Ar_home_b_search
 

Recently at the FAR annual convention one of NAR’s attorneys, Brian Larson, spoke to us about various MLS topics. This included the FTC complaint against the Houston association and now the Michigan association.

 

Additionally, Brian spoke to his recommendation to eliminate cooperating commission and simply have the buyers pay their broker if they so elect to even engage one. Brian wrote an article on this subject and posted it to his website. Here is the link: The End of the MLS as We Know it

 

7 Comments on End of MLS cooperating compensation

SEP
30
2006
137,591 Points 10 Featured Posts Outside Blog
He has a point.  I already have a policy that my firm will not compensate buyers agents that are buying for themselves.  You are either the buyer or the agent, not both.  This came about due to the demand from some of our bank clients and we have implimented it across the board.  We also have our first listing where the courts are allowing a fee to the listing brokerage, but the buyers agents must be paid as an add on or outside of the deal.  The serious agents with the serious buyers are not having a problem with it.  It is the lookieloos who are complaining.
8:32am • #1
3 Featured Posts
Rich, I assume your policy of non-compensation relates only to your associates. You cannot make such a restriction if entered into the MLS. Also, how are the courts involved in a commission claim. Did it not qualify for arbitration through the association?
9:02am • #2
937,519 Points 361 Featured Posts Outside Blog Attended Rain Camp Called Shot Master

This was a very interesting article Stephen. Change is definitely on the horizon. I thought he had some very good points. By primarily working with Sellers I feel fortunate to be able to control the inventory and my commission. Makes my life a lot easier.

A Buyer's Broker Agreement is a great tool and all Realtors should be utilizing them. It is definitely the way of the future, so best to jump in the game now.
12:01pm • #3
137,591 Points 10 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Well, I had a real long and drawn out post drafted and then my wireless internet went out for a second.

In brief your assumption is wrong.  It is not just for my agents.  There is a "variable rate commission" option on our MLS listings.  I identify right on MLS that there is a variable rate and that rate is 0-3, sometimes 0-2.  It depends.

I am not sure if the MLS gods are going to strike me down or not, but the reality is that if you are planning on being a principal purchaser of real estate and you are purchasing my listings, I am probably not sharing my fee with you.  I do the best I can to disclose this on MLS with the space allowed and it is disclosed to my clients.  So far, none of them have had any issue with it.

THe corts are not involved in the commission claim, the Order approving my retention as an officer of the Court provides for the listing broker to be compensated from sale proceeds, however there is no provision for buyers agents to be compensated.  By extension, we are informing agents that they need to get paid outside of the deal. If I remember right we have it listed as "subagency 0" & "buyer agency 0" on MLS.

Problem with most agents is that they have no idea what the 00's mean and many of them assume that if a property is listed in MLS, then there is a fee being offered no matter what.  Not so.
1:13pm • #4
OCT
02
2006
3 Featured Posts
Rich, interesting concept. I have never seen "variable rate" used in this concept. It would probably fly. Once again I assume, hopefully correctly this time, that all of your MLS listing to provide for some offer of compensation (just not to Realtors acting as principals).
11:09am • #5
137,591 Points 10 Featured Posts Outside Blog

All except the one.  With this listing, I am definately going the extra mile on making sure that everyone knows about the "0" when they call on the property.

There are ways to get them paid, like write a commission into the contract. If the Courts approve the whole contract, the new Order will wipe out the conflicting term in the older one.  The other way, obviously, is an off the HUD payment to the broker (not agent) or the lender may allow the commission to be "added in" and financed on top.

 
4:11pm • #6
OCT
25
2006
175,637 Points 17 Featured Posts Outside Blog

Stephen, in your first comment reply you wrote: <<You cannot make such a restriction if entered into the MLS.>>

If you check our MLS, you'll find that there are a few companies that have (or have had) listings that state "no commission to agent/broker buying for own use".  To see these listings, just enter "(contains:) no commission" into the remarks field and you'll find dozens that say this.  One even went so far as to state "no commission paid to agent, relative or associate for own use".
7:58pm • #7

What does the graphic say?

Leave a response…

(optional)
What does the graphic say?
 
Sbm_fullsize-mini

Stephen McWilliam, ABR,CRB,CRS,GRI

Fort Lauderdale, FL

More about me…

Florida State Realty Group, Inc

Address: 790 E Broward Blvd, #102, Fort Lauderdale, FL, 33301

Office Phone: (954) 359-3000 x 1767

Cell Phone: (954) 325-6771

Email Me



Links

Archives

RSS 2.0 Feed for this blog