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.
There are a lot of things regarding real estate law in AL that other agents from other states find "funky" and I don't disagree with that...like caveat emptor. Yet...if an agent KNOWS of a defect we have to disclose it prior to contract. Seems to contradict caveat emptor, doesn't it? That's AL law.
Well, I don't find requiring agents to disclose known defects to be "funky" at all. It's just part of being fair and honest in a transaction. I would hope that most states require that; Michigan surely does.
Well, I don't find requiring agents to disclose known defects to be "funky" at all. It's just part of being fair and honest in a transaction. I would hope that most states require that; Michigan surely does.
No, the disclosure part is not what I was referring to as funky....its the fact that Alabama is a non disclosure state yet the state requires disclosure. Its a contradiction in our laws. Its one not a lot of agents realize or adhere to. They think because we are "buyer beware" they don't have to disclose if they know of a defect but the state says they do.
And I agree with you on that....I disclose, disclose, disclose.
Last edited by LCTMadison; 02-20-2015 at 06:05 PM..
Someone may have asked and I missed it. Does she work as an independent agent or for a firm? ( forgive my terminology if incorrect.) we came across this when selling our house in NJ. The agent said if we were uncomfortable we could select someone else from her agency to represent us if she wasn't meeting our expectations. Is this an option?
Does the OP feel she has been harmed in any way by the dual agency situation? There don't appear to be any damages incurred but whether she was represented as far as getting the best price is unclear, even if her first post seems to indicate she's happy with the price.
Someone may have asked and I missed it. Does she work as an independent agent or for a firm? ( forgive my terminology if incorrect.) we came across this when selling our house in NJ. The agent said if we were uncomfortable we could select someone else from her agency to represent us if she wasn't meeting our expectations. Is this an option?
No, because in AL all clients belong to the broker of the company so another agent from her company would have still been a dual agent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kokonutty
Does the OP feel she has been harmed in any way by the dual agency situation? There don't appear to be any damages incurred but whether she was represented as far as getting the best price is unclear, even if her first post seems to indicate she's happy with the price.
Where's the beef?
She indicated they had told their agent they did NOT want to be in a dual agency situation. So her agent has her sign contract documents and then drops the dual agency bomb on them. Not only is that illegal in AL, but its a bait and switch in my opinion. I don't blame her for being upset with how this has unfolded.
Bluetulip mentions,
"I knew dual agent wasn't the greatest thing, but I did not know it meant we were on our own. Completely on our own."
Not true. Your broker is working for you and representing your best interests. As a dual agent she cannot divulge any personal information about your motivation to buy or ability to pay to the seller.
The same applies to you regarding her relationship with the seller. She cannot divulge the seller's motivational or personal info to you. She can perform fiduciary and ministerial tasks for both parties. For years I was the only Realtor in our very large school district in this very rural part of Maine. However, I rarely acted as a dual agent.
Yes but she would be able to get advice for inspections and other items rights?
VERY limited. She cannot advise one party in a manner that would be detrimental to the other....and that often times goes beyond price.
And while she may have a fiduciary responsibility to look out for each party's "best interest"....if that interest means doing harm to the other she CANNOT advise in that manner. So it greatly dilutes the agency relationship.
I see people getting hung up on the agency relationship while overlooking the more real issue of the agent's character. I'd rather have an honest agent serving as a transaction broker or dual agent than a dishonest one acting as my single agent. The constraints of agency relationship or Code of Ethics aren't guarantees in the real world.
No, because in AL all clients belong to the broker of the company so another agent from her company would have still been a dual agent.
She indicated they had told their agent they did NOT want to be in a dual agency situation. So her agent has her sign contract documents and then drops the dual agency bomb on them. Not only is that illegal in AL, but its a bait and switch in my opinion. I don't blame her for being upset with how this has unfolded.
Understood, but being upset and having damages are two different things.
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.
