U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Real Estate
 [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 08-18-2012, 04:22 PM
 
Location: Montclair, NJ
454 posts, read 944,703 times
Reputation: 137

Advertisements

In the above scenario, the agent was either cutting their commission, which in some states calls for disclosure ahead of time of a variable commission structure or they were working on your (and their) behalf to the detriment of their clients, the seller.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-18-2012, 05:32 PM
 
397 posts, read 492,693 times
Reputation: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
I understand. I emailed the seller to go over his listing agreement. I know most listing agreements include clauses (where you can terminate anytime you want). But you still cannot sell the home until the original listing expired. So you can pull the home off the market. But if his original listing were to expire on Jan 16th 2013. Than legally he cannot sell the home to me until Jan 16th 2012 without incurring charges in commission.
The LA also probably has a section specifying a period of time beyond the end of the listing where the listing agent is still owed commission by the seller (if sold to someone who looked at or negotiated during the listing agreement).

This is yet another gem that listing agents put in the LA.

I would clarify this before looking at the property or negotiating during the listing period. Any communication with the sellers during the listing period could be construed as negotiating so would do it all off the record (verbally). If all your showings and negotiations were prior to and after the listing agreement period, you should be OK.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 09:36 PM
 
2,636 posts, read 4,361,221 times
Reputation: 2080
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontclairNative View Post
In the above scenario, the agent was either cutting their commission, which in some states calls for disclosure ahead of time of a variable commission structure or they were working on your (and their) behalf to the detriment of their clients, the seller.
It didn't work to the clients' detriment if it motivated an offer, and ultimately, a sale that wouldn't have occurred at that price, which sounds like the case. It was likely the former case--and how do you know that the agent didn't first disclose his/her willingness to cut the commission with all affected parties? I think you are thinking of a deal where the LA is clearly trying to cut out the BA, but in this case, that is not happening. The poster said s/he found the house without the help of the BA, and any BA who had been as lazy or inept (or just tired of working with that client) as described in the post would be crazy to raise a fuss over this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-18-2012, 09:43 PM
 
Location: Salem, OR
13,754 posts, read 31,653,769 times
Reputation: 12131
Quote:
Originally Posted by RE Skeptic View Post
The LA also probably has a section specifying a period of time beyond the end of the listing where the listing agent is still owed commission by the seller (if sold to someone who looked at or negotiated during the listing agreement).

This is yet another gem that listing agents put in the LA.

I would clarify this before looking at the property or negotiating during the listing period. Any communication with the sellers during the listing period could be construed as negotiating so would do it all off the record (verbally). If all your showings and negotiations were prior to and after the listing agreement period, you should be OK.
Yes, the way the clauses work is for buyers that were either introduced to the property, or engaged in negotiations during the listing period. The clause is for buyers that were procured during the listing period. I call it the "going behind my back clause" when I explain it to my sellers. The "gem" is an unfortunate necessity in listing agreements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2012, 09:43 AM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
8,862 posts, read 17,486,453 times
Reputation: 6244
The buyer and listing agency contracts protect clients from unethical agents and they protect agents from unethical clients. If you aren't unethical, RE Skeptic, you shouldn't have anything to worry about.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2012, 09:57 AM
 
3,576 posts, read 5,915,478 times
Reputation: 1431
OP here. Going to close on home this week. We are just using real estate attorney for transaction.

Buyer hasn't faced any legal repercussions by getting out of contract with listing agent. Real estate attorney said listing agent had switched companies thereby voiding the real estate contract listing all together. (original brokerage just went out of business when original listing was signed and agent switched to another company).

Home was never shown to any other prospective buyers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2012, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Cary, NC
31,686 posts, read 55,513,715 times
Reputation: 30266
Quote:
Originally Posted by aneftp View Post
OP here. Going to close on home this week. We are just using real estate attorney for transaction.

Buyer hasn't faced any legal repercussions by getting out of contract with listing agent. Real estate attorney said listing agent had switched companies thereby voiding the real estate contract listing all together. (original brokerage just went out of business when original listing was signed and agent switched to another company).

Home was never shown to any other prospective buyers.
It would seem that the real crux of the attorney's assessment would be that the original brokerage closed down without assigning the listing contract to another party.

That the agent went to another firm is merely a detail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2012, 02:57 PM
 
Location: Gilbert - Val Vista Lakes
6,069 posts, read 12,700,380 times
Reputation: 3810
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
It would seem that the real crux of the attorney's assessment would be that the original brokerage closed down without assigning the listing contract to another party.

That the agent went to another firm is merely a detail.
The last firm I worked for before going out on my own had a clause in their agent/company contract whereby they would transfer the listing to the agents new brokerage when they change companies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2012, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Gilbert - Val Vista Lakes
6,069 posts, read 12,700,380 times
Reputation: 3810
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman View Post
The buyer and listing agency contracts protect clients from unethical agents and they protect agents from unethical clients. If you aren't unethical, RE Skeptic, you shouldn't have anything to worry about.
Brandon, what is unethical about clients going behind an agents back to make deals with sellers, and for buyers to use agents for free, and continue working with several agents, maybe even for 40 hours each before deciding which agent the want use?

After all, from what I'm reading on some of these threads, a few people think that's the right thing to do. After all, Realtors make too much money, so they should be working for free, and giving away some of that big money they earn
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2012, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Salem, OR
13,754 posts, read 31,653,769 times
Reputation: 12131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bill View Post
The last firm I worked for before going out on my own had a clause in their agent/company contract whereby they would transfer the listing to the agents new brokerage when they change companies.
Out here the seller would have to consent to that change, and a new listing agreement executed. While 99% of the time that is what happens, sellers aren't under any obligation to execute a new listing agreement as the terms might be different. I would think that clause would be dubious.
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 > General Forums > Real Estate
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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