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.
The ultimate goal is to make real estate like a giant used car lot with nobody to represent the buyers so they are easier to take advantage of. Was it Redfin or Zillow who actually came out and said that? They wanted to transform the market where they would get rid of all the real estate agents and mortgage brokers and allow people to "trade in" their homes like a car dealership. They want to find out the maximum amount of monthly payment a person can afford and find a way to get them into only those models. And when they can afford more, they can come back and they'll take that from them too.
This will not change the day to day business, yet. Besides appeals, sellers want to sell and will offer buyers agents payments to get to the closing table.
Mike, did you see that they just filed a new national lawsuit? The brokerages named in the new suit are Compass, eXp, Redfin, Howard Hanna Real Estate, United Real Estate, Douglas Elliman and Weichert Realtors.
This will not change the day to day business, yet. Besides appeals, sellers want to sell and will offer buyers agents payments to get to the closing table.
Many will.
Many will not.
Too many consumers have bought into the long-term NAR lie that buyer's agency cobrokes are a seller expense for any blanket statement to be accurate.
And, in hot markets with homes going fast it's easy to foresee sellers offering minimal incentives for top dollar sales.
Mike, did you see that they just filed a new national lawsuit? The brokerages named in the new suit are Compass, eXp, Redfin, Howard Hanna Real Estate, United Real Estate, Douglas Elliman and Weichert Realtors.
I list a house, have a contract with the owner which says that upon closing, they pay 5% of the total sales price to me.
John, a realtor, brings to me a client of his, who winds up buying the house. I now split the 5% with John, who gets 2.5% of the total sales price, whereas I get 2.5% of the total sales price, unlike the 5% had I sold the house myself.
I’m just a home owner her who has bought and sold 7 houses in the last 40 years. I’ve always viewed agent commission as the cost of doing business. I’ve also never begrudged paying the commission. We’ve always chosen our listing agents carefully, and they all did a wonderful job and earned their commission. We’ve always chosen an agent to represent us when we were buying who knew the area and willing to listen to our needs, wants, and budget restrictions.
I list a house, have a contract with the owner which says that upon closing, they pay 5% of the total sales price to me.
John, a realtor, brings to me a client of his, who winds up buying the house. I now split the 5% with John, who gets 2.5% of the total sales price, whereas I get 2.5% of the total sales price, unlike the 5% had I sold the house myself.
Why is that bad/wrong?
The basis of the suit is the requirement by MLSs, with NAR and member brokerages on board, that requiring MLS sellers to "pay" and to make payment through their listing agent to a successful buyer's agent is anti-competitive, that sellers should not have to "pay" the buyers agents' fees.
For decades, NAR ceaselessly identified those fees as seller costs and "free" to buyers, helping to make sellers feel like they were absorbing buyer costs.
Idiotic of NAR, but it is what it is.
I look forward to seeing appeals resolved in another 3-7 years.....
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.