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 would think that a seller would have to agree for an agent to refuse a showing to unagented buyers in writing as it would violate their fiduciary duties to the seller. Don't you have a fiduciary duty to make a good faith effort to procure a buyer for the seller unless otherwise instructed?
Exactly. If a buyer wishes to see a house that you have listed, AND they do not have an agent, your responsibility as the listing agent is to show it to them. Not to represent them, but to show them the house.
Now, there are people who have agents who lie to listing agents when asked and say they don't have an agent because their agent is unavailable and they, the other agent's client, absolutely cannot have the gratification of seeing the house deferred, and that makes listing agents a bit wary, but I've never declined to show a house to an unrepresented person. Fact is, if they do have an agent, it is their agent's responsibility to show them the house or get another agent to cover for them, and a listing agent can be stepping on toes by showing the house to someone signed with another agent.
I can't imagine a broker instructing listing agents not to show their own listings unless he's got a stable of agents who jump up and run out and show houses to anyone who calls, which is not only not an efficient use of time but has been shown to be a risk of life and limb to agents who do it consistently (agents have been raped and murdered meeting someone they don't know at a vacant house), and the broker is trying to keep his agents alive with rules rather than training.
I would think that a seller would have to agree for an agent to refuse a showing to unagented buyers in writing as it would violate their fiduciary duties to the seller. Don't you have a fiduciary duty to make a good faith effort to procure a buyer for the seller unless otherwise instructed?
Yes we do have the same fiduciary duty to the seller. At the time this occured I was unlicensed so I was not completely familiar with the rules/regulations as they applied specifically to agents...I just ended up getting an agent to let me view the property.
I know that the one brokerage that does not show their own listings has that in their agreement as I have since bought another property that they represented and I inquired after I had my license.
I think the rationale behind that provision is based upon the fact that a licensed Michigan real estate salesperson is required to work under a broker. If a salesperson engages in the purchase and sale of real estate beyond their principal residence, that is deemed to be part of their licensed vocation and, hence, they need to also carry on that activity under the supervision and guidance of a licensed real estate broker. That's my assumption anyway--I didn't write the laws or regs.
Ok, Ok, I misunderstood.....We are in the same situation...All of our listings are held by a broker as well. A licensed sales person works under the supervision of a broker, and all of our listings, even our own if its on the MLS, are technically the brokers, and are managed by the broker.
A licensed agent here can sell his own house without a broker (but with a disclosure) however, without the broker, they would not be able to get onto any of the MLS services.
I think the rationale behind that provision is based upon the fact that a licensed Michigan real estate salesperson is required to work under a broker. If a salesperson engages in the purchase and sale of real estate beyond their principal residence, that is deemed to be part of their licensed vocation and, hence, they need to also carry on that activity under the supervision and guidance of a licensed real estate broker. That's my assumption anyway--I didn't write the laws or regs.
I've known many Realtors who have both a real estate license and a broker's license, yet they work as agents because they don't have the where with all to be their own broker. I'm pretty sure there are other practical boundaries to being a broker, including probably insurance, bonding, etc. But I'm speculating.
Many Realtors work for brokers because the broker has the license and the premises and whatever it takes to hold a realty company together. It is not uncommon for Realtors to jump companies from time to time, or even often. I was told that by a pretty heavy dude broker I met in Phoenix during the course of my business with his company.
In some states, you can two types if real estate licenses; salesman or broker, issued by the department of real estate/real estate commission. In other states, like Colorado, is a broker only state. Colorado did away with salesmen's licenses in 1997.
In Colorado, you have to be supervised by a Broker for two years before you can have an Independent Broker license, but you cannot supervise others. Then, there is an Employing Broker license, where you can supervise other brokers.
An Agency relationship is with a principal that includes an employment contract (think seller or buyer agency agreement) in place.
So a broker is a type of license. An Agent is employed by a seller or buyer. A Realtor is a member of the local, state and national association of Realtors.
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.
