Once, in recent history, real estate agents only represented sellers. The system was perfect. It was clean. Buyers could buy houses but the agent hauling them around in their car did not have the buyer's best interest in mind. That agent worked for the seller. It was much like a car salesperson. We all know the car dealer is the one the car salesperson represents. Then a bunch of savvy buyers got together and sued a big company for lack of disclosure and the real estate system got messy . . . real messy. Buyers were happy because they could now be represented as well, but agents and brokers haven't been the same since.
We professionals are in a box that worked well under the old system but has it now become our prison? Under the old sytem brokers had sub-agents whom they supervised to show the broker's inventory, houses. These agents acted on behalf of the broker in transactions where the broker was representing the seller.
Keeping the old box of broker/agent relationship under the new buyer agency system is quite messy. With the introduction of buyer agency, came the problematic dual agency. Dual agency is one of the most divisive topics I've heard among agents. The pros and cons exist on divergent sides. Dual agency allows agents licensed under one broker and acting as sub-agents for the broker (remember the broker is the one who contracts with the client and licensees are signing on behalf of the brokerage) to represent both a buyer and a seller of the same house! This is messy. Many agents don't understand the concept that they are actually acting on behalf of their brokers when in the field. As a result they don't understand how dual agency occurs.
So let's look at the box, the old system. If the subagency capacity of the licensee to broker were eliminated how would our business look? If there was no one ultimate "buck stops here" person, but we were each individually responsible for our own businesses as the independent contractors we are, how would we do business? Would we go to a clearing house like Wall Street and bid on clients? How we would office? How would we gather together? Who would supervise? Who would be sued? There are advantages to staying in the old box of the old system. Licensees don't have the ultimate reponsibility because there is someone who has a supervisory capacity over them. If they are sued, the company's deep pockets are addressed as well.
But, if we left the box, eliminated the old system and each became independent contractors without broker supervision think of the clarity. The listings and the buyers would be OURS! Did you hear that? OURS! Not the brokers. When we went elsewhere the clients would go with us. If dual agency occurred, it would be clear because WE would be the ONLY agent involved. The buyer, seller, and agent would understand dual agency completely because it could be seen. The agent who still doesn't get dual agency today wouldn't have to figure it out anymore. It would be clear. When I represent both the seller and buyer that is dual agency.
Now I know this is too simplistic. There is protection in the broker system. There's supposed to be supervision. Nevertheless, restructuring "the box" might bring a better system that would bring more clarity to the way real estate is sold today compared to the days before buyer agency. If we could only think "out of the box" what might we come up with?
Comments(0)