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 07-18-2012, 03:16 PM
 
936 posts, read 1,755,222 times
Reputation: 934

Advertisements

You'd get eaten alive in the Chicago market. If you were here then I'd send all my buyers to you and just sit back and collect commissions for you doing all the work. Sounds like a good deal.

What's petty about getting paid for the services that get provided? Do you normally work for free?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-18-2012, 03:24 PM
 
Location: DFW - Coppell / Las Colinas
30,017 posts, read 34,671,455 times
Reputation: 36053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall View Post
I'm right here. I will absolutely show my listings to another agent's client. I ask upfront if they have an agent. If their agent is unavailable, I'll show my listing. If they are unagented as of that moment, I will show my listing. If they have no intention of using my company for buyer representation, I'll show my listing. If they hire an agent after I show it to them, I'm happy to present that offer with their buyer agent to my client.

People don't hire agents to be petty and play games. They hire us to provide a service.
Agreed. There have been quite a few agents here put in the MLS under private remarks that they will reduce the commission to X% if they show the buyer the house. Many Indian buyers were using these agents to open the door then going to a discount rebate buyers agent to write the offer.

Our company prohibits this practice and the MLS has tried to put a stop to it. What is advertised is the BAC paid per MLS rules unless agreed in writing separately.

The problem is the poorly trained rebate buyers agent who wrote the offer never carried their load. Usually the listing agent had to fix their screw ups and was dealing with a poorly represented buyer, thus a reduction in %.

But that's a different subject covered here many times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 03:32 PM
 
2,624 posts, read 4,128,260 times
Reputation: 1876
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silverfall View Post
I'm right here. I will absolutely show my listings to another agent's client. I ask upfront if they have an agent. If their agent is unavailable, I'll show my listing. If they are unagented as of that moment, I will show my listing. If they have no intention of using my company for buyer representation, I'll show my listing. If they hire an agent after I show it to them, I'm happy to present that offer with their buyer agent to my client.

People don't hire agents to be petty and play games. They hire us to provide a service.
That's what I did when viewing houses in NJ. I didn't have an agent in NJ, and viewed ~4 houses. Each time, I was shown the property by the listing agent and when asked I told them that we did not have an agent yet in NJ (had one in PA).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 04:14 PM
 
Location: Lexington, SC
4,281 posts, read 10,325,143 times
Reputation: 3700
A friend of mine (Tom) signed a sales agreement. It said if the agent (Sara) listed and sold the house, the commission would be 4% but if another broker was involved, it would be 6%.

Realtor has several open houses and one planned the following week. Sara calls Tom and says she cannot do the scheduled open house but can she have somone from her office do it. Tom says fine.

Make a long story short. Someone (Dick) tours the house during the open house. Dick calls Sara and wants to see it again. Dick makes an offer. Sara tells Tom the commission will be 6% as the "person" from her office showed Dick the house during the open house and is claiming a commission split.

Tom was upset as Sara played like it was just "someone from her office" was going to cover the open house for her.

PS

The sale was for $550K. This cost Tom $11K. Not chump change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 04:34 PM
 
Location: Salem, OR
13,757 posts, read 31,661,700 times
Reputation: 12136
Quote:
Originally Posted by yousah View Post
You'd get eaten alive in the Chicago market. If you were here then I'd send all my buyers to you and just sit back and collect commissions for you doing all the work. Sounds like a good deal.

What's petty about getting paid for the services that get provided? Do you normally work for free?
Not at all. If an agent started playing games like that I would just send out a notice of reduced commission for that office that is permanent. I don't play games like that.

It is petty to show your own listing and then try and claim procuring cause and reduce the real estate compensation after the fact. If you want to have that policy, write up a letter and send it to each real estate office informing them of your policy and commission splits. What's so hard about that?

I think it is petty to put buyers and sellers in the middle of compensation arguments, but if that is okay with you that is your choice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 04:38 PM
 
Location: Salem, OR
13,757 posts, read 31,661,700 times
Reputation: 12136
Quote:
Originally Posted by accufitgolf View Post
A friend of mine (Tom) signed a sales agreement. It said if the agent (Sara) listed and sold the house, the commission would be 4% but if another broker was involved, it would be 6%.

Realtor has several open houses and one planned the following week. Sara calls Tom and says she cannot do the scheduled open house but can she have somone from her office do it. Tom says fine.

Make a long story short. Someone (Dick) tours the house during the open house. Dick calls Sara and wants to see it again. Dick makes an offer. Sara tells Tom the commission will be 6% as the "person" from her office showed Dick the house during the open house and is claiming a commission split.

Tom was upset as Sara played like it was just "someone from her office" was going to cover the open house for her.

PS

The sale was for $550K. This cost Tom $11K. Not chump change.
In my state only real estate agents can hold an open house because it is considered real estate activity. All a "person from the office" could do would be to stand there and hand out flyers. They wouldn't be allowed to discuss anything about the house not written as a fact on the flyer.

Having other agents hold open houses is very normal. The issue at play is that the real estate agent didn't explain well that it was another agent holding the open house.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 05:34 PM
 
936 posts, read 1,755,222 times
Reputation: 934
SilverFall- those are exactly the games that you are proposing-- to let someone else show the house to your buyers then want your share of the commission.

This issue is really very simple. Anyone wanting to make a claim for the commission better have been the person who showed the property in the first place then followed through to the contract phase.

The original poster started their own problem by choosing to use an agent to do the initial showing then scampered off to another agent who then wants the commission.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 05:49 PM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
26,929 posts, read 58,187,169 times
Reputation: 29444
Quote:
Originally Posted by yousah View Post
The original poster started their own problem by choosing to use an agent to do the initial showing then scampered off to another agent who then wants the commission.
Or not. What you describe is an interpretation of events that best suits your own bias.
As has been thrashed out already... there are other viewpoints on the matter.

In any case we really don't know the particulars as the OP has never returned to fill in the gaps.
Perhaps someday they will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 05:51 PM
 
Location: Salem, OR
13,757 posts, read 31,661,700 times
Reputation: 12136
Quote:
Originally Posted by yousah View Post
SilverFall- those are exactly the games that you are proposing-- to let someone else show the house to your buyers then want your share of the commission.

This issue is really very simple. Anyone wanting to make a claim for the commission better have been the person who showed the property in the first place then followed through to the contract phase.

The original poster started their own problem by choosing to use an agent to do the initial showing then scampered off to another agent who then wants the commission.
We have a different interpretation of things. Apparently opening doors and doing showings is the value you think real estate agents in the Chicago area have? I think MAM would disagree with that.

There is no game here. This is the LISTING agent who is HIRED by the seller to sell their home. Period. If the listing agent wants to have that business policy they need to disclose it to potential buyers BEFORE they show them the listing.

Potential Buyer: "I want to see the house you have listed at 123 Main."

Listing Agent: "Do you have an agent?"

Buyer: "No, not yet."

Agent: "I'm happy to show it to you but just know that if you want to bring in a buyer agent after I show it to you, it is my policy to reduce their compensation offering since I showed the property. Would you still like me to show it to you?"

See? How hard is that to be...egads...upfront and direct with consumers who know diddly squat about procuring cause. If you have a hidden agenda, you are playing a game. If you are upfront and clear about policies, then there is no game. You can have whatever policies you want as a business, but don't stand back and hide it from consumers and other agents. Otherwise you are gamey.

You should read the NAR's arbitration cases. Procuring cause has clearly been determined to be more than showing a property. Agents will lose every time in trying to make that claim. Legal precedent has been set.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 05:58 PM
 
936 posts, read 1,755,222 times
Reputation: 934
In Illinois it is assumed that the broker is working for the party they are working with unless they dislose otherwise. The problem isn't with the broker who would be working with that buyer, but with the buyer who then chooses to go to a second broker to follow through on their transaction. It's the buyer who needs to be upfront and tell the broker that they don't want a relationship with them. The broker can then decide whether or not to work with that buyer on that basis. I didn't write the laws, I only follow them.

What other profession does this happen with where a consumer goes to a professional and expects them to do things on their behalf, then not get paid? Only in real estate.

And how in the world can someone be a procurring cause if they didn't even show the property?
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
Similar Threads
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