LearnGrokUse this workflow to turn local evidence into a one-page market summary for an instruction meeting. It is for estate agents and valuers who need a documented draft range, clear assumptions and a record of what still needs checking.
The output supports your professional pricing recommendation. It does not replace an inspection, title review or the judgement of the person giving the valuation.
Key point
Build the range from evidence, not an average
Select comparable evidence first, explain every adjustment, then state the assumptions behind the draft range.
1. Set up the subject property record
Create a working sheet named Pricing summary - [property address] - [meeting date]. Add these fields before collecting market data:
- Subject address and postcode sector
- Property type, tenure and approximate age
- Bedrooms, bathrooms, reception rooms and stated floor area
- Plot, parking, garden, outbuildings and known improvements
- Condition, presentation and any apparent repair issues
- Occupancy status and target launch period
- Seller's stated timescale, if supplied
- Evidence cut-off date
- Source and date for each data point
Separate facts from unverified statements. For example, record seller states loft conversion completed rather than four-bedroom home until you have checked the relevant documents and measurements.
Watch out
Do not treat a portal description as evidence
Listing copy can be outdated, incomplete or optimistic. Use it to find candidates, then verify the features that affect comparability.
2. Gather three evidence sets
Collect data for the same local area and broad property type. Use a period that reflects current conditions, then record the dates used. Do not silently combine old sales with current asking prices.
| Evidence set | Collect | Use it for |
|---|---|---|
| Recent completed sales | Address, sale date, recorded price, property type, size and condition notes | What buyers have paid |
| Active listings | Asking price, first listing date, reductions, property condition and competing stock | What the seller will compete against |
| Agreed prices | Agreed date, agreed price where available, original asking price and sale status | Current buyer appetite, with caution |
Start with a wider search area, then narrow it. Prefer similar streets, estates or micro-areas where buyer demand, school catchment, access and housing stock are alike. If suitable evidence is thin, expand by a stated rule, such as neighbouring postcode sectors with the same property type. Record that expansion in the summary.
Treat agreed prices as provisional. A sale agreed can fall through, be renegotiated after survey, or include terms you do not know. Do not present it as a completed sale.
3. Select the usable comparables
Add each candidate property to a comparables table. Keep enough records to show the market shape, but remove records that cannot be fairly compared. Typical exclusions include new-build incentives, auction sales, clearly distressed transactions, mixed-use property, major redevelopment potential and sales with insufficient property detail.
For each retained comparable, note:
- Distance or relationship to the subject property
- Sale, agreed or active-listing date
- Price and price per square foot or metre, only if both areas are reliable
- Similarities in type, size, accommodation and tenure
- Differences in condition, plot, parking, outlook and improvements
- Whether the evidence is direct, partial or unverified
- Your reason for retaining it
Use short, testable notes. Write same terrace, smaller garden, renovated kitchen rather than good comparable.
Check
Your table should explain every inclusion
Another valuer should be able to see why each property was retained or rejected without reopening the search.
4. Ask for a structured comparison
Provide the model with the subject record, the retained comparables and the active stock. Ask it to produce a draft summary, not a final valuation. Remove personal contact details, seller circumstances and any unnecessary identifiers before sharing material.
Use a prompt such as:
Draft a local market summary for an estate agency pricing meeting.
Subject property:
[paste verified subject record]
Recent completed sales:
[paste table]
Active competing listings:
[paste table]
Agreed prices:
[paste table]
Do not invent missing facts. Separate completed sales, active listings and agreed prices. Identify the strongest comparable evidence, the main differences from the subject property, and any conflicts in the data. Propose a cautious draft pricing range with a low, central and high position. State every assumption, uncertainty and item requiring inspection or document verification. End with five questions for the seller meeting.
The model can organise the evidence and expose gaps. It cannot confirm that a floor area, tenure, boundary, sale status or condition statement is correct. Check the available product and data-handling requirements before you use it. Features and limits are version-dependent, so use the current xAI documentation.
5. Turn the draft into the meeting summary
Edit the result into a short document with these headings:
- Local market position: a plain-language account of demand, competing stock and recent movement.
- Best comparable evidence: three to five selected records and the differences that matter.
- Draft pricing range: low, central and high positions, labelled as a working range for discussion.
- Pricing assumptions: condition, presentation, marketing timing, tenure, measurements and any improvements assumed.
- Seller meeting questions: items that could move the recommendation.
Avoid a false precision figure when evidence supports only a range. If the subject property's condition has not been inspected, say so directly. If active listings are numerous or have had repeated reductions, make that visible rather than averaging them into completed prices.
Note
A range needs a decision rule
State what would support the central position, what would justify the upper end, and what would require a lower launch position.
6. Check for errors before the meeting
Read every number back against the source record. The common failure is not poor prose. It is a polished summary that mixes categories, uses an incorrect date, or assumes a property feature that was never verified.
Look for these warning signs:
| If you see this | Check this | Then do this |
|---|---|---|
| A large price difference | Floor area, condition, tenure, plot and sale date | Explain the difference or remove the comparable |
| A narrow range from mixed evidence | Whether sales, asking prices and agreed prices were blended | Split the evidence and widen or qualify the range |
| A strong claim about demand | Number and status of records behind it | Replace the claim with the observed evidence |
| An upper-end recommendation | Improvements, presentation and competing stock | List what must be true for that position to hold |
Check that the summary distinguishes completed, active and agreed in every section. Ask a colleague to challenge the highest and lowest comparable. If you cannot explain the adjustment in one sentence, it is too vague for the file.
7. Hand over the pack
Save the final summary with the evidence cut-off date. Attach the comparable table, source notes and the prompt output or working draft where your office process requires it. Mark the document draft for instruction meeting until the inspection and required checks are complete.
At the meeting, use the questions section to confirm condition, alterations, tenure details, boundaries, parking arrangements, known defects and the seller's preferred marketing strategy. Update the range only after recording what changed.
When the workflow does not work
Stop and do not force a confident range if there are too few reliable comparables, the property is unusual, key details are missing, or the evidence points in different directions. State the gap in the meeting summary. Arrange further local research, inspection, document checks or review by an appropriately qualified colleague. A clear limitation is more useful than an unsupported price.
