U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-18-2009, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Mostly in my head
19,814 posts, read 55,781,243 times
Reputation: 18994

Advertisements

All of the above are good answers. If neither party has an agent, it becomes a 3-ring circle. What are the comps for the area? Do you know a good home inspector? Do you have financing in place? Do you know the ins and outs of NC law, to recognize a safe contract when you sign it? Who is going to do your title search? Who is going to make sure all taxes are handled properly (seller may get some back if pre-paid, you may have to pay some on the spot)? These are things normally handled by the buyer's agent. I would never attempt to buy w/o an agent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-19-2009, 06:44 PM
 
140 posts, read 542,953 times
Reputation: 45
So a seller should always be paying for the representation of the buyer?
What if the buyer hires an attorney, should the attorney for the buyer be paid for by the seller?
Obviously you took my post as a knock against real estate agents, which was not intended.
If a seller decides to sell without an agent due to the costs of commissions for their own reasons, good or bad, if they have an attorney who will be representing them, then there is an arms lengths transaction.
In a difficult market some people may feel that if they price right and can sell without paying anywhere from 3-6 % commission, they are saving needed money. I am not saying this is the right choice, but for some it may be. Like any other contract, if you choose to have representation..pay for it.
When a seller decides to sell a home with the help of a Realtor, the seller is not paying the commission fees to the buyers agent, the sellers agent is agreeing to give up a portion of their share so that other Realtors will bring people to see the home. This is fee splitting. It is not the seller paying the buyers agent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2009, 09:26 PM
 
2,341 posts, read 4,046,190 times
Reputation: 1667
It is not customary for the seller to pay for the buyers attorney, if one if hired. The agent handles the inspections, advises their client, negotiates with the seller, files paperwork on the tranaction, etc... A lot happens before you sit down at the table with an attorney. I don't see buyer and seller handling this themselves as arms length.

Again, it is customary for the seller to pay comissions to buyer's and sellers agent. When closing, the buyers agent is issued payment from the seller as is the sellers agent. The sellers agent is not issuing payment.

I'm giving my opnion on folks that try to avoid paying a real estate professional. As a buyer, I know my limitations. I'm a professional programmer. The 3 houses I've bought/sold have not made me a real estate pro. ;-) There are too many homes for sale where the seller is willing to follow custom. Even at the top of the market there were too many homes for sale for me to take that type of chance with what will most likely be the largest purchase of my life. You can say, the buyer should just pay for it. But if you are the selling, you're taking a risk that yu'll find a buyer willing to play the game by your rules, instead of the rules that 99/100 other sellers are using.

Quote:
Originally Posted by robretpd View Post
So a seller should always be paying for the representation of the buyer?
What if the buyer hires an attorney, should the attorney for the buyer be paid for by the seller?
Obviously you took my post as a knock against real estate agents, which was not intended.
If a seller decides to sell without an agent due to the costs of commissions for their own reasons, good or bad, if they have an attorney who will be representing them, then there is an arms lengths transaction.
In a difficult market some people may feel that if they price right and can sell without paying anywhere from 3-6 % commission, they are saving needed money. I am not saying this is the right choice, but for some it may be. Like any other contract, if you choose to have representation..pay for it.
When a seller decides to sell a home with the help of a Realtor, the seller is not paying the commission fees to the buyers agent, the sellers agent is agreeing to give up a portion of their share so that other Realtors will bring people to see the home. This is fee splitting. It is not the seller paying the buyers agent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2009, 05:54 AM
 
2,341 posts, read 4,046,190 times
Reputation: 1667
FSBO = For Sale By Owner

I think that was the question
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2009, 06:26 AM
 
140 posts, read 542,953 times
Reputation: 45
"Again, it is customary for the seller to pay comissions to buyer's and sellers agent. When closing, the buyers agent is issued payment from the seller as is the sellers agent. The sellers agent is not issuing payment."


The seller is issuing payment to the sellers agent. The sellers agent is fee splitting with the buyers agent. At closing what normaly happens is two checks are dispersed from the sellers proceeds, one to the sellers agent and one to the buyers agent..this is for matters of conveince, nothing more. It saves time and energy as opposed to the sellers agent being given a check for the full amount, then the sellers agent in turn writing a check to the buyers agent from the sellers agent company. Although it may appear that the seller is paying the buyers agent, that is not what happens.

I do agree with you that in most cases it is wiser to have an agent working on your behalf to do comps and such and to give you an idea of what the market is.

Last edited by robretpd; 04-20-2009 at 06:26 AM.. Reason: quotes
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2009, 06:32 AM
 
7,105 posts, read 9,699,824 times
Reputation: 2564
Maybe I'm asleep at the switch here but I got to believe there is an unspoken motive that OP has in mind and is not sharing with us. Reason I say this is b/c (as other posters have noted) there does not seem to be one single reason for a prudent person to buy w/o buyer's representation.

Since I believe in always respecting the other's person opinion, if it's logical, I feel OP has something in mind that is not quite clear in the first post.
je
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2009, 06:57 AM
 
Location: South Charlotte
1,435 posts, read 5,221,122 times
Reputation: 486
Quote:
Originally Posted by johne482 View Post
Maybe I'm asleep at the switch here but I got to believe there is an unspoken motive that OP has in mind and is not sharing with us. Reason I say this is b/c (as other posters have noted) there does not seem to be one single reason for a prudent person to buy w/o buyer's representation.

Since I believe in always respecting the other's person opinion, if it's logical, I feel OP has something in mind that is not quite clear in the first post.
je

Yes I agree compeltely John. With the initial statement and then all of the basic questions that followed there has got to be something else going on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2009, 07:11 AM
 
140 posts, read 542,953 times
Reputation: 45
Maybe the op wanted to see if there was going to be a war between the use of r/e agents vs the non-use. its nice to see inteligent non heated discussions concerning all sides.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2009, 08:09 AM
 
7,105 posts, read 9,699,824 times
Reputation: 2564
Default Still asleep at the switch.Sorry 'bout dat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by robretpd View Post
Maybe the op wanted to see if there was going to be a war between the use of r/e agents vs the non-use. its nice to see inteligent non heated discussions concerning all sides.

War? Inteligent?(Intelligent) Non-heated? Not using a service that costs user$000.00?

Don't understand one single point you are trying to make. Sorry.

Going back to sleep now. Yawn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-20-2009, 12:56 PM
 
140 posts, read 542,953 times
Reputation: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by johne482 View Post
War? Inteligent?(Intelligent) Non-heated? Not using a service that costs user$000.00?

Don't understand one single point you are trying to make. Sorry.

Going back to sleep now. Yawn.
Not understanding the point is mutual. Sorry. Hope you got some more sleep.
What do you think the original ops unspoken motive was????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:44 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top