Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 12-22-2010, 07:02 PM
Status: "Made the Retirement Run in under 12 parsecs!!!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Cary, NC
43,176 posts, read 76,815,786 times
Reputation: 45533

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMC49 View Post
This concept does nothing for either side of the real estate sell. Nothing for the seller, nothing for the buyer. What is does is assure the real estate agent that they will be paid a double income. They by law cannot give any useful information to either party.
Complete misunderstanding.
Dual agency still requires the agent to convey material facts as they are learned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-22-2010, 07:16 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
10,940 posts, read 21,914,344 times
Reputation: 10571
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
Complete misunderstanding.
Dual agency still requires the agent to convey material facts as they are learned.
Correct, and add deal honestly and ethically with both buyers. Clients are owed obedience, loyalty, disclosure, confidentiality, accounting/fiduciary responsibility, and reasonable care and skill. In dual agency, you simply can't advise someone if it works against the other party. However, I rarely tell my client what offer they should or shouldn't take anyway.

And yes Ole Cap, mediation is not representation. However, at the end of the day the job is to get the home sold/help the buyer purchase. If through mediation a meeting of the mind is created and there is a successful closing with all legal obligations met, then isn't that the end goal?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 09:17 PM
 
Location: NW Las Vegas - Lone Mountain
15,756 posts, read 38,127,294 times
Reputation: 2661
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
Complete misunderstanding.
Dual agency still requires the agent to convey material facts as they are learned.
Partial misunderstanding. Material facts are not the only information around...and mostly they are not the important ones. A clear assessment of the other sides position would be one of the things that cannot be given. Potential strategies to pursue is another area that can be of great import.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-22-2010, 09:20 PM
 
Location: NW Las Vegas - Lone Mountain
15,756 posts, read 38,127,294 times
Reputation: 2661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Hoffman View Post
Correct, and add deal honestly and ethically with both buyers. Clients are owed obedience, loyalty, disclosure, confidentiality, accounting/fiduciary responsibility, and reasonable care and skill. In dual agency, you simply can't advise someone if it works against the other party. However, I rarely tell my client what offer they should or shouldn't take anyway.

And yes Ole Cap, mediation is not representation. However, at the end of the day the job is to get the home sold/help the buyer purchase. If through mediation a meeting of the mind is created and there is a successful closing with all legal obligations met, then isn't that the end goal?
As i said...a two way transaction to a three way...the third being to assure the house gets sold...which may well play more to the agents good than either participant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-23-2010, 04:54 AM
Status: "Made the Retirement Run in under 12 parsecs!!!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Cary, NC
43,176 posts, read 76,815,786 times
Reputation: 45533
Quote:
Originally Posted by olecapt View Post
Partial misunderstanding. Material facts are not the only information around...and mostly they are not the important ones. A clear assessment of the other sides position would be one of the things that cannot be given. Potential strategies to pursue is another area that can be of great import.
Oh, I think "complete misunderstanding" is accurate, since the concluding sentence was, "They by law cannot give any useful information to either party." What a misconception! And the post serves no purpose without at least a nod to some fundamental accuracy.
We are certainly clearly commanded by law to give useful information.
We certainly must help clients in dual agency without favoring either side.
We have to do CMA's.
We must convey any material change in the other side's ability to close.
We have disclosure responsibility to the client regarding the property and any known or reasonably easily noted material defects or issues.

I don't aggressively seek dual agency.
Earlier this year, I referred a client out of the firm to get her full representation, and I am glad I did. I will do it again.
But there is a lot of misinformation on dual agency out there, much of it promulgated by agents who do not clearly understand agency.

And a knowledgeable buyer can be smart in seeking out a dual agent to tilt the transaction in their favor by taking the agent's guidance off the table for the other side.
Of course, that may be when the smart agent defers and refers out either the buyer or seller.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-23-2010, 08:59 AM
 
Location: NW Las Vegas - Lone Mountain
15,756 posts, read 38,127,294 times
Reputation: 2661
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
Oh, I think "complete misunderstanding" is accurate, since the concluding sentence was, "They by law cannot give any useful information to either party." What a misconception! And the post serves no purpose without at least a nod to some fundamental accuracy.
The post over stated the theoretical. It was likely right on for the practical.

Quote:
We are certainly clearly commanded by law to give useful information.
And directed by law not ot give useful information.


Quote:
We certainly must help clients in dual agency without favoring either side.
Which says no help that favors one even if we would give it if not for dual...

Quote:
We have to do CMA's.
You may...we don't have to and often don't

Quote:
We must convey any material change in the other side's ability to close.

We have disclosure responsibility to the client regarding the property and any known or reasonably easily noted material defects or issues..
Yes..and that is about it..

Quote:
don't aggressively seek dual agency.
Earlier this year, I referred a client out of the firm to get her full representation, and I am glad I did. I will do it again.
But there is a lot of misinformation on dual agency out there, much of it promulgated by agents who do not clearly understand agency.

And a knowledgeable buyer can be smart in seeking out a dual agent to tilt the transaction in their favor by taking the agent's guidance off the table for the other side.
Of course, that may be when the smart agent defers and refers out either the buyer or seller.
Agreed...and much of it conveyed by agents who do use dual..questionable ethics and confilict of interest be damned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2010, 11:21 AM
 
Location: MID ATLANTIC
8,670 posts, read 22,853,798 times
Reputation: 10490
When a referral from a former customer calls me, one of the very first questions I ask is who his agent is and request permission to call and introduce myself. Last week, I found out a reason to insist upon it. This first-time (high end) buyer contacted me and I ran various scenarios for his approval. We briefly discussed his agent and he said he talked to the agent about me and the other agent was okay with him using me. (I thought the wording odd then, but gave it no more thought). He started sending over listings to me. Most realtor listings have the buyer's agent's name on there, with the listing info removed, so the only agent's name I had, was the one that said I was okay (never heard of him before). Well, the customer and I had a common friend, so he asked if I had any opinions on the properties from the three scenarios I ran......and since he asked, I did some checking, like pulling up the assessment history and looked to see who the Realtor was on the listings. I was a bit surprised to see all three listings were from the very same agent he was using. About 24 hours later, I get a call he wants to write on one after he emails me his proposed strategy (offer price and absolute max)........I asked if he happened to share this info with "his agent." He says not, but does mention after I asked him if his agent was showing anyone else's listings, another agent in the office was appointed as his agent for this offer.

His offer was outright rejected, no counter. So, now we both are kind of wondering what's up. I'm wondering if the agent has yet another buyer in the wings.......but something sure does stink on this situation. I did tell him since he did mention this other agent was rather unimpressive, to call our mutual friend (who dropped his part-time RE license about 8 or 9 years ago). I'm wondering now, where he got this agent's name from, but my gut instincts are usually dead on. However, I'm not saying a word.....and am thinking I will call our mutual friend tomorrow - to see if he has heard anything, and ask him to check in on my buyer. But no more and no less, at least for right now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2010, 11:25 AM
 
Location: earth?
7,284 posts, read 12,900,631 times
Reputation: 8956
In dual agency the interests of the buyer and seller are at odds . . .you can't effectively represent both because they have different interests. In buyer agency, the agent is supposed to get the lowest price for the buyer, in seller agency, the agent is supposed to get the highest price for the seller.

It is impossible to REPRESENT both the seller and the buyer, effectively, as they have different interests.

And aside from price, in the transaction, things come up which require REPRESENTATION . . .as in representing an interest.

You can't do both . . . it is an oxymoron.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2010, 11:43 AM
Status: "Made the Retirement Run in under 12 parsecs!!!" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Cary, NC
43,176 posts, read 76,815,786 times
Reputation: 45533
Quote:
Originally Posted by imcurious View Post
In dual agency the interests of the buyer and seller are at odds . . .you can't effectively represent both because they have different interests. In buyer agency, the agent is supposed to get the lowest price for the buyer, in seller agency, the agent is supposed to get the highest price for the seller.

It is impossible to REPRESENT both the seller and the buyer, effectively, as they have different interests.

And aside from price, in the transaction, things come up which require REPRESENTATION . . .as in representing an interest.

You can't do both . . . it is an oxymoron.

Are the interests of buyer and seller at odds when there are two agents involved?
Yes. Seldom are their interests in complete harmony, other than both should want to see the property conveyed.

Of course, one person cannot offer fiduciary-level representation to two opposing parties.
That is a given, and provided for in the definition and specific disclosure, and election to accept dual agency by the principals.

In North Carolina, "Dual Agency" is not an "oxymoron." It is a specific level of service, easily defined, (http://www.ncrec.gov/publications-bulletins/WorkingWith.html - broken link) ("... It may be difficult for a dual agent to advance the interests of both the buyer and seller. Nevertheless, a dual agent must treat buyers and sellers fairly and equally. Although the dual agent owes them the same duties, buyers and sellers can prohibit dual agents from divulging certain confidential information about them to the other party. ...") with required disclosure and clarity, and acceptance by the parties.

To say that it is unethical because some agents screw it up might require us to agree that any and all real estate agency is unethical because some agents screw it up.
I accept neither position. Let the slacker agents pick up the tab for their behavior.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-26-2010, 12:24 PM
 
Location: earth?
7,284 posts, read 12,900,631 times
Reputation: 8956
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
Are the interests of buyer and seller at odds when there are two agents involved?
Yes.
Seldom are their interests in complete harmony, other than both should want to see the property conveyed.

Of course, one person cannot offer fiduciary-level representation to two opposing parties.
That is a given, and provided for in the definition and specific disclosure, and election to accept dual agency by the principals.

In North Carolina, "Dual Agency" is not an "oxymoron." It is a specific level of service, easily defined, (http://www.ncrec.gov/publications-bulletins/WorkingWith.html - broken link) ("... It may be difficult for a dual agent to advance the interests of both the buyer and seller. Nevertheless, a dual agent must treat buyers and sellers fairly and equally. Although the dual agent owes them the same duties, buyers and sellers can prohibit dual agents from divulging certain confidential information about them to the other party. ...") with required disclosure and clarity, and acceptance by the parties.

To say that it is unethical because some agents screw it up might require us to agree that any and all real estate agency is unethical because some agents screw it up.
I accept neither position. Let the slacker agents pick up the tab for their behavior.
Your bolded statement that the interests of buyer and seller are at odds when there are two agents representing them makes no sense . . . they may be "at odds," but the efforts of each agent in representing their client will be to move each closer to the middle or to a point of negotiation - in terms of price and then throughout the deal, as issues arise.

I know many states allow dual agency, but that doesn't mean it is the best for the clients involved. In the case of listing agent, it is a bonus, but no one else is fairly represented, in my viewpoint, especially not the buyer . . . the listing agent is really only concerned with getting the deal done, not REPRESENTING the buyer's interests . . .this is my viewpoint, take it or leave it.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:06 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top