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.
Hello. I was wondering if people might private message me the names of good real estate attorneys that I might use in my purchase of a property sometime down the line.
I was until recently working with an agent, but it occurred to me (after reading others' experiences) that I might not need one, and that I may be more likely to get an offer accepted if I work directly with the listing agent for a property that I may eventually be interested in. People in California have been having a lot of luck with this, after not having had their offers accepted when they use buyer's agents.
I have a friend who gets me access to MLS listings. So I'll just contact the listing agent, view the property, and, if interested, will let the listing agent work both sides of the deal (as an incentive to accept my offer). Then I'll hire a real estate attorney (for less money than the commission the buyer's agent would have made) to look over my documents and make sure that I'm not getting into any trouble. This is an approach that's apparently gaining some momentum among frustrated buyers who are encountering stubborn sellers in the current market.
Hello. I was wondering if people might private message me the names of good real estate attorneys that I might use in my purchase of a property sometime down the line.
I was until recently working with an agent, but it occurred to me (after reading others' experiences) that I might not need one, and that I may be more likely to get an offer accepted if I work directly with the listing agent for a property that I may eventually be interested in. People in California have been having a lot of luck with this, after not having had their offers accepted when they use buyer's agents.
I have a friend who gets me access to MLS listings. So I'll just contact the listing agent, view the property, and, if interested, will let the listing agent work both sides of the deal (as an incentive to accept my offer). Then I'll hire a real estate attorney (for less money than the commission the buyer's agent would have made) to look over my documents and make sure that I'm not getting into any trouble. This is an approach that's apparently gaining some momentum among frustrated buyers who are encountering stubborn sellers in the current market.
Any referrals would be appreciated, thanks!
Yes, I'm a Realtor, so if you want to take it with a grain of salt, I understand.
However, you're wrong about you thinking it makes your offer a better one by not having an agent. I'm a very heavy listing agent, so I'd be the one someone was coming to without an agent and I'll tell you this; it does NOT affect your offer whether you have an agent or not. When I sign an agreement with my seller, it's for a certain amount. Period. If there's a buyer's agent involved, I give them a split. If not, I keep the full amount.
And even though I make more by there not being a buyer agent involved, I'd MUCH rather do a deal with another agent, than with a buyer on their own. Typically the deals are nightmares (yes, I know YOU'RE different...everyone says that) when there's no buyer agent involved.
You won't get a better deal with my sellers (remember, they're paying me the full amount still) and you won't get a better deal with me, because although you have an attorney to make sure all your I's are dotted and T's crossed, they can't negotiate with me and they don't know the market. The TREC forms are promulgated by TREC attorneys, so they're all the same. It's just a matter of filling in blanks. A good buyer's agent knows the forms just as well as an attorney does, but they can better negotiate with me, as they have access to info that an attorney doesn't have. And they do this EVERY day. When you've got someone that negotiates real estate for a living, they're going to be better at it than an attorney at it.
Can you have an attorney review the forms? Absolutely.
Will not having a buyer's agent HELP your chances in any way? Absolutely not. Typically buyers that think they've got a way to "beat the system" are a horrible pain to deal with, and end up paying more than they would have if they had a skilled buyer's agent.
Find a GOOD buyer's agent on a referral from someone. It's your best bet. If you want to have an attorney review the forms, that's fine, but you're putting yourself in a WORSE position, not a better one.
And again, I'm a heavy listing agent, so I'm not advocating for buyer's agents. Just using common sense and knowing how I'd handle the deal personally.
When a buyer approaches me without a buyer's agent, I can tell you that EVERY time, they'll end up paying more than they would have with one, and that I'm going to work that contract in a way that benefits my sellers HEAVILY, regardless of if an attorney works it over or not.
Typically an attorney will try to change terms and cross things out, to which my sellers and I will reject the contract.
And just to touch on the comment about "stubborn sellers", it's common for buyers right now to come in with ridiculous offers just because the news is telling them it's a buyer's market. A "buyer's market" means that there's more to choose from on the market. It does NOT mean that the sellers are obligated to sell you a home in which they lose money. Buyers are feeling entitled to get a steal, and often get offended when a seller says no.
It's the seller's house. They have a right to accept what they want. By you calling them a "stubborn seller" that's telling me that you're consistently submitting lowball offers and you're frustrated because nobody is accepting the ridiculous offers. We see this garbage every day.
Hello. I was wondering if people might private message me the names of good real estate attorneys that I might use in my purchase of a property sometime down the line.
I was until recently working with an agent, but it occurred to me (after reading others' experiences) that I might not need one, and that I may be more likely to get an offer accepted if I work directly with the listing agent for a property that I may eventually be interested in. People in California have been having a lot of luck with this, after not having had their offers accepted when they use buyer's agents.
I have a friend who gets me access to MLS listings. So I'll just contact the listing agent, view the property, and, if interested, will let the listing agent work both sides of the deal (as an incentive to accept my offer). Then I'll hire a real estate attorney (for less money than the commission the buyer's agent would have made) to look over my documents and make sure that I'm not getting into any trouble. This is an approach that's apparently gaining some momentum among frustrated buyers who are encountering stubborn sellers in the current market.
Any referrals would be appreciated, thanks!
Can't give you a referral but can point you in the direction of attorneys that specialize in real estate. Here are a couple of links.
What you propose sounds like a winning plan! However what you want to do is make your offer with the contingency that the seller's agent gives up 1% of their 6% in the form of some type of legal credit to you. Regardless of how it is given, as long as you receive it then that should help pay your attorney's costs. Just check with the attorney first that you choose to make sure what they charge and if 1% is sufficient or acceptable to you.
Not sure what the above post is referring to but from what I read of the real estate laws here attorneys are not required to have a license to handle real estate transactions. What an attorney is exceptional for is making sure you don't get screwed with the contracts they use here.
If you are concerned about an attorney not having access to real estate information such as the back side of the MLS then there are plenty of attorneys out there that also have their agent/broker licenses. Even if they negotiate a 3% return to them as their fee then you still win by having an attorney/licensed agent to look out for your best interests.
Thanks for your perspective, Kevin. Yes, you and your sellers will reject the contract, and that's perfectly fine. FYI, you can't work a contract for an agentless buyer that favors your seller heavily if the buyer, ahem, says NO as well Were you calling offers "garbage" when prices were doubling over the last decade? Why consider a return to historical norms ridiculous? Anyway, interesting point about agents signing for an automatic 6% with their sellers. Maybe that's a Texas thing, if it's universal here. Part of my motivation is also to be open to buying an FSBO without a buyer's agent around my neck. Or maybe I could just tell my agent that I might buy an FSBO without him...
Unfortunately you have to be very careful if you sign any agreements with an agent here in Texas. Most of them use agreements that lock you into paying their fee whether you use them or not for the transaction as in the case of the FSBO example you mentioned.
Texas laws and rules are really oddball! TREC controls licensed agents and brokers and has no authority over attorneys/lawyers. It seems here in Texas that if another professional license allows a person to perform the functions of another profession (in this case an attorney doing an agents job) then the licensing agencies have zero control over what the other does. Attorneys seem to have free reign over what they can do. Check with your selected attorney to make sure of this but they don't have to answer to TREC. As you can see from the conveyance laws they don't dictate what forms must be used during a property sale other than a minimum disclosure form. That would indicate that an attorney can use any contract they want for an offer if they are working for you. I would expect an attorney performing real estate transactions will have a much better contract than what the agents/brokers are required to use as dictated by trec? That would be much more advantageous to you instead of the lopsided ones forced on the agents/brokers.
Your biggest issue will be with agents/brokers who will be reluctant to deal with your offer, as demonstrated above, because you have chosen not to use the services of one of their brethren. But that is your choice and you also have to remember that if you ever have a legal question and need legal advice the agent/broker is going to point you in the direction of an attorney faster than ferrari running down the highway!
You should read up on the real estate procedures here and it is well worth an initial consultation with an attorney to see if they can provide you the service you are looking for over that of an agent/broker.
The commission will be paid if a realtor is used at all. It's in the listing agreement. It pays to work with the listing agent if you are lowballing an offer. They know every other offer coming in and should tip you off to any other offers received, even though they aren't supposed to. Incentives make things happen.
Mail an offer to the owner directly if you want to cut out the realtor. The seller will have to decide how he will handle his listing agreement.
An attorney is a waste of time and money. He can't cheat the listing agent. He'll just negotiate a split commission with listing agent on top of the fee he charges you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proffer
Hello. I was wondering if people might private message me the names of good real estate attorneys that I might use in my purchase of a property sometime down the line.
I was until recently working with an agent, but it occurred to me (after reading others' experiences) that I might not need one, and that I may be more likely to get an offer accepted if I work directly with the listing agent for a property that I may eventually be interested in. People in California have been having a lot of luck with this, after not having had their offers accepted when they use buyer's agents.
I have a friend who gets me access to MLS listings. So I'll just contact the listing agent, view the property, and, if interested, will let the listing agent work both sides of the deal (as an incentive to accept my offer). Then I'll hire a real estate attorney (for less money than the commission the buyer's agent would have made) to look over my documents and make sure that I'm not getting into any trouble. This is an approach that's apparently gaining some momentum among frustrated buyers who are encountering stubborn sellers in the current market.
Go ahead and mail the owner directly so he cuts out his agent.....you'll find yourself in the middle of a hairball of a legal fight. You won't be the one being sued, but you could well spend lots of time in a courtroom testifying.
There are certain disclosures, inspections and forms that have to be completed/performed as part of a RE transaction. The seller pays the cost of the agent of both parties - trying to go around without one, IMO, is akin to walking through a room full of snake pits........with the lights out.
When a buyer approaches me without a buyer's agent, I can tell you that EVERY time, they'll end up paying more than they would have with one, and that I'm going to work that contract in a way that benefits my sellers HEAVILY, regardless of if an attorney works it over or not.
And although Kev will treat the unrepresented buyer fairly and honestly, he's required to get the most out of that buyer for his client, the seller, whether there's a buyer's agent, an attorney, both, or neither. The listing agent is working for the seller. Period. He has to work the contract in a way that benefits the seller heavily. (I'd hate to be an unrepresented buyer having to negotiate with Kev.)
I bought my house from a "FSBO" using a RE lawyer on my side. The process went very well and I did save money by not paying an agent. There was an RE agent (her neighbor) that was trying to get the owner to sign a listing contract before I bought the house. I guess it would have been easy money for that RE agent had the contract been signed.
I still had two inspections done before making a final offer. If you educate yourself on the process, it can be done but I understand not everyone wants to go this route.
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.
Were you calling offers "garbage" when prices were doubling over the last decade? Why consider a return to historical norms ridiculous? Anyway, interesting point about agents signing for an automatic 6% with their sellers. Maybe that's a Texas thing, if it's universal here. Part of my motivation is also to be open to buying an FSBO without a buyer's agent around my neck. Or maybe I could just tell my agent that I might buy an FSBO without him...
