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.
We had a leak in our vacant place, and the agent saw it. Instead of calling a plumber for this emergency, she allowed the whole place to flood. I call that negligence. (we were out of the country)
On the contrary, I think it's the exact opposite of negligence. Unless you have some sort of written arrangement that your agent is also acting as your property manager, it would be irresponsible for them to go around shutting things off, turning things on, hiring contractors, etc. What if you didn't approve of their solution or the cost of it? What if they broke something or caused additional damage?
As a rule, the agent unlocks the door, turns on the lights, maybe turns on the furnace or the A/C if needed....that's it really. They don't touch anything else.
I do apologize, on behalf of the industry, for that agent's failure to adequately explain.
However.... When you say your friend felt "tricked into spending 10K more", that assumes, that the buyer who went to this open house was the only buyer who looked at the home. Did NO other showings happen with other agents? Would your friend not have expected THOSE showings to result in offers that would cost the full commission?
I would think the relatively unusual instance of a buyer who has no agent of their own, coming to an open house ready to make an immediate offer to the listing broker, would not have been the usual expectation of most sellers. Most buyers, even those at open houses, have their own agent, even if they aren't with them at the time.
So most sellers probably would have had the expectation that they were likely to pay two agents from the outset, they wouldn't see it as a sudden 10K MORE... that's just hindsight, after your friend realized the buyer had come from the open house and assuming that meant no commission split.
If this is the only reason your friend is badmouthing this agent, it's probably quite unfair.
We only heard from our last 2 agents a few times in the whole year each one had the listing.
It's a bad market and I don't expect them to magically create interest where there is none. But some regular communication to show they are still aware of the listing....
We had a leak in our vacant place, and the agent saw it. Instead of calling a plumber for this emergency, she allowed the whole place to flood. I call that negligence. (we were out of the country)
On the contrary, I think it's the exact opposite of negligence. Unless you have some sort of written arrangement that your agent is also acting as your property manager, it would be irresponsible for them to go around shutting things off, turning things on, hiring contractors, etc. What if you didn't approve of their solution or the cost of it? What if they broke something or caused additional damage?
As a rule, the agent unlocks the door, turns on the lights, maybe turns on the furnace or the A/C if needed....that's it really. They don't touch anything else.
Irresponsible for an agent to act on a water leak? Really? If I were a BUYER's agent showing a property and saw an active leak, I would certainly take at LEAST the action of calling the listing agent to notify them and ask for instructions to prevent further damage to the property. It would be irresponsible to leave without reporting it.
As listing agent for an owner who is out of the country or is not living nearby, I would hope there has been some conversation about handling emergencies, power outages, cold snaps, and leaks.
I'm curious to know what "research" you did, that led you to conclude that a buyer would not have been able to close.
This was over five years ago, so I might have forgotten parts.
Information we were given, either in the offer itself or by the buyers' agent:
-the buyers had already sold their house so that they'd be attractive buyers
-it would be a VA loan
-no down payment, plus they wanted us to pay almost all of closing costs
-a little bit about the family and their interests
-they were pre-approved and would get us the letter in a couple days
My question: If they just sold their house, why do they have NO money? And if they were making such an effort to present themselves as attractive buyers, why was the letter not ready? Those things weren't necessarily a problem, but I thought I'd check. So, a few clicks later, . . .
Their home sale was a short sale. It was also much larger and fancier than ours, and their lifestyle didn't seem like a good fit for our neighborhood. Okay, that part, not our problem - although I suspected that they would back out, for reasons not necessary here.
With a VA loan, the private road probably would have become an issue, as there was no written maintenance agreement, and the chances of getting all the owners on the road to sign one were approximately zero.
I called the VA loan people, who told me they had very clear rules on how long people had to wait after a short sale before getting a VA loan. (I don't remember the time period, but it was definitely longer than the couple of months in this case.)
The pre-approval turned out to be pre-qualification. We asked for pre-approval. Our agent said they were the same thing. Our understanding was that pre-qualification is more like, "Yeah, based on what these people told us, we think it's likely we'd give them a loan." Pre-approval is, "We have looked into these people's actual information and decided that we will give them a loan if they find a house."
Anyway, the VA thing was enough to turn down the offer.
A couple weeks later, we lowered the price, and almost right away the same buyers made an offer. This time they had a pre-approval letter. Because I knew the VA rules, I suspected something was not right. I googled the lender; it was a new, renamed version of a company that had gotten in some trouble for bad practices in the balloon years. I also saw on their website that they had some special authorization to expedite VA loans. (Hmm. Could they sneak this through? Maybe, but if so, I didn't want any part of cheating the VA. And there still was the private road issue.) I called the lender to confirm that everything was okay and there was no problem with the short sale. He said, "What short sale?" He had no idea, or he had been planning to pretend he had no idea - I'm not sure which.
My friend, right or wrong, assumed when she said she would have someone cover the Open House it never occurred to him (legal or not) that the "house shower" would be an agent claiming her side of the deal. Did the agents act illegally. No. Did they not properly explain? Yes.
Like it or not, my friend feels he was set up/tricked into spending $10K more.
And people wonder why real estate agents are not trusted. Would you trust her to do another deal? I know he would not and he bad mouths her every chance he gets.
Here's what you are missing:
NO ONE says that it was a clean deal. No one.
We don't know.
We do know and can agree that it is very common for agency to be poorly explained, or poorly grasped.
That is why the other guys did some explaining.
Me? As I said, I just think it is a stone cold error for a consumer to allow dual agency in an initial agreement.
No dual agency? No disclosed dual agency? No designated dual agency?
This event would not have happened.
But, that goes back to poor explanation of agency by agents and/or poor grasp of agency by consumers.
So, really, you are involved in a conversation on the topic, not some vast cover-up or rationalization.
For my part... I do think there is a noticeable aroma ( YOU seem to find it a "stench." I am not arguing against your perception, just discussing) around the circumstances your friend described. But, I am not involved, and should withhold judgement without all the specifics and communications between the parties right in front of me.
I would reiterate that blithely agreeing to allow dual agency is an error. Unfortunately, too many consumers (and sloppy agents) breeze through the agency disclosure forms, because they "are not a contract." They are really one of the most important discussions a consumer can have with agents. Without initial clarity, the foundation of the relationship is slipshod, IMO.
I proactively highlight the choice to decline dual agency in all my buyers agency agreements, and all listing agreements, while mentioning that IF IF IF we see an opportunity for dual agency to arise, we will discuss at that time and make agreement to proceed or to find other accommodation for the clients.
And, I tell them that the "other side" will also be disallowing dual agency in their agreements, and would have to agree to proceed, too.
This was over five years ago, so I might have forgotten parts.
Information we were given, either in the offer itself or by the buyers' agent:
-the buyers had already sold their house so that they'd be attractive buyers
-it would be a VA loan
-no down payment, plus they wanted us to pay almost all of closing costs
-a little bit about the family and their interests
-they were pre-approved and would get us the letter in a couple days
My question: If they just sold their house, why do they have NO money? And if they were making such an effort to present themselves as attractive buyers, why was the letter not ready? Those things weren't necessarily a problem, but I thought I'd check. So, a few clicks later, . . .
Their home sale was a short sale. It was also much larger and fancier than ours, and their lifestyle didn't seem like a good fit for our neighborhood. Okay, that part, not our problem - although I suspected that they would back out, for reasons not necessary here.
With a VA loan, the private road probably would have become an issue, as there was no written maintenance agreement, and the chances of getting all the owners on the road to sign one were approximately zero.
I called the VA loan people, who told me they had very clear rules on how long people had to wait after a short sale before getting a VA loan. (I don't remember the time period, but it was definitely longer than the couple of months in this case.)
The pre-approval turned out to be pre-qualification. We asked for pre-approval. Our agent said they were the same thing. Our understanding was that pre-qualification is more like, "Yeah, based on what these people told us, we think it's likely we'd give them a loan." Pre-approval is, "We have looked into these people's actual information and decided that we will give them a loan if they find a house."
Anyway, the VA thing was enough to turn down the offer.
A couple weeks later, we lowered the price, and almost right away the same buyers made an offer. This time they had a pre-approval letter. Because I knew the VA rules, I suspected something was not right. I googled the lender; it was a new, renamed version of a company that had gotten in some trouble for bad practices in the balloon years. I also saw on their website that they had some special authorization to expedite VA loans. (Hmm. Could they sneak this through? Maybe, but if so, I didn't want any part of cheating the VA. And there still was the private road issue.) I called the lender to confirm that everything was okay and there was no problem with the short sale. He said, "What short sale?" He had no idea, or he had been planning to pretend he had no idea - I'm not sure which.
We did not accept the offer.
Well....
Everything you say makes sense to me.
With the exception of "prequalification" vs. "preapproved."
Some lenders just never say "preapproved."
And, the two terms are so often used interchangeably by agents, consumers, or many lenders, that there is only confusion as to the meanings, not clarity.
But, you may have done very well not to have accepted that offer.
On the contrary, I think it's the exact opposite of negligence. Unless you have some sort of written arrangement that your agent is also acting as your property manager, it would be irresponsible for them to go around shutting things off, turning things on, hiring contractors, etc. What if you didn't approve of their solution or the cost of it? What if they broke something or caused additional damage?
As a rule, the agent unlocks the door, turns on the lights, maybe turns on the furnace or the A/C if needed....that's it really. They don't touch anything else.
Good grief. You would just walk away from a looming disaster? At least start making phone calls--to the other agent, to the owners, to municipal authorities who might be able to reach owners.
This was over five years ago, so I might have forgotten parts.
With a VA loan, the private road probably would have become an issue, as there was no written maintenance agreement, and the chances of getting all the owners on the road to sign one were approximately zero.
I want to comment on just this part. You may have snuck in under the wire in a recent change, but it is now ALL loans that will require a road maintenance agreement on a private road, NOT just VA loans. Conventional loans and Rehab loans also.
Just went through it on two homes up here.
Good news is you usually don't have to get ALL the owners on the road to sign it. Sometimes at least two (the current owner and one other) is enough! And if your neighbors aren't agreeable, look them up with the county if any have bought or sold within the last couple of years... they probably had do a maintenance agreement also, and you may be able to tag onto it.
It's in any of their interest to participate in an agreement, or they won't be able to sell without it either.
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.
YOU seem to find it a "stench." I am not arguing against your perception, just discussing) around the circumstances your friend described. But, I am not involved, and should withhold judgement without all the specifics and communications between the parties right in front of me.
With the exception of "prequalification" vs. "preapproved."
