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.
This really sounds, given the original scenario presented, like you are advising unethical behavior on the part of the buyer.
Now that is really fascinating...and which code provision did the client violate?
Quote:
The first buyer's agent found the home and wrote the offer. Either the buyer is dissatisfied with their agent, or (given the OP who started this thread) the FSBO seller is dissatisfied with the buyer's agent(!) and wants to encourage them to fire their agent and get one that they, the seller, prefers (or have no agent at all).
But suppose that the buyer, in the middle of a contract, decides they want to change agents. You are encouraging them to withhold pertinent information from the agent that they are looking to hire to represent them, in order to trick the agent who would not otherwise represent them if they knew all the facts to do so. And you are assuming that, with a contract already having been in place, that the listing agent and seller wouldn't advise the buyer's agent that there had already been a contract on the house with another agent, and very recently.
I am not assuming anything I don't think. But I would note that RE Agents get pretty pompous about the requrements they place on their client...who, to the best of my knowledge, have not agreed to any of this.
Basically you hold that an obvious conspiracy of the agents can fairly deprive a client of the right to representation because their commission may be at risk...but you hold that some "code of ethics" requires the client to tell the facts that will prevent him getting representation...
Think about it...not very rational is it.
Quote:
The odds actually, if there was a contract already in place written by the first agent, do favor a finding in the favor of the first agent for procurring cause. You are correct, of course, that the parties to the contract are not (or may not, depending on the protection clause in the buyer's rep and how it reads in the state they're in) liable for that, but the listing agent may very well be.
What contract? We work here on bare wire. We don't use no frigging contract. Buyer Agent Contracts are mostly a deal whereby the agent protects and guarantees his pay day while offering the client nothing.
The really sad thing is that some states require you to sign such an agreement. Or that some agents con people into signing such a onesided document.
In Arizona, we have a Buyer Broker Agreement where the Buyer "hires" the Broker to find a property meeting the terms, conditions and type of property the buyer is seeking.
If the Broker is successful in doing so, and this includes preparing the offer at the direction of the buyer, and the offer is accepted (a contract is formed), then that Broker is due the compensation stated on the Buyer Broker Agreement.
Buyer Broker Agreements are quire commonly used here in Arizona.
In Arizona, we have a Buyer Broker Agreement where the Buyer "hires" the Broker to find a property meeting the terms, conditions and type of property the buyer is seeking.
If the Broker is successful in doing so, and this includes preparing the offer at the direction of the buyer, and the offer is accepted (a contract is formed), then that Broker is due the compensation stated on the Buyer Broker Agreement.
Buyer Broker Agreements are quire commonly used here in Arizona.
GD your view of how the client makes out on the BBA.
Does a buyer win or lose if they sign one?
If they become unhappy with their agent does the BBA help or hurt?
GD your view of how the client makes out on the BBA.
Does a buyer win or lose if they sign one?
If they become unhappy with their agent does the BBA help or hurt?
The Buyer wins IMO.
If the Broker abandons the client - does not do their job - the buyer has recourse -
But generally speaking, and in my experience, and that of the industry, BBA work very well here. Also, keep in mind, it also protects the Broker/Agent from that shifty buyer as well.
I disagree with this statement. If I hire someone to do a job and they don't do the job to my satisfaction, I do not have to pay. That is grounds for voiding most contracts, nonperformance.
Case in point. I went to a new hairdresser when I moved to a new city. She colored my hair. It looked HORRIBLE. She expected me to pay her and come back in a few days to have it "fixed." WTH? Oh, no, dear. I not only will not pay you, why on Earth would you think I'd give you a second chance to mess up my hair?
This is my point MFP. The realtors already protect themselves in that they get a commission whether they do their job or not and then on top of that the Buyer can't even hire a new agent because they won't get paid.
Imagine if that bad hair color job your new hairdresser did turned out that you had to keep the same hairdresser because no one else would be allowed to do your hair because they wouldn't get paid! Yah, it really sounds stupid doesn't it? But that is just what the realtors have managed to do ..... tie people to realtors. It just doesn't sound American to me. Sorry to hear about your bad hair day.
If the Broker abandons the client - does not do their job - the buyer has recourse -
But generally speaking, and in my experience, and that of the industry, BBA work very well here. Also, keep in mind, it also protects the Broker/Agent from that shifty buyer as well.
I hire the sharp dude in the Armani suit and after two weeks I find out that he really has no useful knowledge for what I need and has mostly been BSin and ducking me.
I want to fire him and hire someone else. How does the client get out of the deal and what compensation can they realistically expect from the turkey agent due to the BBA?
Now that is really fascinating...and which code provision did the client violate?
I am not assuming anything I don't think. But I would note that RE Agents get pretty pompous about the requrements they place on their client...who, to the best of my knowledge, have not agreed to any of this.
Basically you hold that an obvious conspiracy of the agents can fairly deprive a client of the right to representation because their commission may be at risk...but you hold that some "code of ethics" requires the client to tell the facts that will prevent him getting representation...
Think about it...not very rational is it.
What contract? We work here on bare wire. We don't use no frigging contract. Buyer Agent Contracts are mostly a deal whereby the agent protects and guarantees his pay day while offering the client nothing.
The really sad thing is that some states require you to sign such an agreement. Or that some agents con people into signing such a onesided document.
Conspiracy? Requirements placed on the client that they have no knowledge of or have agreed to? Working on a 'bare wire'? "don't use no frigging contract?" For the love of God man, buyers are given the option of what level of service they want and 'how' they want a Realtor to work for them. In most states, if not all, it's law to provide clients with Definitions of Working Relationships which they have to sign and be given a copy (have you even heard of that manditory disclosure form?) It was made mandatory because buyers would walk into a brokerage and not realize that there was no fiduciary responsibility to them as a 'customer'.
I guess some people feel that Realtors should spend all of their time locating a property, not only hours on MLS, but previewing homes for the buyer, spend a lot of time away from their families, drafting offers, etc. etc. etc., only to have the buyer bypass the Realtor and say 'never mind' - I'm going to go it alone or decide to not disclose to a new agent, while right in the middle of a transaction, that it was another Realtor who showed them the home, drafted and presented the offer, made the cooperative agreement with the listing agent - and set up the 'new' agent to finish a job already started and possibly have them end up with squat. And, yeah, just like everyone else, Realtors have bills to pay and families to support.
A true buyer agent promotes and protects the buyer's best interest and no one puts a gun to their head that they have to sign a buyer agency contract - and everything is spelled out in black and white and the buyer has to sign it signifying that is the type of relationship they want with the Realtor. And it's pure bull that buyer agents only want a pay day and offer the client nothing. Obviously you have never specialized in buyer agent services or you would know how much time a Realtor who does specialize in that area spends serving their client.
You try spending months of previewing properties for a client, spending time away from your family only to have a buyer bypass you and buy directly from the seller. That's why in most states, if not all, even in the Real Estate Commission Approved Listing Contract it contains a 'holdover' clause because Realtors would take their clients/buyers to a home, then the buyer would go back to the seller to find out when the listing contract would expire - then, once it was expired, they would do a deal between themselves.
Conspiracy? Requirements placed on the client that they have no knowledge of or have agreed to? Working on a 'bare wire'? "don't use no frigging contract?" For the love of God man, buyers are given the option of what level of service they want and 'how' they want a Realtor to work for them. In most states, if not all, it's law to provide clients with Definitions of Working Relationships which they have to sign and be given a copy (have you even heard of that manditory disclosure form?) It was made mandatory because buyers would walk into a brokerage and not realize that there was no fiduciary responsibility to them as a 'customer'.
I guess some people feel that Realtors should spend all of their time locating a property, not only hours on MLS, but previewing homes for the buyer, spend a lot of time away from their families, drafting offers, etc. etc. etc., only to have the buyer bypass the Realtor and say 'never mind' - I'm going to go it alone or decide to not disclose to a new agent, while right in the middle of a transaction, that it was another Realtor who showed them the home, drafted and presented the offer, made the cooperative agreement with the listing agent - and set up the 'new' agent to finish a job already started and possibly have them end up with squat. And, yeah, just like everyone else, Realtors have bills to pay and families to support.
A true buyer agent promotes and protects the buyer's best interest and no one puts a gun to their head that they have to sign a buyer agency contract - and everything is spelled out in black and white and the buyer has to sign it signifying that is the type of relationship they want with the Realtor. And it's pure bull that buyer agents only want a pay day and offer the client nothing. Obviously you have never specialized in buyer agent services or you would know how much time a Realtor who does specialize in that area spends serving their client.
You try spending months of previewing properties for a client, spending time away from your family only to have a buyer bypass you and buy directly from the seller. That's why in most states, if not all, even in the Real Estate Commission Approved Listing Contract it contains a 'holdover' clause because Realtors would take their clients/buyers to a home, then the buyer would go back to the seller to find out when the listing contract would expire - then, once it was expired, they would do a deal between themselves.
"Work on a bare wire" Well, good luck with that
You trying to impress everyone with your ability to color things red?
Why not orange?
Or Green?
List for us the advantage to the client of the BBA. It is of course useful in protecting the agent from the "bad" client. However define "bad".
BBA in my judgement favor the agent and mostly screws the client. But let us hear an argument that it is not true. But facts...it is good for the client because... And reality. Not how a BBA should be but how they are...
Not colors of no useful purpose.
And I think we lose maybe one client in twenty working without the BBA net. Probably 10% of those were "bad" clients> Some of the rest did not like how we do it but most simply decided it was not a reasonable time to buy what we had to sell.
I want to fire him and hire someone else. How does the client get out of the deal and what compensation can they realistically expect from the turkey agent due to the BBA?
Contact their broker. Remember, it is the Broker who is responsible. More often than not, the Broker would release you from the obligation - not unlike the seller who is not happy with their listing agent type situation.
Compensation is, like a listing, negotiated. Often times, the compensation is commensurate with the compensation offered to the Buyer Broker in the Listing. If the BBA's compensation is higher than that received in the transaction through the listing broker, the buyer would be obligated to make up the difference.
Contact their broker. Remember, it is the Broker who is responsible. More often than not, the Broker would release you from the obligation - not unlike the seller who is not happy with their listing agent type situation.
Compensation is, like a listing, negotiated. Often times, the compensation is commensurate with the compensation offered to the Buyer Broker in the Listing. If the BBA's compensation is higher than that received in the transaction through the listing broker, the buyer would be obligated to make up the difference.
I think you simply confirm my belief. If you happen to sign up with a turkey your relief is to throw yourself on the mercy of the Broker...who will likely let you out if you sign with someone else on the staff. If they really let you out it will include a clause absolving them of any damages for wasting two weeks of your life.
So basically if you sign with the wrong agent you may be able to get out eventaully as long as you wave all damages.
So I think GD supports my position that there is little to favor the client and lots to favor the agent in a BBA.
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.
Say what?
