I was having a discussion with my father (RE/Max, Missoula, MT) last night about the agent’s responsibility to ensure their buyer’s financial well being. As Steve Dawson commented on my last post (How to Negotiate and WIN), agents are bound by ethics to the ‘fiduciary responsibilities’ of a client. With that in mind, I proposed this question to my father: Have you ever, or would you in the future, put your client in a house you know will be financially overwhelming for them in the long run? He replied that he had not and never will. To him, it is less about the sale (money) and more about finding the home where his clients can be financially secure and happy with their purchase.
The Code of Ethics charges realtors to do the best they can for their client and their client’s well being. While it does not out rightly state that the responsibility of the agent in the case of financial predicament is to deter a buyer from their preferred home, it’s my thinking that even if it costs a sale you should dissuade your client from making a careless purchase.
What do you think? Have you ever knowingly placed a client in a home they couldn’t afford just to make a sale? Or do you run the risk of your deals falling through by steering the buyer towards something below their expectations?
Great post. Never have and never will. But I know a few who would and have done exactly that.