Number one. Why are you advertising to the world what you are willing to pay?

Number two. Your current listing Agent should be able to handle this sort of question. I have a question for you. Do you trust your Agent?

Number 3. If you do not trust your Agent, why are you listed with him/her?

Lastly, I'll tell you that it is unethical for an Agent to not present an offer to a seller. It does not matter that you have a home to sell. Ypu are open to choose an agent to represent you. I do not recommend the listing Agent of the home you wish to purchase. Listing agents sign on to represent the Seller. It is unlikely that they can recuse themselves later and become mere messengers with word from both parties.


If you sign an offer to purchase, it must be presented by the listing Agent, regardless of the terms. Who knows what the Seller may think on any given time or date.

I hope you find this helpful.

Sincerely,


Chris Bowman
Broker - Realtor®
Remax Experts http://www.suburbanestates.com
847-507-6047

get your agent first. Buyer side you don't pay any money. Your agent work for you, your side not sellers' side. Dual agent --> you don't have your side !! Simple is that

I say if you REALLY want the house, go with the seller's agent. They will totally help you get it for what you want because they get dual commission. And that equals a LOT of money for them.

Question 1: listing agent represent the seller. You can deal with him but at the end of the day he is looking for his clients best interest not yours. If you decide to negociate against a professional directly all by yourself good luck. I don't buy Jeff answer: the listing agent has a contract (listing) with the seller that states the commission whether there is a buyer agent or not. So the x% saving going direct is a clear misunderstanding of the industry as it is today.
I disagree with the "don't go with a contingency" . We see more and more contingent transactions. That's not the best, it's a weaker offer but hey you might end up do the same and take what's coming at you.
Why don't you use your listing agent? he will help you go through a reasonable offer, respecting your conditions and will give you the right advice taking into account your local market conditions. And you can negociate some discount on his commission if he does the 2 deals!
Everything else is just trying to save a buck with knowledge from the newspapers: in the end you make mistakes and you end up paying the bill.

I think it would best for you to get your home sold FIRST then start looking for your new home. It don't think it would matter if you had a buyers agent or if you used the sellers. Most sellers in the current market do not want to take their home of the market unless they have a rock solid deal.

I have to agree with Mike on this one. Dual agency is a morass, and a lawsuit waiting to happen. Erick may be correct that the law requires us, as a dual agent, to treat both parties fairly. But that's not what the seller hired me for.

The seller hired me to get him the best deal possible, in a reasonable period of time. I've told the seller that I'll get him the highest price and the best deal I can. Interestingly enough, that's the same thing I'm supposed to do for the buyer... get him the lowest price and the best deal possible. Those are not two compatible goals.

So, as a dual agent in Illinois, what am I now allowed to do? I basically have to revert to a therapist session, and when asked questions about negotiations, inspections, credits, repairs, should I go forward with this deal... all I can do is ask the buyer or seller that age-old psychiatrist's question "what do YOU think we should do?"

I have to remain neutral and fair, and not pass any proprietary information to the other side. So the things each side hired me for are neutralized. That is NOT what I was hire for.

Dont Listen totally to Mikes advice! I am disturbed about his statement about dual agency. It is true that we would work for both sides but State Law requires that we work for the best intrests of each client. For example, It is my job to get the house for you at 200k and also my job to get the house at 209 for the seller. I could vey well know that the seller would take 195k but if you offered 200k because you it it what you felt was a good price, I have done my job on both ends. I cannot disclose that I know of the 195k price and on the other hand, I cannot disclose to the seller that you told me that you would be willing to do 205k either. It is a tricky situation but PLEASE UNDERSTAND, My license is at stake if I do anything that shows patiality or favortism to either client. It is my job to see that both get whatthey are looking for. I hope this helps.

It's too bad you signed an agreement with your agent (listing agent) and you are going to pay that 5% or 6% or whatever regardless of what the buyer does. Not only that, but your agent, that you are paying for, now isn't yours! Get this, your agent just became a dual agent and can no longer give you any advice on anything, all your agent is good for is pushing paper. Still think you'll choose that as a seller?

Also, it's never so cut and dry where a buyer will offer X and you pay 6% to your agent and if buyer didn't have an agent you would still get X but would have to pay 3% to your agent. it's more like people will offer you some price, and your agent could negotiate it, it's very unlikely that you would get two offers for the exact same price. Besides, how would you even determine what that X price is?

Last but not least, just like when people go to an fsbo, they realize fsbo isn't paying commission, and will make their offer lower according to that. The only reason a buyer would not use an agent, is because they believe they will save money this way. So, thinking that a buyer who isn't using an agent will offer you the same amount as if they were using an agent is a bit naive. They woud take whatever their agent's commission would be and offer that much less than whatever price they were going to offer.

Of course, since seller's contract is with the listing agent, seller will be paying the full commission regardless of buyer having or not having an agent. Unless seller had a clause that listing agent will reduce commission if he gets both sides of the deal. But then the seller loses a good part of what an agent brings, so, you'd pay less but you'd get less as well.

It's easier to get a better price without a realtor. This isn't what Realtors will tell you.
If you are selling a home and you have two offers:
1. Person without a Realtor offer 2% below your asking price.
2. Person with Realtor is willing to pay full asking price, but you have to pay the Realtor 4-7%
What would you do?
Save $10,000 and go without a Realtor.

I would highly recommend that you use a buyer's agent for any property you are purchasing. You are up against a professional and you need representation of your own. You can make an offer on a home with a contingency that your home sells. Expect that there will a 48 or 72 hour "kick out" clause, meaning that the home will continue to be marketed and, if a viable offer comes in, you will have 48 or 72 hours to prove that you are ready, willing and able to close.

I DO NOT recommend to my buyer clients that they enter into contracts contingent upon their home selling. It binds you to the property and if a better property comes on the market you are out of luck, unless you can get a release from the first contract.

Karin Baldwin
RE/MAX 1st Olympic

Tracy,
A sellers agent represents the seller. Now if you ask them to represent you, then they become a dual agent. So they cannot advise or negotiate for you. I would get my own agent a buyer's agent since the commission will come out of the sellers proceeds. That way you have someone looking out for just your best interest.

Larry Story
Coldwell Banker Triad

In the greater Chicago area (where you are), a 95.6% offer (which you're talking about) is possible. A lot depends on how long the property has been on the market, what's the seller's motivation, are they willing to accept your home-sale contingency?

I always believe that it's better to use your own agent, rather than use the listing agent who's loyalties lie with the seller, instead of you.

Why would you not sure an agent? Just out of curiousity.
Regardless, you can offer anythign with any contingencies wheather you go with an agent or not.
Offerign 200k on a 210k list price is certanly acceptable (unless the house is under priced and just went on the market) contingency of selling your own house before buying a new one is rather unpopular, especially in todays market. How long have your house been on the market, how many showings, offers?

You might be able to get an aceepted agreement with a kick out clause (basicaly they can cancel agreement if another buyers makes an offer while you are still trying to sell your house) Also, is your house listed with an agent? Why not ask that agent this question.