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.
Como'n now this is a no brain er. First question. Are the buyers Psychic that without any sign on the property they knew that someone in the neighbor was trying to sell and stopped by? Of course not.
Second question: Did you happen to notice that this matter occurred in 2010?
I have a related situation. First the background, then my questions:
I am selling a house in New York. I signed a contract with a broker listing his name and company name. The company name is listed under the section MLS office name, and the broker gave me the card and represented himself as a broker of that agency. His house sign listed his agency with his name and photo. I agreed to use this broker partly based on the resources I felt that large agency could bring to help sell my house. The form states this contract is "for use by ABC company. Use by any other party is illegal and voids the contract." (ABC company being broker's original agency) The term of the contract was 1 year. Six months in to the contract, the broker changed real estate companies. The broker never told me he changed companies, but I noticed he changed the sign on my house. The original company was a larger well known company, his new company I have never heard of.
During the period of this contract (whether it is still valid or not) there was a buyer who spoke with my agent and we all verbally agreed on a price. The buyer came through another agent. I never received any paperwork confirming the offer and later learned the buyer is having some issues with the sale of his house, necessary to conclude before he buys my house. Several months passed without any action from this buyer.
Since then, my contract with the agent/broker has expired. There is a clause in this contract stating if the house actually sells or goes into contract within 60 days, to a party who was shown the house during the term of the contract,
the commission is still due to the BROKER. I would be willing to pay this commission to the broker if he could arrange a quick closing within that 60 days, whether or not the contract is still valid (because I consider myself a fair person). However I may have to give additional money to this buyer to get him to act quickly, thereby making the broker's commission not affordable. We are already 10 days into this 60 day period and it seems unlikely, but not impossible that we will go to contract during that period. I have heard the buyer is still interested in buying my house if he clears up his issue.
Questions:
1. Is the contract void if the broker is no longer with the original listing agency?
2. If the contract is still valid and the house does sell to that buyer, and I pay the broker his commission, am I still liable to his original company for commission also?
1. Is the contract void if the broker is no longer with the original listing agency?
Your contract is with the real estate brokerage. It is not technically with your agent even if they are the managing broker or broker/owner of the brokerage. The brokerage itself is a legal entity in the eyes of the law.
This leads me to the question . . . why did the name of the brokerage change on the sign? Did your agent leave their office and go to another office? If they did, then your contract is still valid with the original brokerage but your agent no longer being with that brokerage would no longer be a party to the contract. Is it possible the name of the brokerage changed? I know my office changed names this summer. We used to be a Prudential Real Estate office but that brand is going away so we converted to the new brand that's replacing it, Berkshire Hathaway. In this scenario, it's possible that you might have had to amend the contract to keep it valid, but that's hard to say as I'm not a lawyer. If the scenario you fear does come up, it would likely be best to consult an attorney before committing to sell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DepressionGlass
2. If the contract is still valid and the house does sell to that buyer, and I pay the broker his commission, am I still liable to his original company for commission also?
Again, that depends on why the name changed on the sign. If the agent left his original company and went to a new one, then you would owe the original company a commission and your agent nothing since he contract is with the brokerage and not the agent as I said above. If the name simply changed then you may owe a commission to the brokerage who would in turn pay the agent their share.
Here's what I would say to you . . . first if you're really concerned about this you should consult an attorney. Second, you don't have to agree to any sale contract you don't like. So, if the numbers don't work out for you then don't sell at that price. It may be the best you can do and you'll have to stay put but again the decision lies with you as it always has. You can also wait until the 60 day protection period expires and then sell to anyone you want, but it sounds like you don't want to sell unless someone can close before that timeframe ends.
1. Is the contract void if the broker is no longer with the original listing agency?
2. If the contract is still valid and the house does sell to that buyer, and I pay the broker his commission, am I still liable to his original company for commission also?
Your contract is most likely still valid--but it would be with the brokerage, not the agent. However, based upon your description, there may be some question as to what has transpired regarding the name change and the "broker's" true role. Regardless, you wouldn't owe double commission if you contract for sale within 60 days of the expiration.
Last edited by jackmichigan; 02-03-2015 at 10:38 AM..
You should always deal with others how you would like to be dealt with. Honesty, Fair, and with Integrity. I do not know how you grew up....but those words do not fit in your sincerio.
And it would be easy for the listing office, to win this. They would just complain to the state association of Realtors, who would order a trial which they would hold and the Realtor buyer would have to pay a commission to the original office.
I was a licensed investment real estate broker from 1972 till I finally retired.
I once collected a $43,000 commission on a business, when a Realtor tried to play games. The seller was a licensed Real Estate Broker, and wanted out after my spending a lot of time putting it together which involved several trips of 200 miles each way to put it together. She refused to close, because her son who managed the business told her he would leave the state and take her only grandchildren with him if she sold his business. She refused to close and the buyers signed a release to her. I asked for my commission and she said no, so I took it to the state association and after 30 minute trial where she said she refused to close it for personal reasons, and the order was to write me a check that day. She did, but was angry about it. The trial was so short, because it was so cut and dried that she had violated the contract so blatantly.
The listing agent could also sue you, as you contrived with another Realtor that was dealing with you during the listing period, and you simply waited till after the contract expired to draw the contract. I would bet money, on the listing agent to collect the commission and his/her costs to bring the suite.
I had a 6 month contract with an Agent in which she came with one potential buyer. We refused their offer (too low) and they refused our counter-offer. Contract expired and we took house off market. There was a close of 180 days after expired contract to pay commission if any of potential buyer(s) presented by agency comes back. In the last week of that 6 month period, the Agent texted us telling us that these 'buyers' were still asking questions about our house, would we come up with a final selling price? We said yes, we would and did, we told her our 'final selling price' but did not sign any contract...it was discussed within the 180 days after contract period. Again these 'buyers' said no. They would not buy at that price (we were $15K) difference. So now, we are at this: the signed contract has expired, the 180 days clause after end of contract also expired.
Now a month and half passed. These buyers (which we never saw) called this morning and would like to see our house again. My question is: should we let them see the house (again, it's off market and not relisted with any agents), and should they make an offer that we could possibly accept since we would not have to pay a commission to agent, are we right to think that we would not have to pay a commission to that agent? Or would it be only a 'moral' obligation to pay the agent a small 'fee' like $5000 (instead of the $25,000) he would have earned if he had sold the house while in contract OR during the 180 days after contract clause?
I had a 6 month contract with an Agent in which she came with one potential buyer. We refused their offer (too low) and they refused our counter-offer. Contract expired and we took house off market. There was a close of 180 days after expired contract to pay commission if any of potential buyer(s) presented by agency comes back. In the last week of that 6 month period, the Agent texted us telling us that these 'buyers' were still asking questions about our house, would we come up with a final selling price? We said yes, we would and did, we told her our 'final selling price' but did not sign any contract...it was discussed within the 180 days after contract period. Again these 'buyers' said no. They would not buy at that price (we were $15K) difference. So now, we are at this: the signed contract has expired, the 180 days clause after end of contract also expired.
Now a month and half passed. These buyers (which we never saw) called this morning and would like to see our house again. My question is: should we let them see the house (again, it's off market and not relisted with any agents), and should they make an offer that we could possibly accept since we would not have to pay a commission to agent, are we right to think that we would not have to pay a commission to that agent? Or would it be only a 'moral' obligation to pay the agent a small 'fee' like $5000 (instead of the $25,000) he would have earned if he had sold the house while in contract OR during the 180 days after contract clause?
Seems to me that you are free to go to contract and to sell your house as you desire.
"Moral obligation?" Do you feel like there was no intended manipulation of the timeline to specifically exclude the agent and commission payment?
None of us knows the full wording of your listing contract, and if we did know we still couldn’t interpret what it means because that might be considered as acting as an attorney...a huge no no for agents. If you have concerns, consult a real estate attorney or take your chances based on your own reading of your contract.
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.
