|
Find AB real estate agents and Lethbridge real estate on ActiveRain.
Disclaimer: ActiveRain Corp. does not necessarily endorse the real estate agents, loan officers and brokers listed on this site. These real estate profiles, blogs and blog entries are provided here as a courtesy to our visitors to help them make an informed decision when buying or selling a house. ActiveRain Corp. takes no responsibility for the content in these profiles, that are written by the members of this community.
© 2013 ActiveRain Corp. All Rights Reserved
6 Comments on REALTORS® Representing Both Buyer and Seller - Can it Be Done Successfully??
Can it be done successfully you ask? That depends on who is determining the measure of success.
If the who is the agency/brokerage which is retaining both sides of the commission, then it's a definitely a success for them. (Facilitator is just another word for double dipper.)
However if the who is a client expecting all the fiduciary duties including undivided loyalty from their real estate representative, then the answer clearly must be - NO.
The public has a right to the undivided loyalty of their own representative in a real estate transaction. They should be advised of that right and be warned against giving it up.
Hi Larry:
I always appreciate your honest opinion, but I would have to disagree with you on this one. I always advise my clients of what duties I will not be able to honour in Transaction Brokerage (namely undivided loyalty and full disclosure). I feel that a client sometimes gets better protection in Transaction Brokerage in that I am required to disclose all information to each party about the property (ones that may not be deemed necessary to disclose to an agent from a different brokerage). I always let them know that they have the option of choosing another agency to represent them if they are not comfortable with Transaction Brokerage.
I think the key to making it work is to be completely transparent to both parties. I have usually established good relationships with both buyer and seller by the time we get to offer stage, so there is a great deal of trust in place already. I make sure to guide them to the questions that need to be answered without influencing their decisions. It isn't hard for me to be impartial and I think only a REALTOR with a very strong sense of ethics can provide the objective service essential for Transaction Brokerage to be successful.
When it comes down to it, if a seller wants to sell a property I have listed and I also have a buyer that wants to buy that property, my job is to help them find that middle ground where both are pleased with the outcome. Thanks for commenting!
Liz, in NY we have "dual agency" (as opposed to transaction brokerage). A question I have is this: when you list a sellers house, is "fiduciary" in the description of your service to them, or do you begin the process with a complete understanding on their part of "transaction" brokerage?
Frankly, I wish that this option were available here, so that there were no mid-stream change (after having collected confidential seller info) in representation to the seller- that's my big issue with dual agency (along with the fact that the buyer is often not well enough informed).
Hi Laurie:
Section 21 of our Listing Contract is dedicated to explaining Transaction Brokerage and how my role as an agent could change. It is always discussed at listing time and we also have an Agency Relationships form that must be explained and signed. It again talks about the differences between Sole Agency and Transaction Brokerage. It helps me to know up front if they are open to Transaction Brokerage. If they are not interested in working under such an arrangement, I would have to look at other options, but funny thing is, it's never happened to me!
I agree that buyers are often the ones who don't get a good enough explanation. I guess that is one more good reason for buyers to work under an Exclusive Buyer Brokerage Agreement. Transaction Brokerage is fully explained in those forms as well. Thanks for your comments!
I guess it all comes down to document, document, document! I (and my company) have a policy not to engage in dual agency because of the potential pitfalls. Most agents in my area love to "double dip" but I think the day is coming that we will no longer be allowed to do so. My opinion is that it can't happen too soon.
I think that the client too often suffers. You are all talking about what it should look like, but too often the Realtor and/or one of the parties are hte ones who come out on top. RECA (The Real Estate Council of Alberta) has a very large percentage of their complaints related to this issue. It allows unscrupulous Realtors to manipulate the situation, and it gets worse in the larger centres where you have larger immigrant populations, drug laundering, mortgage fraud etc. In these situations the vendor and Realtor do ongoing deals, and it works best if one Realtor controls the situation. In Lethbridge you know there are some Realtors who aren't above board. I think that it is very hard for anyone to be fair, even with the best intentions. You spend months working with a client, or maybe they are a repeat client. Someone walks in off the street, and there is impartial treatment? Did you show that buyer more homes to establish if this is the best home, prequalify them, discuss hte pros and cons of the area, establish their needs..... Most of us try but it is a road full of pitfalls!