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)
 
Old 08-01-2012, 02:11 PM
 
Location: DFW - Coppell / Las Colinas
29,948 posts, read 34,553,963 times
Reputation: 35946

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
Good points.
I work deals all the time with agents in our company (in TX it's called Intermediary not DA) who I've never meet. I know local ReMax, KW agents better than most of our agents.

We discuss the Dual Agency with our clients multiple (3) times and they agree 2 separate times in writing to let the Relationship exist. TX law says It must always be in writing and disclosed.

 
Old 08-01-2012, 02:24 PM
 
Location: Chicago
3,260 posts, read 4,509,897 times
Reputation: 3991
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
Just to clarify... Dual agency can also exist when 2 agents from the same firm represents the Buyer & Seller. Our company has 32 offices and 1800 agents so the odds one of them might bring a buyer are fairly high.

In a large Metro area like DFW, I seldom represent both parties but in small towns it may be very common. There may be very few agents in Podunk Kansas and they will naturally handle both sides of a transaction.

So... normal is not always normal depending on the size of a city, the Brokerage and the amount of agents in a given area. It's a reason DA is practiced or allowed in real estate and it can be done correctly and fairly.
In Illinois, in every contract I have seen, dual agency only exists when the same designated agent is representing both parties. The contract usually reads something like: "Possible Dual Agency: The above named designated agent may undertake dual representation (represent both the buyer and the seller) for the sale..."

So, in my case, saying no to dual agency did not limit someone from the same brokerage from selling the property. I still told our agent at the time that if the situation somehow presented itself that we'd consider it.

It is amazing how much varies from state to state...
 
Old 08-01-2012, 02:44 PM
 
Location: DFW - Coppell / Las Colinas
29,948 posts, read 34,553,963 times
Reputation: 35946
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikitakolata View Post
It is amazing how much varies from state to state...
One of the reasons it dangerous for people to come on here and start lecturing about RE practices like we see many times. This thread is a great example. What's right in one state may be wrong in another.
 
Old 08-01-2012, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Cary, NC
31,621 posts, read 55,349,802 times
Reputation: 30183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
One of the reasons it dangerous for people to come on here and start lecturing about RE practices like we see many times. This thread is a great example. What's right in one state may be wrong in another.
Yes, indeed.
Sometimes it all reminds me of Trulia Answers....
 
Old 08-02-2012, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
8,852 posts, read 17,450,334 times
Reputation: 6212
Quote:
Originally Posted by RE Skeptic View Post
... your listing agreement (that was likely drafted by the states Real Estate Association's lawyers) that are weighted in the RA advantage (BA commission goes to LA by default, seller may be responsible for commission even if home doesn't sell, if buyer defaults EM is split with LA, agency has option to exercise dual agency and does not need the sellers consent)....
First, you're looking at the commission wrong. The seller makes an agreement to pay the agent x% if the home sells. The agent then makes an agreement with other agents that he will pay them a portion of x% if they provide a buyer that closes on the home.

There are certain situations where the seller may owe a commission but that is usually in a situation where the seller has done something questionable such as not show up at closing.

Seller does need to consent to dual agency, I believe you got that one wrong.

Of course the form was written by lawyers for agents but it's a fair contract because they still must comply with real estate laws that are in place to protect the public. Who do you think writes the contracts for doctors, lawyers, doctors, etc? The person that is doing the work of course. Why do you take umbrage with this when it's common practice regardless of profession?

Your post should have simply read "I think I can get a better deal by trying to cut the agent out of half the commission. What is the best way to do that?" After all, that's what you meant so why not just say it?
 
Old 08-02-2012, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Lexington, SC
4,281 posts, read 10,294,366 times
Reputation: 3700
One thing that alludes me in many of these discussion is I have never lost the sale of nor not bought a home based on a few % points one way or another.

In my last sale I accepted an offer that netted (bottom lined) me less as the buyers had better credit, had pre-approval, and had less conditions. A few % points did not swing the sale.

In my last purchase I would have paid more then we settled on. A few % points did not swing the deal.

Penny wise, pound foolish comes to mind. What am I missing?
 
Old 08-02-2012, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
19,884 posts, read 36,406,318 times
Reputation: 21321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman View Post
First, you're looking at the commission wrong. The seller makes an agreement to pay the agent x% if the home sells. The agent then makes an agreement with other agents that he will pay them a portion of x% if they provide a buyer that closes on the home.

There are certain situations where the seller may owe a commission but that is usually in a situation where the seller has done something questionable such as not show up at closing.

Seller does need to consent to dual agency, I believe you got that one wrong.

Of course the form was written by lawyers for agents but it's a fair contract because they still must comply with real estate laws that are in place to protect the public. Who do you think writes the contracts for doctors, lawyers, doctors, etc? The person that is doing the work of course. Why do you take umbrage with this when it's common practice regardless of profession?

Your post should have simply read "I think I can get a better deal by trying to cut the agent out of half the commission. What is the best way to do that?" After all, that's what you meant so why not just say it?
Brandon, C-D won't let me give you rep points but I really wanted to for so succinctly and accurately summing up what this is all about from the OP's point of view.

Wonder if that would fly put in the email he wants to send?
 
Old 08-03-2012, 10:34 PM
 
397 posts, read 491,621 times
Reputation: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman View Post
First, you're looking at the commission wrong. The seller makes an agreement to pay the agent x% if the home sells. The agent then makes an agreement with other agents that he will pay them a portion of x% if they provide a buyer that closes on the home.
Maybe in SC, but in NC the listing agreement (at the least the one I signed) specifically states what the BA will get. Perhaps I am understanding the contract wrong. Are you saying that despite what the seller specifies the BA commission at, the LA has the option of changing this commission on their own? If a seller agrees to a total commission based on the assumption that they will pay x% to a BA and BA is not in the deal, by default the entire commission goes to the LA. IMO most sellers don't know this (until it is too late).

Quote:
Seller does need to consent to dual agency, I believe you got that one wrong.
Correct, I conceded that one. But as I stated, the seller really has no choice to agree to this if a buyer comes from the same agency. I question the legality of not consenting to DA and re-evaluating DA after an offer is submitted from the same agency (proposed by another member). Presumably for an offer to be presented, the buyers had to see the home with their agent. But if DA was not consented, how did the agent (from the same agency) even show the house. I think agency starts with the showing, not the offer?

Quote:
Of course the form was written by lawyers for agents but it's a fair contract because they still must comply with real estate laws that are in place to protect the public. Who do you think writes the contracts for doctors, lawyers, doctors, etc? The person that is doing the work of course. Why do you take umbrage with this when it's common practice regardless of profession?
The mere presence of RE laws does not insure that listing agreements written by the RE Associations are "fair". Your lawyers would not being doing their job if they didn't draft the contract in favor of their clients (RAs). The problem from the sellers perspective is that they are forced to use this contract. How many of you would sign a "custom" listing agreement crafted by the sellers lawyer?

Most doctors don't sign contracts with their patients.


Quote:
Your post should have simply read "I think I can get a better deal by trying to cut the agent out of half the commission. What is the best way to do that?" After all, that's what you meant so why not just say it?
I am new to these posts and my initial query was simply intended to get input on agent obligations (legal and ethical) related to email communication. I (naively) assumed that I would get comments from a variety of people and never realized I would receive such an onslaught of biased posts from a rather hostile and defensive RE crowd.

No doubt I am trying to leverage my unrepresented status. Like most buyers, sellers (and agents) I am trying to maximize my financial outcome...guilty as charged. Is this any different than a SA trying to get an extra 3% on an unrepresented buyer, a concept that many of you (RAs) ardently support. The only difference is that as the buyer I am being completely transparent to the sellers, while many of the RAs on this thread appear to be trying to sweep this issue under the rug.

In the end, I think all parties can benefit. If the house sells at 800k and the SA gets 1% (8k) for opening the doors for my inspectors and doing a little extra hand holding, is that worth it? No right or wrong answer to this, but I suspect many of you would take this deal, especially of the listing agreement was expiring soon. If you passed this up, would have to question your business acumen.
 
Old 08-04-2012, 06:35 AM
 
Location: DFW - Coppell / Las Colinas
29,948 posts, read 34,553,963 times
Reputation: 35946
Quote:
Originally Posted by RE Skeptic View Post
Maybe in SC, but in NC the listing agreement (at the least the one I signed) specifically states what the BA will get. Perhaps I am understanding the contract wrong. Are you saying that despite what the seller specifies the BA commission at, the LA has the option of changing this commission on their own? If a seller agrees to a total commission based on the assumption that they will pay x% to a BA and BA is not in the deal, by default the entire commission goes to the LA. IMO most sellers don't know this (until it is too late).

And in 48 other states it's handled in different ways which is the problem with your assumptions. Nowhere in any of our TX Agreements does it say how much we are offering a BA. That is left at our discretion, the market and our company rules.


Correct, I conceded that one. But as I stated, the seller really has no choice to agree to this if a buyer comes from the same agency. I question the legality of not consenting to DA and re-evaluating DA after an offer is submitted from the same agency (proposed by another member). Presumably for an offer to be presented, the buyers had to see the home with their agent. But if DA was not consented, how did the agent (from the same agency) even show the house. I think agency starts with the showing, not the offer?

Rarely does it start with the showing. If someone calls on the house and wants to see it, I have no agency relationship with that person. DA must always be disclosed and in writing.



The mere presence of RE laws does not insure that listing agreements written by the RE Associations are "fair". Your lawyers would not being doing their job if they didn't draft the contract in favor of their clients (RAs). The problem from the sellers perspective is that they are forced to use this contract. How many of you would sign a "custom" listing agreement crafted by the sellers lawyer?

No one forces a person to sign an agreement. Our listing agreements are Fair to all parties and clearly spells out our obligations, responsibilities and our fees.


Most doctors don't sign contracts with their patients.

Doctors don't "Represent" their patients. Lawyers do and require a signed agreement for a legal relationship to exist. I even give my auto shop written signature to work on my care so there is no misunderstanding on what the work is to be done.


I am new to these posts and my initial query was simply intended to get input on agent obligations (legal and ethical) related to email communication. I (naively) assumed that I would get comments from a variety of people and never realized I would receive such an onslaught of biased posts from a rather hostile and defensive RE crowd.

Your OP was answered at least 6-10 times. Funny how when people disagree and tell us we are clueless they are hostile and defensive. You are just so wrong in many of your assumptions we in the business don't like bad info where the public might believe it's true nationwide or in their situation.


No doubt I am trying to leverage my unrepresented status. Like most buyers, sellers (and agents) I am trying to maximize my financial outcome...guilty as charged. Is this any different than a SA trying to get an extra 3% on an unrepresented buyer, a concept that many of you (RAs) ardently support. The only difference is that as the buyer I am being completely transparent to the sellers, while many of the RAs on this thread appear to be trying to sweep this issue under the rug.

I can't speak for the other hundred of thousand's of agents but I communicate very effectively with my clients and will discuss all offers or situations with them no matter how solid or crazy the other party might be. Almost always they see the motives of the offer party and act appropriately. After all I represent their best interests (but not the buyers)


In the end, I think all parties can benefit. If the house sells at 800k and the SA gets 1% (8k) for opening the doors for my inspectors and doing a little extra hand holding, is that worth it? No right or wrong answer to this, but I suspect many of you would take this deal, especially of the listing agreement was expiring soon. If you passed this up, would have to question your business acumen.

I respect a business that sells their product for a profit. Not sure what you do for a living but does your companies customers tell the company if they cut your pay they could get a better deal ? Your company knows this to be the case but have policies and guidelines on the fees they charge to make a profit.

It really only matters what you think on your individual transaction. Everyone has the right and freedom for them to decide what works best in their situation.
See in blue above
 
Old 08-04-2012, 07:02 AM
 
Location: NJ
17,579 posts, read 38,320,873 times
Reputation: 16099
I have to say I am surprised that how much the buyer's agent gets is not set and stated on the listing agreement in places. That seems pretty important.
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.


Closed Thread

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