[ProJuMp2001]

Hi.. I have a dual agency question.

Here goes.

ABC realty has a house on MLS.
XYZ realty shows the ABC MLS house to a customer (now XYZ is sub agent of ABC MLS seller. all parties agree with this.)
Then

The customer walks away, Now I think that XYZ is still sub agent of the MLS seller at ABC realty correct?

If he is still is the sub agent of ABC realty MLS seller after customer walks away then.....
Now here is the tricky part
A buyer client of XYZ realty wants to make offer on the ABC MLS home after the customer walked away.

If buyer client of XYZ makes offer on ABC MLS sellers house
( and i think XYZ would still be sub agent of ABC's MLS seller from before when the customer was making the offer )

is this dual agency with the new buyer client of XYZ? or is it not because it is a separate transaction?

If it is dual agency everything that XYZ sub agent heard about the ABC MLS client must be kept confidential and this really all makes sense to me.

But if I am wrong and it is not dual agency because it is a separate transaction then buyer broker cannot tell confidential things heard from the ABC's MLS client to the buyer client because he at one time was sub agent. or if he still is its dual agency and of course he cannot tell buyer confidential information.

but i also want to know if this would be dual agency? or not.

Now if it is not dual agency because say the sub agency was closed,
(or if i am wrong and its not dual because this would be a separate transaction)
Am i correct in saying: As long as no confidential info is told to XYZs buyer client that was found out when XYZ realty was sub agent of ABC realty seller. But new information or information that was found out before and after but NOT during the sub agency, will always keep confidental.

Do i understand this? or am i all wrong? I just cant get my head around dual agency when it comes to co brokers , sub agency and what constitutes "same transaction"

Let me know what I am wrong or right about this. and if I am wrong why.. Thanks So much.

[Rich Lee]

Originally Posted by ProJuMp2001

Hi.. I have a dual agency question. Here goes.

ABC Realty has a house on MLS.
XYZ Realty shows the ABC MLS house to a customer (now XYZ is sub-agent of ABC MLS seller. All parties agree with this.) Then the customer walks away. Now I think that XYZ is still sub-agent of the MLS seller at ABC Realty correct?

They would most likely remain in sub-agency with this particular buyer-customer only. The relationship might be indefinite because of the dynamics involved.

Originally Posted by ProJuMp2001

If he is still the sub-agent of ABC Realty MLS seller after customer walks away then...now here is the tricky part...A buyer client of XYZ realty wants to make offer on the ABC MLS home after the customer walked away. If buyer client of XYZ makes offer on ABC MLS seller's house (and i think XYZ would still be sub-agent of ABC's MLS seller from before when the customer was making the offer)

There's no problem here. Say that ABC has the listing for 123 Main Street. I write an offer for Mr and Mrs Jones. (By the way, I'm not with ABC.) Then, lucky me, Mr and Mrs Smith also want to make an offer on 123 Main Street. As long as the seller hasn't accepted any offer, more can be presented even if they're written by me. My relationship with the buyers doesn't matter. If it's sub-agency, then, of course, it has to be agreed to by the seller and ABC.

Here's another closer analogy. Say that I have Mr and Mrs Brown's listing for 6 months. Upon expiration, they go with another firm. A month later, I represent a client who wants to make an offer. The law states that I cannot divulge anything learned about the sellers' motivation while I was their listing agent and can represent the my new clients as their Buyer Agent.

Originally Posted by ProJuMp2001

Is this dual agency with the new buyer client of XYZ or is it not because it is a separate transaction?

If it is dual agency everything that XYZ sub-agent heard about the ABC MLS client must be kept confidential and this really all makes sense to me.

But if I am wrong and it is not dual agency because it is a separate transaction then buyer broker cannot tell confidential things heard from the ABC's MLS client to the buyer client because he at one time was sub agent. or if he still is its dual agency and of course he cannot tell buyer confidential information.

but i also want to know if this would be dual agency? or not.

Now if it is not dual agency because say the sub agency was closed,
(or if i am wrong and its not dual because this would be a separate transaction)
Am i correct in saying: As long as no confidential info is told to XYZs buyer client that was found out when XYZ realty was sub agent of ABC realty seller. But new information or information that was found out before and after but NOT during the sub agency, will always keep confidental.

Do i understand this? or am i all wrong? I just cant get my head around dual agency when it comes to co brokers , sub agency and what constitutes "same transaction"

Let me know what I am wrong or right about this. and if I am wrong why.. Thanks So much.

It is not dual agency but not necessarily for the reason you mentioned. Dual agency exists when seller and buyer are represented by the same firm/same broker. Dual agency/dual licensee exists when Sam from ABC represents seller, but Bruce from ABC represents the buyer. Dual agency/single licensee exists when Sam represents both.

NOTE: If Sam represents 2 buyers (competing interests*) for 321 Washington Street which is listed with another firm, there is no dual agency whatsoever. Let me know if this makes sense.

*versus Dual agency which is adverse interests

[ProJuMp2001]

It is not dual agency but not necessarily for the reason you mentioned. Dual agency exists when seller and buyer are represented by the same firm/same broker. Dual agency/dual licensee exists when Sam from ABC represents seller, but Bruce represents the buyer. Dual agency/single licensee exists when Sam represents both.

NOTE: If Sam represents 2 buyers for 321 Washington Street which is listed with another firm, there is no dual agency whatsoever. Let me know if this makes sense.[/quote]

Yes it does,

Its only dual agency with the same firm, I should have known. so if cutomer is unrepresented and wants to make offer on MLS house and broker must become subagent of MLS seller then that is only the case for that one transaction?
if a buyer client walks in the door and wants to make offer on that sellers house this is fine and is not dual agency because for this new transaction buyer is no longer subagent, he is still subagent for the buyer customer from before.

If some day that buyer customer wants to be represented then subagency is called off and seller is then handled by listing firms broker.

and everything that buyer broker found out about seller when he was the subagent broker can now use it agenst seller..??

Let me know.

[Rich Lee]

Sub-agency can become buyer agency easier than the other way. Unrepresented can become buyer-agent represented but is difficult to near impossible to go in the other direction.

As for your statement that the buyer broker can use things that (s)he learned as a sub-agent against the seller, (s)he can absolutely not use this information. Only material facts regarding the property can be shared with buyer clients.

[ProJuMp2001]

material facts and defects of property is what i meant when I said confidential info, because the book says that a material fact can be seller is going into foreclosure and must sell fast. and to me that seems confidential but I was told that Anything that will help your client, you can and must disclose. The book calls these material facts, I guess confidential things are only things that do not have anything to do with the transaction.

So I can use all the wonderful material facts learned as sub-agent of seller against the seller if we are no longer in sub-agency, but if that buyer customer comes back and this time I represent him as buyer broker and I am no longer sub-agent of seller. Can I disclose material facts learned from when I was sub-agent of seller and customer of that same buyer?

I could see that with anyone I am a buyer broker for, I will need to disclose material facts and defects learned when I was sub-agent of seller..

But with my buyer client that was my buyer customer from when I was sub-agent of seller makes me wonder..

Because people would be doing the following..

Customer: I want to make offer on that house in the MLS
Broker: ok I will need you to sign unrepresented persons forms

broker becomes subagent of seller
broker finds out stuff about seller
customer walks away.

a week passes.

that same customer comes in this time wants buyer represention
broker is now buyer client but not subagent of MLS seller any longer
broker must disclose facts learned when he was sub-agent for mls seller

and now buyer client gets a better deal because he read a real estate book and found out this can be done..

[Rich Lee]

Originally Posted by ProJuMp2001

material facts and defects of property is what i meant when I said confidential info, because the book says that a material fact can be seller is going into foreclosure and must sell fast. and to me that seems confidential but I was told that Anything that will help your client, you can and must disclose. The book calls these material facts, I guess confidential things are only things that do not have anything to do with the transaction.

Material facts are usually those pertaining to the property (wet basement, well went dry in '03, etc.).

Originally Posted by ProJuMp2001

Because people would be doing the following..

Customer: I want to make offer on that house in the MLS
Broker: ok I will need you to sign unrepresented persons forms

broker becomes subagent of seller
broker finds out stuff about seller
customer walks away.

a week passes.

that same customer comes in this time wants buyer represention
broker is now buyer client but not subagent of MLS seller any longer
broker must disclose facts learned when he was sub-agent for mls seller

and now buyer client gets a better deal because he read a real estate book and found out this can be done..

No. First of all, the amount of information that the sub-agent finds out about the seller is going to be limited. Secondly, these facts cannot be shared with the individual when his/her status changes from customer to client. (They aren't material facts.) Period. Does it happen...probably.

[ProJuMp2001]

I think that is material defects.. Well I am in CT and I was told that I could disclose anything to my client foreclosure etc. because it is a material fact.. But confidential would be that the customer got a divorce 8 years ago and he/she is also gay and black.. that is confidential but anything about the house or person that will affect the deal say the customer is moving away and needs to move fast, I will have to tell this to my client in Connecticut this is a material fact as is the wet basement. But confidential has nothing to do with getting a better deal.

I just want to ad that when we talked about freehold estates some people in class had a hard time understanding it, but I have no problem.. Its Agency Law that seems to be the tricky part for me.