How wide the gaps get
Wider than most people expect. These are real examples from the agencies ranked on this site, checked in August 2026.
| Agency | One platform | Another platform |
|---|---|---|
| Ascend Properties, Manchester | allAgents 4.7 from 1,806 | Google 3.4 from about 570 |
| Bridgfords, Manchester | allAgents 1.3 from 67 | GetAgent 4.3 from 904 |
| Clyde Property, Glasgow | Google 4.3, West End branch | allAgents 1.8 from 124, all branches |
| Aberdeen Property Leasing | Google 3.9 from 706 | allAgents 1.6 from 41 |
| Thornley Groves, Manchester | GetAgent 4.5 from 1,191 | GetAgent 1.9 from 34, one branch |
That last row is the same platform disagreeing with itself, because a group figure and a branch figure are different measurements.
Four reasons platforms disagree
- Different people write on different sites. allAgents is oriented towards landlords and tenants reviewing an agency deliberately. Google captures whoever happens to be logged in and annoyed enough, or delighted enough, to type. Those are not the same populations.
- Different moments. Google reviews cluster around the transaction, when the flat has just been found. allAgents reviews often come at the end of a tenancy, when the deposit has been returned or withheld. The same agency can be excellent at one and poor at the other.
- Branch against brand. Google profiles are per office. allAgents and GetAgent often aggregate to the company. A national firm can score 4.4 as a company and 3.6 at the branch that will actually handle your property.
- Solicitation. Agencies that systematically ask satisfied clients to review on one platform, and do not on another, will show a gap that reflects their marketing rather than their service.
Why we never average them
Take Bridgfords. Averaging 1.3 and 4.3 gives 2.8, a figure that describes nobody's experience and hides the only interesting fact, which is that the two sources violently disagree. An average would also weight sixty seven reviews equally against nine hundred and four.
So on every city page, where platforms disagree, both figures appear with their counts and their sources named. It makes the tables busier. It also means you can see what we saw.
Which one to trust
Trust agreement rather than any single site. When two independent platforms with reasonable bases land in the same place, that is a real signal. Clan Gordon in Edinburgh scores 4.9 on both allAgents and Google across a combined base of more than twelve hundred, and Julie Twist in Manchester scores 4.6 on both. Those are the two most trustworthy numbers on this site.
When they disagree, work out which population resembles you. If you are a landlord, weight the platform whose reviews are written by landlords. If you are a tenant looking for a flat, the transaction-moment reviews are more relevant.
How to read a score properly
- Find the review count before the score. A rating without a count is not information.
- Check whether the figure is for the branch or the whole company, and insist on the branch.
- Look past the headline. allAgents publishes recommendation rate and fee satisfaction separately, and an agency at 4.0 with 61 percent fee satisfaction has told you exactly where its problem is.
- Read the negative reviews for pattern, not drama. One furious review means nothing. Five over two years describing the same failure means it will happen to you.
- Check a second platform before you decide. It takes two minutes and it is the single most useful thing you can do.
Common questions
Which letting agent review site is most reliable?
None of them alone. allAgents publishes a recommendation rate and a fee satisfaction score alongside the headline rating, which is more useful than a bare number. Google usually has the largest base. The reliable signal is two independent platforms agreeing, not one platform scoring highly.
Can letting agents remove bad reviews?
They can request removal, and platforms will take down reviews that breach their policies, but they cannot simply delete criticism they dislike. A more common distortion is selective solicitation, where an agency asks only satisfied clients to review, which lifts a score without anything being removed.
How many reviews is enough?
Around a hundred is where a score stops moving on any single bad month. Below about twenty, treat the number as an anecdote. We have found agencies scoring 4.9 on eleven reviews and 4.3 on six hundred, and the second is by far the stronger evidence.
Keep reading