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.
Have any of you sold a home with your selling agent having a dual agent role with the buyer?
From the seller's point of view, what are the pros and cons of having a dual agent?
I know in my case it would lower the commission from 6% to 5% if my agent found the eventual buyer.
What advantages and/or disadvantages are created with this 1% savings?
Review your obligations and dual agency policy regarding agent obligations in your states LLR disclosure. It will be your best source of info. In a nutshell, if you sell the home it can be good. If it gets you a higher net it can be good. Bad is you lose exclusive representation. Some need it more than others. You'll have to decide about yourself.
In Colorado we don't have a "dual agent". If I'm the listing agent and the buyer doesn't have a agent - I will be the seller's agent and treat the buyer as a customer. Frankly, I LOVE it when the buyer doesn't have a buyer's agency agreement with a broker - happy days!!
I use the term "agent" in a casual manner. Colorado is a single license state - there are no "agents", every licensed real estate agent is a broker.
One of my favorite PROS is that there is no other agent you're waiting on for returned calls or emails. No other middle man. I get to talk directly with both sides and things go much smoother.
One of my favorite PROS is that there is no other agent you're waiting on for returned calls or emails. No other middle man. I get to talk directly with both sides and things go much smoother.
Which is fine for a good competent agent. It's the rest you have to worry about it going wrong. I don't know that the OP has a good agent from that other thread.
Real estate is a game. The rules are laid out. Play by the rules and you win.
That about sums it up...
As long as you understand (scratch that - trust)... the dual agency to be "fair" and you feel you've educated yourself enough on the values in the area, you save 1% and deal with just 1 person.
The matter came up when a couple looked at my house, and hinted that they might let my agent sell theirs. They are coming back tomorrow for another look at mine.
I thought nothing of it, dual agent, and then I went back to the fact that my agent has helped me view 6-8 houses as my buyer agent, but she is helping me sell my house too. It seemed to me that a buyer agent and a seller agent would approach a house in different ways, or have different mindsets.
My agent said she prefers dual agent because of what was mentioned by FalconheadWest, there is no other agent to track down and wait for returned calls, etc. She says she has been a dual agent more times than she has been a solo agent for a buyer or a seller combined, so maybe 52% dual agent, 24% selling agent, 24% buying agent as examples.
She said as far as price, she has to be neutral when she is a dual agent. The buyer may tell her they will offer X but they are willing to go as high as Y. She can tell me their offer but she can not tell me the rest without their permission. She must, "if asked", provide buyers with comparibles.
So, I asked:
"So my buyers may make an offer based on a comparible that >>> YOU <<< gave them?
The answer was yes. And it almost said, "be happy with the double agent 6% commission".
I doubt there are many un-informed buyers. A house is a big purchase and for a buyer to walk into a contract with a seller that has an agent and the buyer is clueless about values, etc. seems unlikely.
"So my buyers may make an offer based on a comparible that >>> YOU <<< gave them?
The answer was yes. And it almost said, "be happy with the double agent 6% commission".
That, in a nutshell, is the dilemma of dual agency. You have to be impartial to BOTH parties, so while there's the push for a higher sales price (to the seller), at the same time you're advising the buyer for another price.
The thing is, everything is market driven ... the value of your property is based on what other houses in the area is going for, adjusted for size, age, condition, location, etc. - NOT by what the seller wants or how much it's listed at in the MLS. Hence, there's always that aspect of "price it right, and it will sell"; sticker shock drives away potential buyers, and a blowout price attracts too many lookie-loos.
Quote:
I doubt there are many un-informed buyers. A house is a big purchase and for a buyer to walk into a contract with a seller that has an agent and the buyer is clueless about values, etc. seems unlikely.
There are many buyers out there who doesn't understand the processes involved, and prolly never will. They must rely on others to provide the information ... and that other is the agent. Hopefully, they got a good one.
The matter came up when a couple looked at my house, and hinted that they might let my agent sell theirs. They are coming back tomorrow for another look at mine.
I thought nothing of it, dual agent, and then I went back to the fact that my agent has helped me view 6-8 houses as my buyer agent, but she is helping me sell my house too. It seemed to me that a buyer agent and a seller agent would approach a house in different ways, or have different mindsets.
My agent said she prefers dual agent because of what was mentioned by FalconheadWest, there is no other agent to track down and wait for returned calls, etc. She says she has been a dual agent more times than she has been a solo agent for a buyer or a seller combined, so maybe 52% dual agent, 24% selling agent, 24% buying agent as examples.
She said as far as price, she has to be neutral when she is a dual agent. The buyer may tell her they will offer X but they are willing to go as high as Y. She can tell me their offer but she can not tell me the rest without their permission. She must, "if asked", provide buyers with comparibles.
So, I asked:
"So my buyers may make an offer based on a comparible that >>> YOU <<< gave them?
The answer was yes. And it almost said, "be happy with the double agent 6% commission".
I doubt there are many un-informed buyers. A house is a big purchase and for a buyer to walk into a contract with a seller that has an agent and the buyer is clueless about values, etc. seems unlikely.
It should be food for thought that there are many MANY agents (myself included) who will not represent both the buyer & seller.
Think about this, how can an agent negotiate to the best of their ability and get both the highest price for the seller and the lowest for the buyer? Wrap your head around that one ...
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.
