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.
It's not showing one of her listings; it's failing to tell us it was indeed her listing as required by law. (and the failure to properly disclose that could have gotten her a fine from the state of Florida or worse if we'd filed a complaint over it) That house was a no-go because it backed up to a busy road, but if it hadn't, it would have been a contender. And her failure to disclose if it had been a house we wanted to buy meant that we may very well have discussed price strategy in front of her that she would have been legally obliged to pass back to the sellers, leaving us in a poor position for negotiating.
I don't think it was malice or attempt to deceive on her part, but I do think a) she was being very sloppy about her job, and b) we shouldn't feel like we're more up on state real estate law than our agent is.
It's not showing one of her listings; it's failing to tell us it was indeed her listing as required by law. (and the failure to properly disclose that could have gotten her a fine from the state of Florida or worse if we'd filed a complaint over it) That house was a no-go because it backed up to a busy road, but if it hadn't, it would have been a contender. And her failure to disclose if it had been a house we wanted to buy meant that we may very well have discussed price strategy in front of her that she would have been legally obliged to pass back to the sellers, leaving us in a poor position for negotiating.
I don't think it was malice or attempt to deceive on her part, but I do think a) she was being very sloppy about her job, and b) we shouldn't feel like we're more up on state real estate law than our agent is.
Had this agent not discussed the possibility of dual agency before, and what that would mean to you? Did you not see any properties that were listed by her company?
Here, the possibility of intermediary (being shown properties listed by the brokerage) is not only discussed, it's part of the buyer's rep agreement (and the listing agreement, for that matter) and either party can opt out at the initial signing, if they so wish. It's an either/or situation. Then, if they opt in, at the time that they decide that they want to write an offer on a house listed by the agent/brokerage, but not at the time that the house is being shown, a notice in writing goes to all parties notifying them that intermediary is now in effect.
One thing puzzles me. You say that you don't consider that you were notified that it was one of her listings even though you saw her name on the sign in front of the house as listing agent. So, what DID you think her name on that sign meant?
It should have been verbal or written notification before we got to the property. It's her responsibility to do that, not for me to have to contemplate the sign out front and go 'so this is your listing?' or for her to have to rely on a prospective buyer seeing the sign to begin with.
Is that how the law is written in Florida? Here, once the buyer has accepted intermediary, then they don't have to be notified before being taken to see a house that it is a listing by the agent or brokerage. Only when the buyer has chosen a house that is listed by the brokerage does intermediary go into effect, so that's when all parties (seller and buyer) are notified.
I take it the Florida buyer's rep agreement has nothing regarding dual agency in it?
And, DID you see the sign before you went into the house?
Did see the sign before the house, but that wasn't the point. The point was that the agent failed to follow Florida law, which at the time stated that she was supposed to notify me in writing if she was showing me one of her listings.
You are incorrect. In the state of Florida, it is 'assumed' that the agent you are working with is a transaction broker. A transaction broker is NOT a dual agent and is under obligation to NOT disclose your situation to the seller or the seller's situation to you. Unless, when you met her, you signed a buyer's broker agreement with her, she was not 'representing' you. She was facilitating a deal. If she had you sign a buyer's broker agreement and then wanted to show you a listing, then she would have either had to have you sign a transition to transaction broker agreement or a non-representation agreement. She more than likely did not have you sign a buyer's broker agreement (and if she did, read it, it probably said she was a transaction broker as our forms and laws state you can do that) and her listing agreement with the seller more than likely was a transaction broker listing agreement.
What you describe is nothing different than what happens in Florida every day and works just fine.
Unless it was longer than two years ago, you are incorrect. Prior to two years ago, she would have had to show you a form describing the different agencies and what they mean and have you sign off which agency she was functioning under.
I'm out of the thread here with the statement that no one will ever have your own best interests at heart more than you ever will yourself.
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.