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.
No, she's not. Whether an agent is from the same broker or a broker across town makes no difference to me. My concern is my client - not the other agent or my own broker. If my broker ever insinuated that I should go easy on the other agent because they worked under the same broker - I would be out the door to a new broker in a flash. As long as I am within the law looking out for my client - my broker has enough sense to not interfere.
Could be that it's different in a large town. My broker has over 800 realtors in the firm. I will never meet half of them. Brokers compete for agent aggressively. No broker will go out of their way to anger an agent doing the right thing.
It's dual agency... your point revolves completely around everything being fine with the transaction. Which doesn't happen all the time.
So you're both making assumptions for the OP here that it will be a perfect transaction. If there's a problem with either agent in this scenario (which happens all the time), your only recourse is going to the same broker managing both sides of the deal.
I don't know how you try to refute that point with saying you don't know 1/2 the other agents in the office. That's not relevant at all.
It's dual agency... your point revolves completely around everything being fine with the transaction. Which doesn't happen all the time.
So you're both making assumptions for the OP here that it will be a perfect transaction. If there's a problem with either agent in this scenario (which happens all the time), your only recourse is going to the same broker managing both sides of the deal.
I don't know how you try to refute that point with saying you don't know 1/2 the other agents in the office. That's not relevant at all.
Relevant as to mindset.
Has there ever been a problem with the other agent - regardless of broker? Yep. Sure gets fixed quicker if it's the same broker.
It's completely different to have one agent representing both the buyer & the seller vs. two agents from the same brokerage representing each side independently.
First, agents are not employees of the brokerage. Fellow agents aren't co-workers - they're competition. We don't work together for the good of the brokerage ... we work for our clients. Period.
Second, problems with other agents don't happen all the time. You hear about them a lot here because the internet is where people come to air their dirty laundry. Most transactions complete without unnecessary drama.
Third, most times that clients have problems with their agent that would require them to speak with the broker, it's during the listing period. Not in the midst of a transaction. But if a client was unhappy with their agent, and this was a designated agency situation, the BICs job is to ensure the agent is an advocate for their client and that agent fulfills their duty.
Fourth, we've been talking about a very specific situation - when the listing agent brings the buyer. But designated agency happens frequently without cause, concern or drama. In fact, in larger brokerages, the agents don't even know each other.
Let's say I have a buyer. I show them 50,000 homes every which way but Sunday. And they fall in love and write an offer on a home that's listed by an agent who works in my office. In fact, it's an agent I've never met, since there are 125 agents in my office and most of them work remotely. Should I not proceed with the transaction based on the fact that they happened to want to purchase a home that's listed with my brokerage?
Uh no. Because I work for my client's interests. I could care less if the listing agent is with my brokerage or C21 or CB or KW ... I'm not going to shirk my duties because I might run into the agent at the water cooler.
And fifth, let me reiterate the problem I have personally with dual agency. How in the world can I negotiate the highest price for my seller and the lowest for my buyer? It's an Escher painting come to life.
I do prepare my sellers - I tell them from the beginning I don't believe in dual agency and that if I happen to have a buyer, I refer them out.
My clients aren't real estate sales experts - if they were, they'd go FSBO. They hire an agent to represent THEIR interests - not the interests of their buyers as well. I don't think I can fairly do double duty just to double end a commission.
And, in my opinion, that's just really sad that you haven't taken enough continuing education classes to know how to represent both sides to the fullest in one class. Otherwise, you would not tell your sellers up front that you're incompetent when it comes to showing their own property. Our job is to learn every aspect of doing our jobs, and part of our job is to know how to work both sides as a win/win.
Maybe that's the difference in education state to state, but Texas has the highest requirements for licensure than any other state.
And, in my opinion, that's just really sad that you haven't taken enough continuing education classes to know how to represent both sides to the fullest in one class. Otherwise, you would not tell your sellers up front that you're incompetent when it comes to showing their own property. Our job is to learn every aspect of doing our jobs, and part of our job is to know how to work both sides as a win/win.
Maybe that's the difference in education state to state, but Texas has the highest requirements for licensure than any other state.
And, in my opinion, it's really sad that you short your clients just so you can double end your commission ... or what was it you said? Just so you don't have to deal with extra emails & phone calls.
Oh, and FYI - the win/win should be for our clients ... not for your pocketbook.
And, in my opinion, it's really sad that you short your clients just so you can double end your commission ... or what was it you said? Just so you don't have to deal with extra emails & phone calls.
Oh, and FYI - the win/win should be for our clients ... not for your pocketbook.
Working both ends has nothing to do with the commision. Only someone greedy like you would think of the money. It's a win/win because both the buyer and the seller know they're working with someone professional who knows how to do their job and get the best results for all involved.
Move along now, as I don't plan on indulging your comments any longer as they keep sounding uneducated.
Working both ends has nothing to do with the commision. Only someone greedy like you would think of the money. It's a win/win because both the buyer and the seller know they're working with someone professional who knows how to do their job and get the best results for all involved.
Move along now, as I don't plan on indulging your comments any longer as they keep sounding uneducated.
Boy, you've really shown your true colors in this thread.
I think if Chuckity was greedy - she WOULD represent both ends. Methinks the opposite is true.
Yes, it's legal in Texas, but it shouldn't be. Most cases of fraud that I have heard about involved only one agent. I am representing a seller now that was scammed into paying much more for the property than it was worth (and don't go into how everyone reads CMAs differently, this was a very substantial amount). The buyer's agent was also the listing agent when she bought it. It's harder to pull that stuff with two agents involved.
When I have told sellers that I will not represent both sides, I get very strong comments about that. They are visibly relieved, and usually wind up telling me a horror story from the past where it was done. A smart seller will not want you to represent the buyer.
FalconheadWest - I usually think highly of your comments. This wasn't one of those times. Sorry, you did throw the first punch - and it wasn't pretty.
It also was uncalled for to malign the other states' education requirements (and I am in Texas, so you didn't hurt my feelings). This forum should benefit all of us, not degenerate into that type of behaviour.
Last edited by cheryjohns; 07-10-2010 at 07:24 PM..
And, in my opinion, it's really sad that you short your clients just so you can double end your commission ... or what was it you said? Just so you don't have to deal with extra emails & phone calls.
Oh, and FYI - the win/win should be for our clients ... not for your pocketbook.
I'd say you're making some HUGE assumptions about someone you don't know here - and we all know what happens when we assume, right?
For me, I think it's really sad that an agent would cavalierly make such allegations regarding another agent. I'd expect this from one of the usual "all agents are venal" crowd on here who think all we do is unlock doors, but not from a fellow agent!
As for me, I don't generally do both sides of the deal (though I have), but on occasion there will be a situation where another agent in our brokerage has a buyer for whom the house that I have listed is perfect, or vice versa. Since, in Texas, what this means and what happens in this situation is supposed to be explained to any potential customer or client or someone we're talking real estate with on first substantive meeting, by law, by the time they sign the listing agreement or the buyer's rep agreement (both of which spell this out, as well), they already know about it and what it means, and they then have an opportunity to opt out of "intermediary", which is what it's called here, at the time of signing, simply by checking that box rather than the one that states that they allow intermediary. At that point, if it's a buyer, we would not show them any of our listings, and if it's a seller, we would not show any buyers working with our agents their house. I've not had anyone opt out once what it is and how it works is explained to them, both verbally and in writing, at least twice.
Then they are notified again, in writing, if the situation should occur.
So it's not like an agent is taking advantage of someone who doesn't know what's going on.
Now, that's Texas, and maybe in your state customers and clients are not informed about how that part of agency works until it happens. Laws and practices do vary from state to state, of course.
I'd say you're making some HUGE assumptions about someone you don't know here - and we all know what happens when we assume, right?
For me, I think it's really sad that an agent would cavalierly make such allegations regarding another agent. I'd expect this from one of the usual "all agents are venal" crowd on here who think all we do is unlock doors, but not from a fellow agent!
.
Listen, I didn't start it - at all.
I explained my feelings on why I don't do dual agency - and then I was told it was "sad" because I didn't have enough education, and that I was incompetent.
I expect more from agents here too.
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.
