After talking with colleagues in different parts of the country, I've come to the following conclusion: If there is a relocation company involved in the transaction, before I show the property I need to ask the buyer, how many brain cells are you willing to sacrifice for your new home? If the buyer has neither the time, patience, or wherewithal to deal with a corporation who doesn't give a hoot whether their client's home ever sells, it may be in everyone's best interest to move on rather than show it, have them fall in love and become disillusioned as the transaction drags out in minutiae.
Am I discriminating against properties? No I'm representing the buyer's best interest. Some buyers can't deal with it. Dealing with a relo company can be frustrating, and that's on a good day. On a bad day, it can make you crazy. If there is a home down the road that works and we don't have to deal with a relo company, of course we'll take that option. There will be times when the perfect home has a relo company involved. That's when I sit down with the buyers and explain the process thoroughly and explain that it will take longer, allow less flexibility and they do not negotiate at all on their addendums. If the buyer is good with that, we move forward. If not, the search goes on. And, if the original owner is still involved, add another 3 weeks to the transaction.
I wonder if those relocated sellers understand that the relocation company is actually hurting them, while ostensibly helping them?
Comments (3)Subscribe to CommentsComment