each jurisdiction requires, and our international health and safety consultants keep that current.
If a viewing overran by an hour this afternoon, and nobody would have known, a free gap analysis is the right place to start.
Related Articles
Written by
Arinite Health & Safety Consultants
Health & Safety Expert at Arinite
