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.
Austin-Willy, surely, as an attorney, you're aware of the way people can suddenly claim they believed you were representing them if things don't go their way and they're looking for someone to blame?
Again, all the piece of paper that is described seems to say is that the agent is NOT representing the seller, and I still can't see any way that is demanding "something for nothing". What exactly is it that you think is being demanded for nothing? No fee is being claimed, no agency is being claimed, all that's being asked for is acknowledgment that the seller does NOT expect the agent (who they've already, by being FSBO, presumably decided they don't want to hire them) to represent them. Where is the big "gotcha" in this that you're so adamant exists? Please point it out? I realize it will be difficult, since you haven't read the document in question, but clearly you think that without reading it you can determine that such exists, so enlighten us.
Actually, it seems to me that it protects BOTH parties, because it makes it quite clear that both are on the same page vis a vis agency. But I haven't read it, either, so I don't know that and thus couldn't decide, from the information provided, what it says or whether it needs to be marked up.
As for mischaracterizing your posts, I invite anyone who might want to to go read them for themselves. I may be reading them completely wrong; I may not. I suspect, if I am, that I'm not the only one coming away with that impression, though.
The whole real estate merry go round is mired in mud , outdated state laws , less than honest lenders , too many brokers and agents , and profiteers feeding on the bones of the poor home owner. ........ Contract law in its simplest form should be all thats needed, when selling a home,a car , or anything else. These days , a car can cost as much or more than a home, and , selling a car is easy. A car has a title , so does a home. Why do we need a title company , when they deny in the contract they are not responsible for anything ? legal council same thing, it should be up to the individual as to just who he wants to represent him, or not. So many state laws , sponsored by the Real estate lobby, and they differ state to state, yet , the loans are resold around the world , the buyer never knows who his lender is. The whole thing needs to be simplified , on a federal level , so , we are all on the same page..........is it any wonder FSBO is gaining in numbers. If I wanted to sell my house , and , I wanted max exposure, I would offer a commission to anyone who brought me a buyer. No exclusives for me ! In the real world of business, exclusives are a thing of the past. As a broker or agent , your "contract" is only as good as your performance. The customer should be free to do what ever he wants, buyer, seller beware, just as in the sale of anything else out there, period.
The customer should be free to do what ever he wants, buyer, seller beware, just as in the sale of anything else out there, period.
I believe agents would agree with this also. Most of the time buyers and sellers seek experienced agents to help guide them through the process and make the best decision possible.
If any person wants to handle it themselves, thank god for the USA they have the right to do so.
Yes many laws are outdated. They came from a time when sub-agency was the norm, rather than buyer and seller agency. Just because they are outdated doesn't mean you can ignore them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by darstar
it should be up to the individual as to just who he wants to represent him, or not.
This is the DOJ's next focus, is the requirement in some states that you have to use and attorney. They feel it is anti-competitive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by darstar
The customer should be free to do what ever he wants, buyer, seller beware, just as in the sale of anything else out there, period.
While I generally agree with the sentiment...Like all laws, the current real estate laws came about because someone got screwed over. I think there are many victims of fraud that would disagree with this.
Like all laws, the current real estate laws came about because someone got screwed over.
Just about every paragraph in every contract reflects this - it was written because at some time, no matter how unlikely it seems, someone did something wrong and hurt someone else and a law had to be made to deal with it.
if you are concerned about having a dual agency relationship implied due to the "agency level" advice you are giving the seller, don't give them that type of advice. Instead, some agents want to be free to give this type of advice and then hide behind the disclosure.
And contrary to what you may think, if a seller makes a representation to you, and then you pass it on to the buyer, the seller can be liable. I assumed that was fairly common knowledge.
And to the previous poster who implied that the seller was the one requiring the disclosures before showing their home to a buyer, that doesn't pass the smell test.
Will you sign something for the seller that says that the seller is not liable for anything that you tell your buyer?
Your quote doesn't say that the seller made a representation to me. That is a different ball game.
I interpreted this to mean, for example, that I tell my buyer the school district is X, and it turns out to be Z. The seller is not liable for that. I am.
if you are concerned about having a dual agency relationship implied due to the "agency level" advice you are giving the seller, don't give them that type of advice. Instead, some agents want to be free to give this type of advice and then hide behind the disclosure.
It isn't a concern for me, I just tell them that is agency level advice and we have no agency relationship with them, so to consult an attorney.
I agree that agents that give it freely is a serious problem.
THL, the unbiased folks (i.e. non-agents) following the other thread that you mischaracterize pointed out that you were way off base and defensive in how you were characterizing my posts. I'm sure anyone who does a thorough reading of that thread will find those posts chastising you for your mischaracterizations.
Yes many laws are outdated. They came from a time when sub-agency was the norm, rather than buyer and seller agency. Just because they are outdated doesn't mean you can ignore them.
This is the DOJ's next focus, is the requirement in some states that you have to use and attorney. They feel it is anti-competitive.
While I generally agree with the sentiment...Like all laws, the current real estate laws came about because someone got screwed over. I think there are many victims of fraud that would disagree with this.
Yes , we have lots of laws , unfortunately, they are not all equal, buyer , seller, agent , broker.........yet , Federal laws have for the most part gone away in many areas. Usury is one example. Some states have taken up the former , but they are weak. The process is broken.
How I long for the good old days, when a handshake between the banker , and or the Broker was all that was needed. I may want legal council , that should be up to me, not a requirement.......likewise , it surely is anti-competitive , when a broker can require a homeowner to sign a contract for six months , and , then, after the time runs out , the broker is still entitled to a commission if you sell it yourself , or , use another broker. Michigan has that law, Illinois does not. Is that fair ?
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.
