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.
he may have been trying to get you to lower the price so he could be on both sides of the transaction.
This sounded like dual agency to me ....
A licensed agent looked at the home that was not the list agent and made an offer. I doubt anyone with a license and that's a MLS member is going to let another agent represent them. Not dual agency there.
I honestly feel like you're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing. For that welcome to the ignore list. You're the first person I've ever put there.
It's actually quite common in CA for real estate agents to bring in another agent to represent them. Not always, but it's certainly not unheard of. Kind of like lawyers. They don't often represent themselves. I bought a house from a principal who was a broker but I dealt only with the listing agent.
And how is a "Transaction" Agent different from a "Dual" Agent?
Dual agency is legal in my state. Been there done that ... IT SHOULD BE ILLEGAL!
In Texas, like most states Dual agents ADVISE both parties. An intermediary broker has different agents within the BROKERAGE to represent each party to a transaction. A transaction agent just does the paperwork and meets minimum standards and can represent one party and advise them but will only do the paperwork, etc. for the other.
FrozenAngel I believe you are a TROLL. You blast off on things you know nothing about just to start a fight. I am going with Brandon and you will be the first on my ignore list also.
In Texas, like most states Dual agents ADVISE both parties. An intermediary broker has different agents within the BROKERAGE to represent each party to a transaction. A transaction agent just does the paperwork and meets minimum standards and can represent one party and advise them but will only do the paperwork, etc. for the other.
FrozenAngel I believe you are a TROLL. You blast off on things you know nothing about just to start a fight. I am going with Brandon and you will be the first on my ignore list also.
Gezzzz, just cuz I didn't understand and I may have over reacted because I had a really BAD experience with a dual agency situation?
I honestly feel like you're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing. For that welcome to the ignore list. You're the first person I've ever put there.
I was wondering if anyone could comment on the following.
We had our house listed with a selling agent (a realtor) a few months ago at a certain price. About six weeks into the listing, our realtor told us we had a couple of offers. Both were quite a bit lower than what we wanted and we turned them down. The realtor did mention in passing that he knew one of the potential buyers, but that was it.
A few weeks went by. One of the potential buyers came back to look at our property again. We thought their behavior rather strange because they turned up at our house and sat in their car until they thought we had left. Then they went in. We hadn't left but were at our next door neighbour's. Our neighbour saw them, and mentioned to us that the potential buyers were their landlord, and that the woman was actually a realtor herself. And whenever they saw our neighbour go out of her house, they would kind of rush away, as though they didn't want her to see that she was inspecting our house. We were also kind of puzzled that our agent never told us who exactly the people interested in our house were. Anyway, the next day, our selling agent called us and said this potential buyer had made another offer. It was again way lower than what we wanted. (Note that our agent had wanted us to lower the price to near what this offer was a week or so before, and we had said no.) It was then that we said to him 'Oh, you mean our neighbour (meaning the landlord)?' Our agent seemed shocked that we knew.
Anyway, when the three month listing was up, our agent didn't even ask why we did not extend the listing with him. He seemed to just want to go away.
In hindsight, we think the agent was not honest with us, and did not disclose all the information about the buyer. And it makes us wonder whether there was more to it.
I like the others don't hear anything unethical. In Oregon it has to be on the contract that the purchaser or seller is a licensed real estate agent, so you would have known at the time of the offer. I find that part odd, but it might not be required out there.
We have no concrete evidence that our listing agent did anything wrong. However, I thought full disclosure (one of the fundamental principles governing ethical conducts of realtors) included letting your seller know everything you know about a potential buyer. In this case, he didn't. Why would we want to know whether the buyer is a realtor? Because of the possibilty that they could do a deal, i.e., the buyer as a realtor could say 'get me the price and I will waive my realtor's fee', hence benefiting both parties. Not saying that this was happening but if I was a realtor, I would certainly let my client know so that there would be no uncertainty about this possibility.
Whether the price we wanted was realistic or not is besides the issue. We aren't desperate to sell and before listing, expressed to the realtor that we had a certain price in mind and was not willing to go much lower. And he accepted the listing on this term.
My posting this was just my wondering whether others as clients of realtors/agents would accept not receiving this information about a potential buyer. The realtor's reaction when we told him that we knew the potential buyer was a realtor seemed very odd to us. Maybe there's nothing behind his reaction but we as clients certainly don't accept it as 'full disclosure' and because of this, we did not extend the listing with him.
There is an interesting thread in the "real estate professional" section of this forum about this very thing. The moderator had to step in and cut some posts b/c it got pretty heated. What's interesting to me is some of the very people on this thread who are saying they saw nothing unethical, on that thread very vehemently saw something unethical. On this thread it was a private citizen who wasn't disclosed to. On that thread it was a real estate professional that wasn't disclosed to. I'm wondering why it would be different? Maybe some of the ones who flip-flopped on this issue from this thread to that can answer? I'd really like to know.
ETA: The thread is entitled "Is a referral fee indicated here?"
Last edited by MsFancyPants; 05-04-2009 at 09:38 AM..
MFP - You are making an assumption that the offerer that was licensed didn't inform the agent that he was licensed. We don't even know if the offer was in writing and what was disclosed/ not disclosed in this case. Heck, we don't even know if the other agent even contacted requesting for info. May have just looked at the property off of MLS and submitted an offer. The other post we know exactly what happened and this one is lacking a lot of details. Don't make assumptions.
We have no concrete evidence that our listing agent did anything wrong. However, I thought full disclosure (one of the fundamental principles governing ethical conducts of realtors) included letting your seller know everything you know about a potential buyer. In this case, he didn't.
No listing agent is required to disclose everything they know about a buyer. In fact certain disclosures violate federal laws.
Realtors ( not all brokers/agents are Realtors) are required to disclose that they are Realtors when acting as principal or when they have an ownership interest.
From a practical standpoint, agents in my area do so and at some point duing the negotiation "throw in" their co-op fee, assuming their broker allows them to do so and not all brokers do.
I have no idea why your agent did not disclose to you that the buyer was an active licenced agent, assuming that was indeed the current situation and not just hearsay, from the neighbor.
If I had been in your shoes, I would have asked my listing agent "what's up with this".
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.
there is a difference
