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.
What if he says, for instance, that it's not a problem to have the listing broker in the same firm, or something to the effect of - no one does the buyer's agent agreements around here? (Several of our friends bought houses in the past few years in Long Island, but none of them had a "buyer's agent"...)
A few years ago, having an agent represent a buyer WAS rare on Long Island. The wording of the new disclosure forms (as of Jan 2007) significantly changed that, by making it much less desirable for an agent to be a "sub-agent" of the seller. It has to do with "liability" for actions and/or statements made during negotiations and transactions. TomMoser or ihateny can probably explain it better than I can.
From a buyer's point of view it is always better to have the agent you're working with, working for your interests rather than that of the seller.
If he says "No one does ... etc", IMHO I would find another agent. That's BS.
There is not a PROBLEM with having the listing agent and buyer's agent in the same office (although personally I don't care for that arrangement, as a buyer... it's hard to be properly adversarial IF needed, when the other person is a co-worker). The problem is when the listing agent and and agent showing the buyer the house, are both "agents of the seller" which by default is what you have at the moment.
The main thing to remember is that he is working for the SELLER. Do not reveal to him any information that you would not want the seller to know, because he is required by law to tell them. For example, never tell him that you are willing to go higher or that you are approved for a mortgage in excess of your offer.
The main thing to remember is that he is working for the SELLER. Do not reveal to him any information that you would not want the seller to know, because he is required by law to tell them. For example, never tell him that you are willing to go higher or that you are approved for a mortgage in excess of your offer.
The thing is, the agent probably is aware of at least some of these things because APNY has been seeing houses with him for several months while completely unaware of the the "representation status" of their relationship (and that is totally completely 100% the fault of this agent). He's been assuming this agent is the good guy in the white hat whose purpose has been to get the best deal for APNY and thus may have been sharing information with him on that erroneous basis.
The way I look at it, if APNY were to sign a Buyer Agency agreement with this agent today (before another word passes his lips regarding the house he saw the other day and is interested in) then from that moment onward this agent is not supposed to pass on any "transaction-affecting" information about APNY to the listing agent. If he's already done that... well... damage done is damage done -- the listing agent already has the info and you can bet will pass it along to the seller if an offer is made.
The fact that it's an in-house listing does make it more likely that the listing agent may have or may get such info anyway (especially if APNY's agent has a letter in his file saying what APNY is pre-approved for; easy enough to for anyone in the office to just pull out the file and look -- this is why I'm happier when the house I'm looking at is NOT listed by the same office as my Buyer Agent. So far that scenario hasn't come up for me.)
Also, is this new construction or a resale of an existing house? I seem to recall one of your other posts mentioning new-construction; is the realtor's office the agent for a builder (custom or spec)?
If it is brand-new construction not completed yet (no C of O) watch out for what builders or listing agents present as what will be the "estimated property taxes". The final post-CO figure can (almost certainly will!) be more than the pre-completion guesstimate.
APNY, if you don't mind my asking, what kind of information have you already shared with this agent?
4StanleyCups makes some excellent points. You can legally change your agency relationship with your agent at any time, but on a practical level it is not so easy. From a legal point of view, if he already showed you a house you are interested in as a "Sellers Agent" and then enters into a "Buyers Agent" agreement with you, he would have to notify the seller and give the seller the opportunity to cancel the Seller Agency relationship that already exists. This is not likely to happen, as it means effectively cancelling the listing.
By the way, once any type of agency relationship is established it applies to the whole company, not just the individual agent. So, if Joe Blow from XYZ Realty enters into a buyer agency relationship with you and shows you a home listed by XYZ Realty (even if it was listed by another agent at the firm) a conflict has arisen. By law, both parties (the buyer and the seller) are required to be notified of this in writing and given the following options: 1) Either party may disolve the agency relationship and find a new agent without a conflict to represent them; 2) The parties can agree to Dual Agency with Designated Sales Associates (the Broker appoints one agent to represent the seller and one agent to represent the buyer).
Tom, I also see another wrinkle in APNY's current situation. Suppose APNY decides he (by the way, I apologize if you're a she ... duh...!) wants to start over with a 'clean slate' by finding another agent in another realtor's office and establishing a Buyer Agency relationship with THAT agent. (Which IMO might well be the best idea, but that's just me speaking)
But APNY is still interested in that house, which was first shown to him/her by the agent he's been working with. APNY would need to tell his new Buyer Agent "I've already seen this house with a different agent, but under these circumstances:..." and then go on to explain it. I'm thinking here of all those "procuring cause" commission-split arguments that would take place when seller sub-agency was all we had on LI and buyers would "do the rounds" with one agent after another because they decided they didn't like this agent or that agent. You know the drill. But would that problem not arise if APNY goes back to see the house with a new (Buyer) agent, because when he saw it the other day he was technically seeing it with a Seller's sub-agent? There'd be no "procuring cause" conflict between his current agent and anyone APNY might sign as Buyer Agent. Right?
Of course whatever info APNY's current agent may already have about him, he has... can't wipe that out if it's already "out there".
Tom, I also see another wrinkle in APNY's current situation. Suppose APNY decides he (by the way, I apologize if you're a she ... duh...!) wants to start over with a 'clean slate' by finding another agent in another realtor's office and establishing a Buyer Agency relationship with THAT agent. (Which IMO might well be the best idea, but that's just me speaking)
But APNY is still interested in that house, which was first shown to him/her by the agent he's been working with. APNY would need to tell his new Buyer Agent "I've already seen this house with a different agent, but under these circumstances:..." and then go on to explain it. I'm thinking here of all those "procuring cause" commission-split arguments that would take place when seller sub-agency was all we had on LI and buyers would "do the rounds" with one agent after another because they decided they didn't like this agent or that agent. You know the drill. But would that problem not arise if APNY goes back to see the house with a new (Buyer) agent, because when he saw it the other day he was technically seeing it with a Seller's sub-agent? There'd be no "procuring cause" conflict between his current agent and anyone APNY might sign as Buyer Agent. Right?
Of course whatever info APNY's current agent may already have about him, he has... can't wipe that out if it's already "out there".
If there is a commission dispute, that's the agent's problem. I believe that the new agent would prevail, given that the old agent never disclosed the agency relationship, which is illegal.
This kind of mess is one reason that brokers need to train their agents about the importance of following the disclosure laws.
By the way, if anyone wants to file a complaint about a Real Estate Agent in New York, here's the address and phone number:
Department of State
41 State Street
Albany, NY 12231-0001
Phone: (518) 474-4752
Fax: (518) 474-4597
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.
