When I started selling real estate in 1984, the phrase “buyer agency” was rarely mentioned and even more seldom employed.
Unless a buyer chose to pay an agent out of their pocket, (which never happened to me or any agent that I knew,) all agents represented the seller either directly or as a sub-agent.
This resulted in landmark litigation in which buyers sued brokerage companies that purported to be the “buyer’s agent” but in actuality were agents of the seller. Buyers DEMANDED representation, and it became customary for sellers to pay for the buyer’s agent.
As a consequence buyer’s agency became a standard practice, and most buyers chose to take advantage of having representation on their side of the transaction.
Fast forward to 2011. We are getting more contacts from buyers that want to eschew representation and DEMAND to work exclusively with the listing agent. The theory is that the money normally paid to a buyer’s agent is on the table and up for grabs.
And even though ALL commissions are indeed negotiable, this practice erodes the additional layer of consumer protection that was demanded by buyers in court and at legislatures across the land.
I believe that consumers have the right to make their own decision when it comes to representation. But I would also like to think that the consumer victories in the past were not won in vain.
We have come a long way to get to where we are today.
I don’t like the idea of going back to where we started.
Comments(22)