Key Facts
| Company name | Better Move |
|---|---|
| Also trading as | Bettermove |
| Companies House no. | 11833187 |
| Incorporated | 18 February 2019 |
| Year founded | 2019 |
| Corporate structure | Subsidiary / group structure — linked to Blootek Ventures Limited |
| SIC code | 68100 |
| Operating model | Direct cash buyer (mixed internal/external funding) |
| Geographic coverage | UK-wide |
| Typical offer | Up to ~10–20% below market value (indicative, varies by route) |
| Typical timeline | 2–12+ weeks depending on route, with shorter timelines marketed but not consistently evidenced |
| Legal fees | Unknown |
| TPO member | Yes |
| NAPB member | Yes |
| Official website | bettermove.co.uk |
PSW Company Index
Three independent measures, built from verifiable data rather than the company's marketing: how its offer compares with the cash-buyer sector, how quickly it completes, and how openly it operates. Every input is shown so you can check the working.
Transparency signals
Good-practice signals
- Member of The Property Ombudsman (TPO)
- Member of the NAPB
- Complaints procedure published
- Typical offer level disclosed
- Data protection / privacy in place
- Independent redress / ombudsman route
- Legal fees policy stated
Contract red flags
- Conditional or hidden fees noted
- Late price-reduction pattern
- Tie-in / exclusivity required
- Early contract before completion
- Requires use of their solicitors
- Restricts marketing elsewhere
- Exit penalties mentioned
How these are calculated. Offer Fairness ranks the company's stated offer (as a % of market value) within the cash-buyer sector — all cash offers are below open-market value. Completion Speed is the fastest completion the company advertises, shown as a fact, not a score, because most firms advertise a similar best case; confirm any timescale in writing. Transparency adds points for TPO/NAPB membership, a published complaints procedure, a disclosed offer level, data-protection registration, an independent redress route and a stated legal-fees policy, and deducts for contract red flags; only publicly verifiable signals score. Full methodology.
Company Overview
Bettermove appears to operate a hybrid model supported by a multi-entity structure. Public website material states that the business can either purchase properties directly or introduce them to a network of pre-approved cash buyers. However, its published Terms of Business describe Bettermove as a property introducer and facilitator rather than a traditional estate agent, and explicitly allow transactions to be completed by associated companies, special purpose vehicles (SPVs), or third-party buyers. Company records suggest that different entities within the Blootek group may perform different roles. One entity appears to act as the contracting and facilitation layer, while a separate trading entity holds property assets and shows evidence of secured borrowing, which may indicate that some purchases are completed internally using debt-backed funding rather than cash reserves. The contractual structure also gives Bettermove flexibility to assign or novate its interest in a transaction to another party. This means that the party a seller initially deals with may not always be the same entity that ultimately completes the purchase. In practical terms, this suggests that outcomes may vary depending on the route used. Some transactions may result in a direct purchase by a group entity, while others may involve introducing an external buyer who completes the sale. Sellers may wish to clarify early in the process who the intended buyer is, whether the purchase is dependent on onward sale or third-party funding, and at what stage the transaction becomes contractually committed.
Products, Services & Process
Property types accepted
Residential — any condition
- Submit property details via the Bettermove website or phone to receive an initial indicative offer.
- If the indicative offer is of interest, a 30-day exclusivity agreement is signed.
- Bettermove markets the property to its investor network and potentially on open portals.
- A buyer is identified — this may be Bettermove directly, an associated SPV, or a third-party investor.
- Contracts are progressed. The contract may be assigned or novated to another entity.
- Completion takes place — timeline varies significantly depending on route taken.
Fees & Pricing
Bettermove’s pricing approach appears to follow an indicative-first model, where initial figures are provided based on a combination of quick appraisal methods, market comparisons, and buyer appetite. These early figures are often presented as achievable sale prices or investor-backed offers, but they do not appear to represent fixed, contractually committed purchase prices at the outset. Evidence from reviews and company responses suggests that pricing may be refined as the process progresses. Adjustments can occur after further information is gathered, when buyer interest is tested, or when comparable market data is reassessed. In some cases, this results in revised pricing shortly after agreement or within the early stages of the transaction. The structure allows properties to be marketed to a database of investors or buyers, as well as through traditional property portals. As a result, pricing may ultimately reflect what buyers within that network are willing to pay, rather than a pre-secured purchase price from a single committed buyer. This creates a degree of flexibility in pricing, but also introduces variability. Initial figures may function more as a starting point than a guaranteed outcome, particularly where third-party buyers are involved. Sellers considering this model may wish to clarify whether any quoted price represents a firm commitment or an indicative guide, what factors could lead to price changes, and at what stage pricing becomes fixed within the legal process.
What Offer to Expect
Cash-buying companies pay below the open market in exchange for speed and certainty. The benchmarks below are worked on the current UK average house price of £270,080 (HM Land Registry / ONS UK House Price Index, June 2026). Your own figure depends on your property's value and condition.
On the UK-average £270,080 home, Better Move's stated offer works out at roughly £216,000–£243,000, versus £203,000–£230,000 for the typical cash buyer. Open-market figure is before agent and legal fees. Source: HM Land Registry / ONS UK House Price Index, June 2026.
| Route | Typical proceeds | On a £270,080 home | Typical speed | Sale falls through? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Better Move (this company) | 80–90% of market value | £216,000–£243,000 | 7–28 days | Very low |
| Typical cash buyer | 75–85% of market value | £203,000–£230,000 | 7–28 days | Very low |
| Open-market sale (estate agent) | Close to full market value, minus agent & legal fees | ~£270,080 less fees | about 5–6 months (≈25 weeks) | roughly 25–35% (about 1 in 3) |
Offers can fall below 70% for properties needing significant work.
Benchmarks: HM Land Registry / ONS UK House Price Index; Rightmove; Zoopla; Propertymark; TwentyCi. The cash-offer range reflects independent consumer guidance, not figures supplied by cash-buying companies. Illustrative only — verified June 2026.
Cash Sale vs Estate Agent vs Auction
How the three main ways to sell a home compare on the factors that matter most to sellers.
Approximate time from agreement (or listing, for the open market) to completion. Sources: Rightmove; Zoopla; Propertymark; TwentyCi.
| Factor | Cash-buying company | Estate agent (open market) | Auction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Typical proceeds | 75–85% of market value | Close to full market value (minus fees) | Variable — reserve plus hammer price |
| Typical timeline | 7–28 days | about 5–6 months (≈25 weeks) | ~6–10 weeks (incl. 28-day completion) |
| Sale falls through? | Very low | roughly 25–35% (about 1 in 3) | around 15% |
| Fees to you | Usually none — buyer covers legal costs | Agent commission (~1–2%+VAT), legal, EPC | Auction/entry fees, legal pack |
| Effort required | Minimal | Viewings, staging, chain management | Legal pack, viewings, reserve setting |
Sources: Propertymark; TwentyCi (fall-through); Rightmove; Zoopla (timelines); HM Land Registry / ONS UK House Price Index (prices). Verified June 2026.
Funding & Completion Stability
Publicly available accounts and company records suggest that Bettermove operates through a multi-entity structure, with different entities performing different roles within the transaction process. One entity appears to act primarily as the contracting and facilitation layer, while a separate trading entity shows evidence of holding property assets and using secured borrowing, which may indicate that some purchases are completed internally using debt-backed funding rather than cash reserves. At the same time, Bettermove’s published Terms of Business describe the company as a facilitator and allow transactions to be completed by associated companies, special purpose vehicles (SPVs), or third-party buyers. This suggests that not all transactions are completed by the same entity, and that the route to completion may vary depending on the circumstances of the deal. Review patterns include references to buyer readiness and funding availability in some cases, which may indicate that certain transactions depend on onward buyers or external funding rather than immediately deployable internal capital. Taken together, this suggests that completion certainty may vary depending on the route used. Some transactions may proceed through internally funded acquisitions, while others may rely on third-party buyers or finance. Sellers may wish to clarify whether any specific offer is backed by committed funds, who the intended purchasing entity is, and whether the transaction is dependent on onward sale or external financing before progressing.
Reviews & Reputation
Review patterns show a clear split between front-end service experience and transaction outcomes. Positive reviews are heavily concentrated around initial contact, highlighting fast response times, helpful staff, and efficient viewing arrangements, often at enquiry or early-stage interaction. In contrast, negative reviews are more commonly associated with the sales process itself, particularly around pricing changes, buyer readiness, delays, and unmet expectations regarding speed or certainty. Several reviews reference offer reductions after agreement and dependency on third-party buyers or funding. There are relatively few detailed, verifiable accounts of completed transactions compared to early-stage feedback. Overall, this suggests strong initial customer service, but more variable experiences as transactions progress toward completion.
- Fast initial response and clear communication at enquiry stage
- Helpful and professional staff at the early stage of the process
- Wide network enabling sales on difficult or unusual properties
What reviewers praise
- Price reductions after initial offer — repeated pattern evidenced in reviews
- Dependency on third-party buyers causing delays and uncertainty
- Exit fees and tail clauses in contractual terms
Common complaints
Complaints & Common Issues
Bettermove’s contractual structure appears to combine elements of estate agency instruction with additional control mechanisms more commonly associated with investor-led or hybrid sale models. Sellers typically enter into a fixed-term agreement (commonly referenced as around 30 days), during which Bettermove acts as the instructed agent and markets the property to its buyer network as well as through standard property portals. The Terms of Business include provisions allowing Bettermove to transfer, assign, or novate its interest in a transaction to an associated company, special purpose vehicle (SPV), or third-party buyer. This indicates that the entity initially dealing with the seller may not ultimately be the purchasing party, and that control of the transaction can pass between entities within the process. The agreement also includes exclusivity and fee provisions. Sellers may be liable for a fee if the property is sold during the contractual period, even if the buyer is not introduced by Bettermove. Additional tail clauses may apply beyond the initial term, particularly where a buyer was introduced during the instruction period. In practice, this structure means that while sellers retain ownership of the property throughout, Bettermove maintains a level of commercial control over how the sale progresses during the agreement period. Sellers may wish to review the terms carefully, particularly around assignment rights, exclusivity, and fee triggers, to understand how much flexibility they retain once the agreement is signed.
Customer Support
| Phone | Not published — see official website |
|---|---|
| Not published — contact via website form |
Regulatory & Compliance
Company History & Timeline
- 2019Incorporated
- 2021Blootek group structure established
- 2024Over 1,900 Trustpilot reviews
Ownership & Leadership
| Current directors | Nicholas Charles Statman |
|---|---|
| Parent company | Blootek Ventures Limited (related group entity) |
| UBO publicly identified | Yes — Nicholas Charles Statman |
| Prior related entities | Yes Website terms reference multiple related entities including Blootek Ventures Limited, Blootek Ventures Trading Limited and Blootek Ventures Marketing Limited. Accounts indicate a separation between a facilitation entity and a trading entity holding property assets with secured borrowing, suggesting a multi-entity structure. |
| Registered address | 20 - 22, Bridge End, Leeds, West Yorkshire, England, LS1 4DJ |
Better Move vs Alternatives
How Better Move compares with other independently profiled cash buyers on the terms sellers ask about most. Figures are drawn from each company's own Property Sale Watchdog profile and reflect the same assessment methodology.
| Factor | Better Move (this profile) | Good Move | House Buyer Bureau | SmoothSale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Typical offer | Up to ~10–20% below market value (indicative, varies by route) | Up to 85% of market value / typically c.15% to 25% below market value based on public po… | Around 20% below market value | Website states 80–85% of market value for cash purchase; up to 100% for investor marketi… |
| Typical timeline | 2–12+ weeks depending on route, with shorter timelines marketed but not consistently evi… | Offer in principle within 24 hours; formal offer to complete in 2–3 weeks; can complete … | Review evidence includes completions in about 12 days, 2 weeks, under 4 weeks, 4 to 5 we… | Direct cash route is marketed as as little as 7 days; investor marketing is marketed as … |
| Legal fees | Unknown | Free | Free | Free |
| TPO member | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| NAPB member | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PSW risk rating | High Risk | Low Risk | Low Risk | Low Risk |
Unlike NAPB-member direct buyers, Bettermove's hybrid model introduces third-party buyer dependency and contractual complexity not present in balance-sheet operators.
View Good Move profile → View House Buyer Bureau profile → View SmoothSale profile →
Pros & Cons
Pros
- Large investor network may enable sales on difficult or unusual properties
- Fast initial response and professional enquiry-stage communication
- TPO and NAPB member — independent redress available
- Properties can be listed on open portals alongside investor network
Cons
- Repeated pattern of price reductions after initial offer — evidenced in reviews
- 30-day exclusivity with exit fee liability if selling elsewhere
- Contract can be assigned or novated — seller may not deal with original buyer at completion
- Third-party buyer dependency means completion certainty is not guaranteed from the outset
- Multi-entity Blootek structure means contractual counterparty may not be the company marketing the service
Frequently Asked Questions
Bettermove operates a hybrid model. It can act as a direct purchaser in some cases, but its Terms of Business describe it as a ‘property introducer and facilitator’ and allow transactions to be completed by associated SPVs, third parties, or other Blootek group entities. Sellers should clarify which route applies before signing any agreement.
Review evidence shows a repeated pattern of price reductions after the initial offer, often before or during the legal process. Triggers cited include market movement, survey findings, and buyer appetite. Sellers should treat the initial figure as indicative and confirm what conditions could cause it to change.
Bettermove typically requires a 30-day exclusivity period during which it markets the property. Sellers may be liable for a fee if the property is sold during the contractual period even to a buyer not introduced by Bettermove. Tail clauses may also apply beyond the initial term.
Yes. Bettermove is a verified member of both The Property Ombudsman (TPO) and the National Association of Property Buyers (NAPB). Both memberships provide sellers with a formal redress route if a dispute arises and require adherence to a code of practice.
Completion time varies significantly depending on the route used. The company markets short timelines but review evidence suggests transactions frequently take 2–12 weeks or longer, particularly where a third-party buyer is being sourced rather than a direct purchase taking place.
Yes. Bettermove’s Terms of Business explicitly allow the contract to be transferred, assigned, or novated to an associated company, SPV, or third-party buyer. This means the entity you initially deal with may not be the entity that ultimately completes the purchase.
Bettermove focuses primarily on residential properties across the UK. Its hybrid model — combining direct purchase and investor placement — means it may be able to consider a broader range of properties than a pure balance-sheet buyer, but this also means outcomes can vary by property type and buyer demand.
Bettermove presents itself as fee-free to sellers, but the Terms of Business include exit fee provisions if a seller sells to another buyer during or after the exclusivity period. Sellers should review the agreement carefully before signing and understand all potential fee triggers.
Who This Suits & Who Should Be Cautious
May suit sellers who…
This structure may suit sellers who prioritise speed of engagement and convenience over achieving full market value, and who are open to a flexible sale route. It may be particularly relevant for those who want to quickly test buyer interest without committing to a traditional estate agency process, or who are comfortable with their property being marketed to a mix of investors and open-market buyers. Sellers who are not under strict time pressure, but are willing to consider offers below full market value in exchange for a potentially simpler or more managed process, may find this model useful. It can also appeal to those who value frequent communication, quick responses, and assistance with arranging viewings and progressing enquiries. This type of structure may also suit sellers who are comfortable with some variability in pricing and timeline, and who are willing to engage with a process where the final outcome may depend on buyer demand rather than a pre-secured purchase. Overall, it may be appropriate for sellers seeking a guided, responsive service and who are flexible on price and timing, rather than those requiring certainty of outcome from the outset.
Be cautious if you…
This structure may require caution for sellers who need certainty of outcome, a fixed price, or a guaranteed completion timeline from the outset. Those relying on a sale to secure an onward purchase, particularly within a chain, may be exposed to risk if the transaction depends on third-party buyers or funding that is not fully committed at the point of agreement. Sellers who expect an initial offer to be firm and not subject to change should also proceed carefully. Evidence suggests that pricing may be indicative early on and can be revised as the process progresses, which may not align with sellers seeking price certainty. Those uncomfortable with contractual restrictions, exclusivity periods, or fee liability if selling elsewhere should review terms in detail before proceeding. The presence of assignment or novation provisions may also be a consideration for sellers who want full clarity on who the final buyer will be. Overall, this model may be less suitable for sellers who prioritise transparency, control, and certainty, or who are operating under tight financial or time constraints where delays or changes could have wider consequences.