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.
I always think it's ironic when I see these types of statements. Why would you trust a realtor just because they are a realtor? There is no background check required to be a realtor. Love completely blind trust!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dltordj
My house wasn't FSBO if you wanted to see it get a hold of a realtor-it's that simple. I'm a woman and no way in heck am I going to let someone in my house that isn't/wasn't with a realtor. I had no problem getting people to view as it wasn't a short or foreclosure. It was also by appointment only.
I've never sold a car via private sale, so I don't care about that.
I always think it's ironic when I see these types of statements. Why would you trust a realtor just because they are a realtor? There is no background check required to be a realtor. Love completely blind trust!
Actually, a background check is required in Nevada, at least for Realtors. I don't know if it's necessary for timeshare salesmen or builder's agents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by observer53
I don't think that's what she's saying. She was responding to a post which stated that the transaction fee pays for a realtor's office staff who writes up the contracts and handles the closing, rather than the realtor himself or herself. She wasn't saying you can't sell your own house.
I took it the same way:
"It is illegal to practice real estate without a license."
There are certain things that are indeed illegal to do without a license. They are spelled out VERY specifically in the Nevada Revised Statutes. Writing up one's own purchase agreement is not one of them, although I have met more than one agent who would like people to think otherwise.
I always think it's ironic when I see these types of statements. Why would you trust a realtor just because they are a realtor? There is no background check required to be a realtor. Love completely blind trust!
They give me their name/info when they call, it better match the business card they hand me before they come in. I can always call before/after to verify they are who they say with the agents office. I feel much better about the process working with a RE agent. Is that clear? There is no point trying to get me to hate realtors-I respect them, I understand the work they do.
Actually, a background check is required in Nevada, at least for Realtors. I don't know if it's necessary for timeshare salesmen or builder's agents.
I took it the same way:
"It is illegal to practice real estate without a license."
There are certain things that are indeed illegal to do without a license. They are spelled out VERY specifically in the Nevada Revised Statutes. Writing up one's own purchase agreement is not one of them, although I have met more than one agent who would like people to think otherwise.
"Practicing real estate" doesn't mean buying and selling real property; it implies an agency relationship, acting on behalf of someone else, not acting on one's own behalf. People don't run afoul of the laws and regulations against "practicing law" without a license when they represent themselves. Same thing when someone does a FSBO.
During the boom, this fee was absorbed by the buyer's agent. But now that a "deal" usually means a $3-5K commission that must be split between the broker and agent, this fee is often passed on to the buyer.
Hire a buyer's agent that belongs to a flat fee brokerage (no desk fees, transaction fees, monthly fees, E&O fees, etc.)
I don't hate realtors, I just think people should know they don't need to use one if they don't want to. I'm a big do it yourself-er, and I enjoy learning new things and completing projects so I give about anything a shot. If you're buying or selling a 100k house or 500k house, the 3k to 15k savings is probably worth giving it a shot, worst case you can always hire an agent if it doesn't work out. And I'm sure most of the agents are good people and do a great job but just like everything there are a few bad ones in the pool.
Wow this topic got a lot more interesting than I thought it was possible.
[mod cut]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diane Sells Las Vegas
It is illegal to practice real estate without a license. Only licensed agents are allowed to WRITE the deal and Escrow and Title are in charge of handling closings. AT NO TIME does the office staff write offers, or get signatures on contracts for clients. IT IS ILLEGAL!
Transaction fees are pretty common place today. It's unfortunate you think so little of real estate agents, for in this market, they can certainly be your best friend in the deal. It's in your best interest to have a professional write the contract, make sure your EMD goes to escrow and not into someone's pocket, and generally guide you past the obstacles.
First of all, I think there are office staff that may write or fill in paperwork for their agents, kinda like secretary or office assistants assist their bosses who are too busy with other stuff to take care of these. I don't think EVERY AGENTS WRITES EVERY WORD, CLICKS ON EVERY THING THAT IS WRITTEN/PRINTED in a contract!
Secondly, for some of us, we have more education than the agent, maybe not in RE but in contracts or legal stuff so a RE "pro" isn't always needed. I look at RE pro for local info and market info but if one studies the market long enough they have just as much info. Also, if we hand the selling agent the EMD, we know where to come and get reimbursement if someone runs away with it.
My main argument in this topic is if the buyers agents are being sneaky with fees, fire them and buy the house without a buyers agent. I don't think anyone is saying ONLY do transactions with FSBO and take all RE agents out of the picture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dltordj
I would not show my house to any one that knocked on my door asking to see it. I also turned away anyone that made an appointment claiming to be an agent but showed up with a business card that had nothing to do with real estate. That person could have been there with genuine interest but they also could have been there to steal. My house is/was occupied so that makes a difference.
Would you have turned that person down if he knocked on your door and said he was interested in seeing your home, would you be able to contact your agent to set a time to come to the house and show the person the home? What if that person said your agent would not show them your house even though they were very interested and had money. Didn't you want to sell the house? Why weren't you listening to offers, regardless of if the buyer had an agent or not? What if the person without an agent was willing to offered $5K more than any other offer you had? What if you had no offers at that point? Is your Agent doing you any favors denying this buyer b/c they don't have a buyers agent? If the house doesn't have offers after months, it eventually goes down in price not UP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckpants
What you say here is very misleading. It is ILLEGAL to sell another house that you don't own and make a commission, but it is not ILLEGAL to sell or buy your own house and pay no commission. Don't get on here and try to scare people into thinking they need a licensed agent or they are breaking the law, complete line of crap.
When you had a car for sale would you only show it to a car salesman? It is just as easy for a thief to set up a buying agent to come scope your house, I don't know that most buyers agents are that worried about the safety of the owners or the property. If you really want to sell your house you should show it to anybody that shows some interest.
I think just like there are people who only buy from car dealers or car lots, there are going to be plenty of people who never think of buying homes or property without an agent. That's fine if that's what they are comfortable with but if there are people willing to buy your car/home without a "pro" involved, the buyer should not be limited or kept out of the market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dltordj
My house wasn't FSBO if you wanted to see it get a hold of a realtor-it's that simple. I'm a woman and no way in heck am I going to let someone in my house that isn't/wasn't with a realtor. I had no problem getting people to view as it wasn't a short or foreclosure. It was also by appointment only. I've never sold a car via private sale, so I don't care about that.
I didn't realize this whole topic was all just about you and what you were okay with. You sound like you have your say and don't care about the other persons point of view with your last statement. Understand that we were having issue with YOUR REALTOR not showing your home to potential buyers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dltordj
My selling agent was a relative so I wasn't paying her thousands of dollars.
Again let's look at the bigger picture and not just about your case. Not everyone has a relative with a RE license and willing to work for less than market cost. BTW what if your relative didn't show homes to people without a realtor and you only ended up with 1 offers instead of 3. That brought your home down in desirability and the offers were not competitive since there were no multiple offers and higher interest in your home. Your relative didn't have to work as hard for the money that they weren't getting paid much for but you still lost out on potential higher bid. Saved $1000 in commissions to your relative but got $5000 less for the house. Happy?
[mod cut]
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckpants
I don't hate realtors, I just think people should know they don't need to use one if they don't want to. I'm a big do it yourself-er, and I enjoy learning new things and completing projects so I give about anything a shot. If you're buying or selling a 100k house or 500k house, the 3k to 15k savings is probably worth giving it a shot, worst case you can always hire an agent if it doesn't work out. And I'm sure most of the agents are good people and do a great job but just like everything there are a few bad ones in the pool.
As long as the buyer is aware of the risk and rewards I agree that people should be able to represent themselves in these transactions. Some people will save themselves the 3% in not having a buyers agent and others will end up paying too high a price for not having a buyers agent knowing the market and getting a better price. It's a free country let the buyer do what he wants, buy at the low or high price that he wants.
Last edited by observer53; 03-04-2012 at 06:45 AM..
Reason: discussing moderation
Wow this topic got a lot more interesting than I thought it was possible.
First of all, I think there are office staff that may write or fill in paperwork for their agents, kinda like secretary or office assistants assist their bosses who are too busy with other stuff to take care of these. I don't think EVERY AGENTS WRITES EVERY WORD, CLICKS ON EVERY THING THAT IS WRITTEN/PRINTED in a contract!
Secondly, for some of us, we have more education than the agent, maybe not in RE but in contracts or legal stuff so a RE "pro" isn't always needed. I look at RE pro for local info and market info but if one studies the market long enough they have just as much info. Also, if we hand the selling agent the EMD, we know where to come and get reimbursement if someone runs away with it.
My main argument in this topic is if the buyers agents are being sneaky with fees, fire them and buy the house without a buyers agent. I don't think anyone is saying ONLY do transactions with FSBO and take all RE agents out of the picture.
Would you have turned that person down if he knocked on your door and said he was interested in seeing your home, would you be able to contact your agent to set a time to come to the house and show the person the home? What if that person said your agent would not show them your house even though they were very interested and had money. Didn't you want to sell the house? Why weren't you listening to offers, regardless of if the buyer had an agent or not? What if the person without an agent was willing to offered $5K more than any other offer you had? What if you had no offers at that point? Is your Agent doing you any favors denying this buyer b/c they don't have a buyers agent? If the house doesn't have offers after months, it eventually goes down in price not UP.
I think just like there are people who only buy from car dealers or car lots, there are going to be plenty of people who never think of buying homes or property without an agent. That's fine if that's what they are comfortable with but if there are people willing to buy your car/home without a "pro" involved, the buyer should not be limited or kept out of the market.
I didn't realize this whole topic was all just about you and what you were okay with. You sound like you have your say and don't care about the other persons point of view with your last statement. Understand that we were having issue with YOUR REALTOR not showing your home to potential buyers.
Again let's look at the bigger picture and not just about your case. Not everyone has a relative with a RE license and willing to work for less than market cost. BTW what if your relative didn't show homes to people without a realtor and you only ended up with 1 offers instead of 3. That brought your home down in desirability and the offers were not competitive since there were no multiple offers and higher interest in your home. Your relative didn't have to work as hard for the money that they weren't getting paid much for but you still lost out on potential higher bid. Saved $1000 in commissions to your relative but got $5000 less for the house. Happy?
As long as the buyer is aware of the risk and rewards I agree that people should be able to represent themselves in these transactions. Some people will save themselves the 3% in not having a buyers agent and others will end up paying too high a price for not having a buyers agent knowing the market and getting a better price. It's a free country let the buyer do what he wants, buy at the low or high price that he wants.
I replied to the person who was asking ME questions do you not read before you post?
Last edited by observer53; 03-04-2012 at 06:48 AM..
I don't hate realtors, I just think people should know they don't need to use one if they don't want to. I'm a big do it yourself-er, and I enjoy learning new things and completing projects so I give about anything a shot. If you're buying or selling a 100k house or 500k house, the 3k to 15k savings is probably worth giving it a shot, worst case you can always hire an agent if it doesn't work out. And I'm sure most of the agents are good people and do a great job but just like everything there are a few bad ones in the pool.
I said before in this thread somewhere if you dont want a realtor to be paid, buy/sell on your own. Scoop does it, lots of people do it the option is definitely there. I prefer the help of realtors- I want them to do the work, they relay info, I signs papers etc.. I don't have the time or desire to do it on my own so for me RE agent help is worth it.
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.
I replied to the person who was asking ME questions do you not read before you post?
