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.
sorry...the whole point to designated agency is that it is not dual agency.
Those who like dual generally value money over value delivered.
Designated dual agency is certainly dual agency, in North Carolina.
Working With (http://www.ncrec.state.nc.us/publications-bulletins/WorkingWith.html - broken link) "Some firms also offer a form of dual agency called "designated agency" where one agent in the firm represents the seller and another agent represents the buyer. This option (when available) may allow each "designated agent" to more fully represent each party."
The office I am in does not practice Designated Dual Agency. Someone else can be the test pilot in court. Opportunities to fail as fiduciaries protecting confidential information are too rife.
I see in Virginia that a supervising broker is 'dual."
"...however, the principal or broker who is supervising
the transaction shall be considered a dual representative..."
Close enough to dual agency, it would seem to me. The Supervisor has turned from "Coach" to "Referee."
Resources available to the clients are lessened.
So . . . speaking of dual agency . . . are there any states that you're aware of that have "outlawed" dual agency? I know there has been talk of this for quite some time - and eventually I think we may see that in some of the "buyer friendly" states such as CA and AZ. Just wondering if it's happened anywhere yet?
I was at a disclosures class today and the instructor had an interesting hypothetical situation:
You show the buyer several properties, all listed with different companies. And then you show the buyer a listing you have that the seller has insisted on pricing $30,000 higher than other comparable homes. Your buyer loves the home and wants to make an offer. In AZ, you're now in a dual agency situation. When the buyer inquires as to whether or not the house is a "good" price, all you can say is "The seller is asking $XXX," and give the buyer some comps to help him decide how much to offer. As the agent you CANNOT counsel the buyer at this point. . . . Okay, now the instructor added another twist to the scenario . . . The seller has told you, "If I don't get an offer by Monday (it's now Thursday), I'm going to drop the price $30,000."
Dual agency is almost ALWAYS a difficult tightrope for an agent to walk.
So . . . speaking of dual agency . . . are there any states that you're aware of that have "outlawed" dual agency? I know there has been talk of this for quite some time - and eventually I think we may see that in some of the "buyer friendly" states such as CA and AZ. Just wondering if it's happened anywhere yet?
I was at a disclosures class today and the instructor had an interesting hypothetical situation:
You show the buyer several properties, all listed with different companies. And then you show the buyer a listing you have that the seller has insisted on pricing $30,000 higher than other comparable homes. Your buyer loves the home and wants to make an offer. In AZ, you're now in a dual agency situation. When the buyer inquires as to whether or not the house is a "good" price, all you can say is "The seller is asking $XXX," and give the buyer some comps to help him decide how much to offer. As the agent you CANNOT counsel the buyer at this point. . . . Okay, now the instructor added another twist to the scenario . . . The seller has told you, "If I don't get an offer by Monday (it's now Thursday), I'm going to drop the price $30,000."
Dual agency is almost ALWAYS a difficult tightrope for an agent to walk.
I don't go there. I give that buyer away immediately. I might show them a listing of mine...but as soon as they show interest off to another agent. and I tell them why then and there.
I was asking you. Perhaps you have some insight I'm not aware of and I'm always willing to consider a new perspective. This is a chance for me to learn something new so please educate me since you've stated that I'm greedy.
The dual agency you speak of is if I represent the buyer and seller on the same property which is a hairy situation that I do not like. It is also dual agency if another agent my office is involved in the transaction and this is more common. Basically, we are not allowed to share insider information with clients.
Dual agency can also be a good thing, i.e., hey fellow agents in my office, I have a divorce headed into foreclosure and we need this thing sold asap. Try to round up a buyer for us somewhere, they really need it sold. That's illegal in a designated agency company, but it certainly can be helpful to the sellers if they get it sold.
The summary is in a dual agency office, we are all acting under the BIC and can share information with other agents in our office (but not clients in a dual agency contract). In designated agency offices, you cannot share information. Pro's and con's to both.
I was asking you. Perhaps you have some insight I'm not aware of and I'm always willing to consider a new perspective. This is a chance for me to learn something new so please educate me since you've stated that I'm greedy.
The dual agency you speak of is if I represent the buyer and seller on the same property which is a hairy situation that I do not like. It is also dual agency if another agent my office is involved in the transaction and this is more common. Basically, we are not allowed to share insider information with clients.
And that is generally why dual agency is not a good idea. You are restricted in the representaton you can provide your clients.
Quote:
Dual agency can also be a good thing, i.e., hey fellow agents in my office, I have a divorce headed into foreclosure and we need this thing sold asap. Try to round up a buyer for us somewhere, they really need it sold. That's illegal in a designated agency company, but it certainly can be helpful to the sellers if they get it sold.
The summary is in a dual agency office, we are all acting under the BIC and can share information with other agents in our office (but not clients in a dual agency contract). In designated agency offices, you cannot share information. Pro's and con's to both.
An interesting point. However I would point out that sharing such information widely is likely a violation of any number of privacy and similar regulations and ethics codes. I don't think I would make such a disclosure without a written permission. In that case of course it would work just as well with designated. I would also be concerned that I was not disclosing stuff to my buyer...which stuff might easily be knowable. If you know how it is relatively easy to find out that a divorce is in the works. Often a neighbor will spill the beans.
In the real world you can do it in either kind of office. Just pick your words carefully.
So . . . speaking of dual agency . . . are there any states that you're aware of that have "outlawed" dual agency?
CO did! We have Designated agency and Transaction Brokerage for cases when we are the listing broker (with a seller agency relationship) and the selling broker (with a buyer agency rep.)
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.
