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.
I think it depends on the buyer. I personally would never hold you accountable for an inspector that I insisted on picking. But I realize not all people are like that.
Liability is only one factor.
It is a service industry. Quality of service concerns equal or override liability concerns.
If I know that you hired a crook or a knucklehead, and I silently let you proceed, have I served you well?
If silently letting you proceed is not acceptable, how should I serve you?
Liability is only one factor.
It is a service industry. Quality of service concerns equal or override liability concerns.
If I know that you hired a crook or a knucklehead, and I silently let you proceed, have I served you well?
If silently letting you proceed is not acceptable, how should I serve you?
I chose not to take your recommendation, that's on me. Silently letting me proceed is perfectly acceptable in my book. If I ask you for an opinion on who I picked, then let 'er rip.
I chose not to take your recommendation, that's on me. Silently letting me proceed is perfectly acceptable in my book. If I ask your for an opinion on who I picked, then let 'er rip.
Been there and done that.
It never feels good.
It is hard to get repairs made for my buyers when the inspector refuses to write the item because he embraces an ego pique over having something he overlooked pointed out.
At least with the current DD Period, we can request stuff that isn't on an inspection report.
It's the northerner in me that makes me not trust people. I'm slowly working on it
But it is a slight conflict of interest, if you don't buy the house, the realtor doesn't get paid. Theoretically an inspector could cover up an issue in the interest of getting the realtor a sale. I'm not saying this happens frequently, but it could so why risk it? There's a gazillion inspectors out there, I'd rather a recommendation from a non-interested party.
That seems rather unlikely to me. Why would anyone risk their livelihood? What does the inspector gain by doing so? He/she is paid for the report, regardless of if the home closes or not. As to the realtor getting paid, wouldn't they simply get paid from another home anyway? It seems to me, one could argue the inspector could benefit from adding issues, hoping for another inspection for another home from the same buyer(s), based on your logic.
Think of it in terms of self-interest. People want to do what it best for them and being honest is more likely to generate future business for them.
I think most Realtors surround themselves with people they feel represent them well and are comfortable recommending.
Oh, and if you search these forums there's someone everyone goes nuts about using for home inspections, though his name escapes me at the moment.
I am hoping that would be me lol. I have inspected for many fellow forum members over the years.
Realtors are better able than most to quantify a quality inspector. They literally attend hundreds of inspections. Collusion is basically non-existent in this day and age.
That seems rather unlikely to me. Why would anyone risk their livelihood? What does the inspector gain by doing so? He/she is paid for the report, regardless of if the home closes or not. As to the realtor getting paid, wouldn't they simply get paid from another home anyway? It seems to me, one could argue the inspector could benefit from adding issues, hoping for another inspection for another home from the same buyer(s), based on your logic.
Think of it in terms of self-interest. People want to do what it best for them and being honest is more likely to generate future business for them.
Sure the realtor will likely get paid via another home, but if a realtor has already shown 50 houses and invested hours and hour of their time in finding a suitable house for this client, then the incentive is there to just get it done.
Yes ethics would say that kickbacks shouldn't occur, but that doesn't mean it doesn't.
Sure the realtor will likely get paid via another home, but if a realtor has already shown 50 houses and invested hours and hour of their time in finding a suitable house for this client, then the incentive is there to just get it done.
Yes ethics would say that kickbacks shouldn't occur, but that doesn't mean it doesn't.
I understand your stance in reference to the ethical side of the argument, which is why I did not bring it up. Correct, ethics would always dictate honesty. My point is that capitalism and personal welfare also lead to that same result.
I think your comments are far too short-sighted. An agent will benefit much more from a satisfied client who sends referrals his/her way than from closing one particular house more quickly. I don't know what kickbacks you are thinking of but I can't imagine any would be worth more than the future business which could come from a job well done. Most people are less transaction-based. I don't want a client for a deal, I want a client for life.
Sure the realtor will likely get paid via another home, but if a realtor has already shown 50 houses and invested hours and hour of their time in finding a suitable house for this client, then the incentive is there to just get it done.
Yes ethics would say that kickbacks shouldn't occur, but that doesn't mean it doesn't.
50 houses? 55 houses? 90 houses?
Whatever. One of the most interesting questions a consumer can ask of a buyers' agent is:
"Can you afford to be in business? If I don't close on a house within the next 90-120 days, will that create hardship for you?"
Agents come and go very quickly, because they just cannot afford to be in business, and desperate agents are agents to avoid.
Client satisfaction with agent effort is far higher on the scale than house counts.
And, Bing Birdseye view really helps minimize the number of showings. Many homes are rejected due to setting that can be seen from the desk.
Actually, I find that most clients tire of the search faster than I do. They do well to have someone in their corner who is helping them not make a rash error.
50 houses? 55 houses? 90 houses?
Whatever. One of the most interesting questions a consumer can ask of a buyers' agent is:
"Can you afford to be in business? If I don't close on a house within the next 90-120 days, will that create hardship for you?"
Agents come and go very quickly, because they just cannot afford to be in business, and desperate agents are agents to avoid.
Client satisfaction with agent effort is far higher on the scale than house counts.
And, Bing Birdseye view really helps minimize the number of showings. Many homes are rejected due to setting that can be seen from the desk.
Actually, I find that most clients tire of the search faster than I do. They do well to have someone in their corner who is helping them not make a rash error.
Getting tired of the search probably has much to do with how many are seen in one day
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.
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.
