Home Buying in New York>Question Details

Firefly4164, Other/Just Looking in

Do I need a buyer's broker?

Asked by Firefly4164, Sun Jan 15, 2012

I found this condo on craigslist and contacted the seller's agent to view it. She was on vacation so I had to wait a week to view the property, and in the meantime, I contacted a buyer's broker. When he asked the seller's agent to view the condo (not telling her it was me), she said she did not co-broke. I decided to view the condo on my own and now I want to make an offer.

Do I need to involve my buyer's agent? Or can I just make an offer on my own and hire a real estate attorney to take care of everything?

Help the community by answering this question:

Answers

127
BEST ANSWER
Firefly,

Joseph is correct. Not only is there no "standard industry commission or co-broke" All commission and fees are negotiable. In fact, agents who discuss commission with agents from other firms in person or online are violating federal anti-trust laws. It may be considered "collusion".

A broker that doesn't co-broke is neither unethical or illegal. There are different types of brokerage business models. There are flat fee and discount brokers and VOWS, they are not illegal or unethical they are different.
They may not be full service brokers. They offer limited services. I personally don't think they are very good business models but I seriously believe that we have to avoid being quick to accuse others of unethical and illegal actions.

Is it ethical to accuse a broker of unethical or even "illegal" behavior without specific knowledge of unethical or illegal actions?

I'm associated with the largest brokerage in NYC. We co-broke, we are a full service brokerage but other real estate business models exist albeit a small market segment but they are not illegal.

The condo in Astoria is not a pocket listing because it was advertised. You saw it on Craigslist. A pocket listing is when a broker has a listing and keeps it a secret except for certain clients usually in their own firm.

While I recommend buyer representation and in NY buyers are entitled to representation there is no law that a buyer's agent must be paid by the seller or seller’s agent. Co-broke agreements are between member firms that belong to the same real estate board or MLS or have reciprocal cooperation agreements. Buyers in NY are entitled to their own representation but in some cases the buyer pays their broker not the seller or seller's broker.

Most brokers co-broke because it's smart business, it makes sense, it is the best way to sell a property but there is no state law that mandates cooperation between brokers.

I bought my apartment without a broker years before I became a broker. It turned out to be a great financial decision. It wasn't brain surgery. In my opinion a bad broker is worse than having no broker. I have seen brokers lose apartments for their clients because they were incompetent and lacked training.

You live in the neighborhood, you did research, you know prices and what you are willing to pay. By law the seller’s agent must disclose who she represents. As a seller’s agent she does not represent your interest as the buyer. However in dealing with you the buyer, a seller’s agent should exercise reasonable skill and care in performance of the agent’s duties. She must deal honestly, fairly and in good faith; and disclose all facts known to the agent materially affecting the value or desirability of property, except otherwise provided by law.

Knowing that make the offer, specify your price terms and contingencies. Don’t tell her any personal information that gives the seller an advantage. Make sure your lawyer protects your deposit and interests in the contract.

Go for it! Good Luck! I hope you get it.

Mitchell Hall, Associate Broker
The Corcoran Group
917-312-0924
mhall@corcoran.com
Web Reference: http://nycblogestate.com
4 votes Thank Flag Link Tue Jan 17, 2012
Mitchell Hall, Real Estate Pro in New York, NY
MVP'08
Contact
Sounds a little sketchy - let us know how it went.
2 votes Thank Flag Link Sat Feb 11, 2012
You should always use a buyer's agent. Your real estate attorney is not going to negioate for you, make sure repairs are done, come with you on the final walk through, help you with your loan, etc... A real estate attorney is just going to make sure you have clean title. Also, I can't believe an agent doesn't co-broke - they are to respresent the seller - not just try to get both sides of the transaction. Ask your agent to investigate this further as to why they don't co-broke. But by all means, get an agent that represents you and only you!
2 votes Thank Flag Link Wed Feb 1, 2012
Sounds like you made the right decision. Some states don't even allow dual agency because they have determined that it simply is NOT in the best interest of the consumer. There is an inherent & unavoidable conflict in it that leaves you unprotected. Stick with your gut on having a buyer agent - it's the best way to keep your needs from being ignored.
2 votes Thank Flag Link Wed Jan 25, 2012
I would strongly advise you against making an offer and permitting the Sellers agent to effectively engage in dual agency. The fact that they don't co-broke is already a red flag to me and should give reason to pause and wonder why not? The listing agent has a fiduciary responsibility to the Seller and I would not trust them to offer you good counsel.

I write about Buyer Brokering regularly and have attached a link to my latest post on the subject here on Trulia.

If you are put in a position where you would have to compensate your buyer broker directly, the offer should be written up to clearly indicate to the seller that this is the case and that it has been factored into your offering price. They should be aware that they should demand their agent cut their commission accordingly. Bear in mind this will increase your upfront out of pocket expenses significantly and I don't know if you are in a position to do this or not.
2 votes Thank Flag Link Wed Jan 25, 2012
Just to update everybody, I ultimately decided not to proceed with this condo. I did feel that the seller's agent was not working in my best interest, and since this is my first time buying a home, I would appreciate having a buyer's agent on "my side". I had many questions about the condo, which were never answered. Also, the kitchen would need to be completely torn down and renovated, which would cost a considerable amount, and would ultimately make this a much bigger project than I can probably handle on my own.
2 votes Thank Flag Link Tue Jan 24, 2012
"I personally would always utilize a buyers broker, to best represent me. A house is a large investment, therefore; you want someone, tottaly in your corner."

Great, can you explain what happens in your corner that gives that "best" representation and totality that exists in your corner? 99.999% of agents say this. Not one can explain anything different that is done more than the listing agent. Never heard how an agent can get the house for less, nor can they explain what they do that makes it better. It is just a self serving remark to make a buyer come to you for the sale.

"however it's well worth the effort to engage the services of your own agent"

Ahh.. Explain the "well worth" part.. how so?

"Only then do you know there is someone who is putting your interests ahead of all others"

Sure, because the buyer agent is getting paid.. that is why you have their "best interest". But why would you think the listing agent could not offer the same service?
1 vote Thank Flag Link Tue Mar 6, 2012
" It sounds to me like the seller's agent is only thinking of their bottom line which causes great concern"

What is your great concern? Why does it sound to you like te seller agent s only thinking about their bottom line? Where do you read that?

The post reads the seller agency does not co-broke. Maybe it is an exclusive listng...

Detail that concern.. why should this buyer be concerned? What do you imagine will happen?
1 vote Thank Flag Link Wed Feb 29, 2012
"But a buyer's broker can help you out tremendously. A buyer's broker is required by law to get you the best price and terms in your housing search. A buyer's broker is a home buying specialist that can help you through this process. It is good to have someone on your side."

This is where the whole "demand a buyer’s agent" thing gets silly.

What Dom, do you do or would you do to get this house for the buyer more than the listing agent would do? Let’s get past the whole adversarial thing.. it is nonsense. What are your specialist tactics that will get this house cheaper? What exactly will you do on the "side" of the buyer that the listing agent cannot?

The Listing agent can pull comps and do a "cma" for the buyer also.. And present that to the buyer, yes. Same as you would.

People say the Realtor is "greedy" o.k.. How so? The Listing agent wants to sell the house them self because the buyer came to them directly .. Now, I spend 3 hours with someone and show them the house and all of its advantages and so on, create a relationship with them too.. Which the listing agent can do.. Why would I want to have that person call in another agent.. for what? There is nothing that a new agent can now do to get this house any cheaper than the seller wants to sell it. Period.

When I work as a buyer’s agent, yes, I take care of my client and close the transaction. But never in an adversarial stance. Usually I want the buyer and seller to speak and have a good relationship. It makes for a great deal.

The worst transactions I have ever had was with some schmoes that call themselves exclusive buyers agents.. Horribletransactions, which in fact, the poor buyers actually PAID MORE for the homes that they bought BECAUSE of the agents! Yes! Both Transactions!

So, what are the specialist tatics and what on your side stuff do you do?
1 vote Thank Flag Link Wed Feb 29, 2012
Attorneys Practice Law--A Realtor is the Real Estate Expert! You do not need a Buyer's Broker-mainly because the seller is paying the commission and will communicate and negoiate through thier Agent. My best advice is to research the area and work with an Experienced Agent who is familiar with the area of your choice and can advise you of the values, recent sales and guide you through the process.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Wed Feb 22, 2012
In all cases if you have problems the Buyers Agent Agreement if you signed one will not be valid. It is better to use a full time Real Estater Broker or Agency. I was the Judge in Arkansas for over 6 years and these buyers agency agreements will not hold up if problems arise.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Mon Feb 20, 2012
Only hire a buyer's agent if you want someone protecting your best interest. You have the right to representation if you want it, but that is your decision. A real estate attorney is not an expert buyer's agent... not even close and that can make a big difference.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Tue Feb 14, 2012
I would recommend you hire a buyers agent even if you have to pay them to assist you. Be VERY careful - I know of a buyer who found a condo on craigslist and was dealing directly with the "owner" of the condo. The buyer was paying cash and the "owner" wants to close quickly. As things turned out it was a scam and the so called "owner" didn't really own the unit.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sun Feb 12, 2012
did the buyer agent you didnt use find this place in the local MLS as well? If so, stated compensation in the MLS agent description is protected. If it was an in-house listing, meaning no reciprocity for other agents since it was MLS exempt, then seller can "save" the co-op commission. That doesnt make sense though, then its like a FSBO with an agent to handle the details for partial commission.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Thu Feb 9, 2012
That is definitely a tough situation. If at all possible I would recommend using a buyers broker, so that you have an agent that is responsible for your fiduciary concern. It doesnt do any good to speculate why the selling agent will not cooperate with another broker. I do know the selling agent must not be a REALTOR, being a member of NAR, for our code of ethics doesnt allow such treatment of other REALTORS. You might contact your local Association of Realtors to get more answers.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Tue Jan 31, 2012
That sounds like an interesting situation. I could see her saying she doesn't pay a buyers agent but to not allow you any representation while you look at the place sounds unusual to me. I think it is always best when the seller allows a potential buyer as much representation as they need agents, inspectors, etc. This could help them down the road if there are any hidden issues (just my opinion I'm not an attorney)
1 vote Thank Flag Link Mon Jan 30, 2012
Absolutely. It is always in your best interest to be represented in every real eatate transaction. It does not matter if it is a family, friend, or stranger, it will make the transaction much easier and every detail will be ironed out on your behalf. You will save time and money by hiring an agent to represent you.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Mon Jan 30, 2012
@ Mniakeplace in White Bear Lake, MN...

I realize that you are not working in the New York market, so things may be very different where you are from. However this question was posted in the "Home Buying In New York" category, and I must respectfully disagree with your comment, especially in regards to buying an apartment in Manhattan. I strongly believe that just like sellers have their Seller's Brokers/Agents representing them, and trying to sell the properties they represent for as much money as poosible, it is extremely important for buyers to have an agent representing, and protecting their best interests.

Sincerely,
Lindsey Newman
Senior Real Estate Sales Associate
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sun Jan 29, 2012
you don't need a buyers agent but I would get one it doesn't cost you anything..
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sun Jan 29, 2012
Yes, a buyers agent represents you, while a sellers agent represents the seller first.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sat Jan 28, 2012
It is always best to be represented by an agent. You don't want to pay too much for that condo!
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sat Jan 28, 2012
It is always best for you to have your own representation. A selling agent represents the seller. Different states have different ways to handle dual agency and a buyers representative should know the correct way to proceed.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sat Jan 28, 2012
In Georgia the process can be simple or complicated depending upon the nature of the property you're interested in. A foreclosure or short sale have a whole set of issues that a buyers agent can really help you with. Additionally, as it's no cost to you (the seller pays the commission) why would you question bringing on additional support in the process?

An interesting article on this topic can be seen here - http://goo.gl/PgZ0V - I've shortened the link but the article is called Home Buyers Go Hunting Alone -- More house-hunters are rejecting the services of so-called buyer's agents. Is that smart? on http://www.smartmoney.com
Web Reference: http://goo.gl/PgZ0V
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sat Jan 28, 2012
in NY State, real estate buyers are entitle to representation even if the listing agent will not co-broke. The listing agent should have allowed you to view the property with the Buyer's Agent. With regards to compensation you would probably have to pay it and this is a discussion the buyer's agent should have had with you when you signed the contract for representation.
This is a big investment, so having your own representation is important.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Fri Jan 27, 2012
I do think that you will be best served if you have a Buyer's Agent assisting you, but if you have seen the property on your own then it may be difficult for a Buyer's Agent to make the case for procuring cause. If the agent/seller is not willing to compensate a Buyer's Agent and you have already seen the property without her, then I think you are on your own. I would recommend that you hire a very good real estate attorney to assist you.

Good luck and best,
Jeanne Feenick
Unwavering Commitment to Service, Unsurpassed Results
1 vote Thank Flag Link Fri Jan 27, 2012
Think of it like an attorney, if you was in court for something would you like to use your opponent's attorney?
1 vote Thank Flag Link Thu Jan 26, 2012
It is in your best interest to get a buyer's agent to represent you. The cost for this service is already included in the commission and it does not cost you anything. Good luck!
1 vote Thank Flag Link Thu Jan 26, 2012
Dear Home Buying in New York,

Most buyers think going directly to the seller's agent will save from them paying commission when in fact its the sellers that pay the commission for both the seller's and buyer's agent to bring a deal together.

It's best to hire a buyer's agent so you have representation through the negotiating, home inspection and closing. A real estate attorney does take over after the P&S is signed but a buyer's agent will make sure you are informed every step of the way.

Hope this helps.

Michele Miller
Keller Williams Realty

508-281-2180
"BUY OR SELL WITH MICHELE"
http://www.livinginworcesterma.com
1 vote Thank Flag Link Thu Jan 26, 2012
I always recomnend having a realtor representing you. It doesn't cost you anything since all commisions are paid by the seller to both agents.

If the seller doesnt want to get any agents involved in the transaction, then definitely hire a lawyer to represent you.

I hope this helps and good luck in your purchase.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Thu Jan 26, 2012
If you are a buyer it is always a good idea to have a buyer broker on your side with only your interests in mind. Someone with experience to help answer all your questions. The selling broker is there to make sure of the Sellers best interest .
1 vote Thank Flag Link Thu Jan 26, 2012
Having a buyer's broker can be beneficial to the buyer on many levels...Let's focus on the most important ones.

When you have a broker as a buyer, you have someone working to find you the perfect home, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, Th broker should practice due diligence and keep the buyer informed not only on the market, but of what the future of the local market holds.

There is no cost to the buyer when you use a buyer's broker. Essentially, the buyer's broker works for free. The broker only gets paid after you find your dream home and the broker is paid only by the seller.

Therefore, a buyer's broker makes total sense! You have someone looking for properties for you, informing you on the market and negotiating on your behalf for free! Can't get a better deal there!
1 vote Thank Flag Link Thu Jan 26, 2012
If you know the market and know what like properties are selling for, not just what they are listed for, an attorney will make sure you legal rights are protected. If you are new to the market a buyer's rep can help determine what a fair price for the property would be. Understand the seller may not agree. An appraisal will also help confirm your purchase price.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Thu Jan 26, 2012
We agree with the response below. Use your instincts. Keep in mind for future purposes as well that the seller agent has the seller's interests as their cheif concern, which is why some buyers choose to use a buyers agent. Good luck with your acquisition!
1 vote Thank Flag Link Wed Jan 25, 2012
Firefly,

I'm sorry for this deal not turning out as you have expected it. More opportunities will present themselves, especially closer to Spring time when more decide to sell in a more active market.

As far as co-broking goes, let me make a point for all of my colleagues who keep on stressing how odd this practice is. In New York, if you belong to REBNY, you are automatically required to co-broke 50/50 with rest of REBNY member firms. In outer boroughs, such as Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island, Bronx, Long Island, majority of real estate firms do not belong to REBNY, and I don't believe (this can be confirmed by MLS and NAR member brokers), are required to co-broke 50/50. This may differ from office to office as most are independently owned.

Take Brooklyn for example, and I’m experiencing this first hand. My buyer is looking for a 1 bedroom cooperative. Out of 6 agents I’ve contacted in the past week, only 3 are co-broking. Out of these three, the total commission being paid by the seller is only 3%. Now let’s take this 3% that the broker needs to split with me. We each get 1.5%. Let’s take the 1.5% and split this further between us and our firm, and let’s assume it’s an even split. Both agents are now left with 0.75% on the table. On a $200,000 co-op the commission to take home, before taxes, before taking the time to show, before gas, train rides, cabs, that’s only $750. This same amount can be earned from a single rental in one weeks-worth of work compared to months of showing and marketing.

Yes, while not having agent’s co-broke is extremely frustrating, because you aren’t able to show a property to your buyer and leaving greedy, unprofessional agents out of this picture. This can be placed on the shoulders sellers who refuse to offer higher reward for having their property sold.


~Alen
1 vote Thank Flag Link Wed Jan 25, 2012
Sounds like the agent doesn't want to share the commission with another agent. I would let her know that you are concerned about not being represented, and would like to have another agent represent you. You should not have to hire someone to represent you the seller typically offers to pay compensation.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Mon Jan 23, 2012
@Lindsey, I was taught that too. Several years ago before buyer's agency we technically all worked for the seller. Agents that worked with buyers were sub agents of the seller's agent so the buyers were called customers. The seller was the principal.

I always looked out for my buyers interests even though before the agency disclosure law technically that was wrong. Back in the old days if a seller found out that I told my buyer the seller's asking price was too high they could have accused me of not having a fiduciary duty to seller and not paid my commission because we all worked for the seller. Fortunately that never happened.

That has all changed now and buyers can have a true buyer's agent that has a fiduciary duty to the buyer. It doesn't matter who pays the commission.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sat Jan 21, 2012
Mitchell Hall, Real Estate Pro in New York, NY
MVP'08
Contact
@ Lindsey Newman: You said

"However as a specialized Buyer's Agent, I have heard too many stories from my customers that indicate to me that the vast majority of Sellers' Agents do not disclose this information because it is to the sellers' and their advantage not to do so".

FYI: A Buyer's Agent does not have customers they have buyer clients. A customer is a buyer of a Seller's Agent. A buyer who buys directly from a seller's agent without their own representation is a customer of the Seller's agent. A customer is an unrepresented buyer.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sat Jan 21, 2012
Mitchell Hall, Real Estate Pro in New York, NY
MVP'08
Contact
Firefly,

I would listen to everything Mitchell Hall had to say, as his answer was most complete and thorough.

No offense to anyone who submitted their input, but if Firefly listens to 95% of recommendations, he/she will lose out on what they already know to be a good purchase. They live in the area, they know the building, they did the research, they know the price, they know how much they want to offer and the broker isn’t co-broking. In this situation, if Firefly is to hire a buyer’s broker, they will be required to pay a commission fee. Once again in this specific situation, this probably doesn’t make financial sense.

What I would suggest is to ask the agent to represent you as the buyer in a duel agency (assuming seller agrees to this), even if they don’t and nothing is signed, you can still go ahead and proceed cautiously with this purchase. Another suggestion, if you show doubt or worry is to hire an agent as a consultant. By doing this, you can agree on a different fee.

For agents in New York that keep on stressing REBNY, please understand that once you go outside of Manhattan, like Queens, Brooklyn, Staten Island, Bronx, Long Island, a very large number of firms belong to NAR, MLS or none of the above. Only in Manhattan will you see over 90% of firms affiliated with REBNY.

Regarding pocket listings, unethical behavior, non-exclusive listings, I hope someone with legal background can chime in. A broker, hired by the client (aka anyone who pays their commission), works for them and in their interest. This means, that if the seller has certain guidelines, the broker has to follow them. An example would be, not to advertise to anyone outside of their own brokerage, period…

On that note, Firefly, I fish you best of luck. You seem to know what you are doing, you have the information, you’ve done your homework and if you believe that this is a great buy, don’t let others discourage you and risk losing out.

Best of luck.
Alen Moshkovich
Prudential Douglas Elliman
(o): (212)418-2066
(c): (347)277-9304
AMoshkovich@elliman.com
1 vote Thank Flag Link Tue Jan 17, 2012
Personally, I take great exception to the comment about some so-called "industry co-broke standard." There is no such thing as it simply doesn't exist, full stop. The Real Estate Board of New York requires it's members to give an even split of a commission in a co-broke transaction but that is hardly an "Industry standard." The Queens and Long Island board (LIBOR) does not require an even split. This one comment has implications for the entire brokerage community. Firefly, I suggest you steer clear of any agent who claims this to be so.

One thing more. This listing broker is required by NY State law upon first substantial contact to have you sign off a NY State disclosure form. It's not a contract but it defines your relationship with this broker and exactly who she represents (not you). If this wasn't done she is in breach of the law.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Mon Jan 16, 2012
Why I would turn down a FREE service to protect my interests in a rel estate transaction behooves me. DId you know that 40% of buyers choose to go it alone?

I personally, even if I was not a real estate broker, would never go unproptected. Especially since Manhattan real estate is such a complicated animal, I would want to make that I have someone being my gate keeper.

Read this article on specifics of what Manhattan real estate brokers do that can help you--for FREE.

http://www.buyandsellmanhattan.com/how-to-manhattan-apts/don…

I am including another article for you on "How to Buy an Apartment in Manhattan and Get the Best Interest Rate"

http://www.buyandsellmanhattan.com/how-to-manhattan-apts/how…

Jennifer Chiongbian
SVP/ Associate Broker
Rutenberg Realty NYC
9172502284
1 vote Thank Flag Link Mon Jan 16, 2012
Have your agent write up an offer including their commision.

Worst case, you can always pay the commision out of pocket to your agent, who should save you money & time, as well as offer expertise in the area you are purchasing.

Well worth it.

Was this answer helpful? Give it a "thumbs up" if so!

The Marie Souza Team - Top Selling on Cape Cod
Cape Cod Real Estate Services
Phone: 508-790-2000
info@mariesouzateam.com
http://www.MarieSouzaTeam.com
1 vote Thank Flag Link Mon Jan 16, 2012
Firefly,

I agree with Armen. Only a weak buyer's agent would let a listing agent who doesn't co-broke stop him from showing you and making an offer on your behalf. Her deal with the seller is between her and her seller.

While she doesn't have to co-broke, an offer from a buyer can include any terms including their buyer broker's fee. The seller accepts or declines the offer not their agent. She is required by law to submit all offers. Most sellers want to sell. Most sellers will pay for a ready willing and able buyer.

Unfortunately a seller in this day and age that agrees to hire a broker that doesn't co-broke is not a smart seller. However, It may actually work to your advantage because the pool of buyers will be limited. She doesn't co-broke and she goes on vacation. It doesn't sound like she is trying to sell the apartment. You may be their only offer.

Unfortunately, attorney's take care of due diligence, contracts and closings they don't negotiate price and terms. Brokers do that.

If you must have this apartment and you didn't sign an exclusive buyer's broker agreement, if you think you can negotiate and represent your own interest you can try. I don't recommend it. Make sure she discusses and has you sign agency disclosure. You have a choice of dual agency she represents you and seller or you are an unrepresented buyer. In my opinion unrepresented buyer is better than dual agency. You don't want her to represent you and the seller.

There is a good chance with this listing agent you will never get to the closing table.

Feel free to contact me if you need more information or any help.

Mitchell Hall, Associate Broker
The Corcoran Group
917-312-0924
mhall@corcoran.com
Web Reference: http://nycblogestate.com
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sun Jan 15, 2012
Mitchell Hall, Real Estate Pro in New York, NY
MVP'08
Contact
The buyer broker you hired should have answered all your questions by now. Also part of REPRESENTING you is not taking NO from a broker representing the Seller.

Get an experienced team of a broker, an attorney and a loan rep behind you and you will get a deal done.
1 vote Thank Flag Link Sun Jan 15, 2012
First of all, that's unethical and illegal that the listing agent said he wouldn't co-broke. If the listing agent isn't co-broking then the seller is better off just listing it through a traditional FSBO.

The whole point of listing with an agent is because the agent can co-broke and engage the 90% of buyers who are represented by buyers' agents.

With that said, you should absolutely engage a buyers' agent. You have every right to elect representation at any stage of the buying process. You are paying for it so why not take advantage of it?

While you're at it, why not get a broker commission rebate from your buyer's agent?
0 votes Thank Flag Link Wed Sep 21, 2016
I see you're in NYC - what neighborhood was the property in? Most brokers in Manhattan/Brooklyn are members of REBNY which means they're contractually obligated to "co-broke" with buyers' agents. That means they are required by contract to share 50% of their commission and work with buyer agents at all other REBNY member firms. The fact that they said in writing that they don't co-broke shows you how low IQ many of these agents are -- you should report them to REBNY and get them fined up to 10Gs.

Almost all other REBNY members will co-broke and work with your buyers' agent, which means there should be no reason for you not to work with one. This is especially true if you're willing to do some of the work in exchange for a buyer agent commission rebate. Essentially the buyer agent will share some of the commission split he earns from the listing broker with you at close. Typically 1% off your sale price which is significant. Go with a reputable NYC firm like Hauseit if you choose this route. Good luck.
0 votes Thank Flag Link Mon Apr 11, 2016
Technically, if your agent does not belong to the same MLS as the seller's agent, the seller's agent can deny compensation- or co-broke, but cannot deny viewing. What can be done is to assure your buyer's agent is truly, by agreement your buyer's agent, having this buyer's agent contact the selling agent to let them know who they are, and in most cases as this, the buyer compensates their buyer's agent the commission or compensation they would have received in a co-broke. A deal being done at 6% for instance, if co-borked, would net 3% to both sides. In the case where the buyer's agent is being compensated by the buyer, 3 % would then be paid to the buyer's agent as compensation, or a compensation agreed upon by buyer and their agent.
0 votes Thank Flag Link Sun Jun 16, 2013
Realtors are the Experts when it comes to the due diligence period, area information, what to look for when viewing property. The property could be researched and an agreement could be reached for you to retain the services of a Buyers Agent. I am sorry you hit a bump in the road, which gives Realtors a Black Eye when consumers want information in reference to property. If you have moved forward with the transaction, remember the agent represents the seller, that is looking out for themselves to obtain both sides of the commission, which is a common practice here on Long Island, if that is the case, please tell me that he or she provided you with an Agency Disclosure which is required by law once you have entered the property prior to viewing it! Please feel free to contact me for additional information.
0 votes Thank Flag Link Sun Jun 16, 2013
It seems to me like everyone that is pro agent considers the buyer mentally challenged. "Uhhhhh 3+4 euallll bananna. I is too stupid to know what good deal are."

If you are buying a home you more or less know where you want the home and what kind of home you can afford. You can use the internet to compare prior listings with simular size, time of sale and amenities.

It's not like the agent will walk into a home and say, hmm...this needs to be repainted, +500bucks, the doors need to be replaced. You should keep those things in mind and be an educated buyer. One day we will live in a day and age where stupidity is frowned upon. You will not have to interact with college dropouts that took a 2 week course and put on the title of Real Estate Agent.
0 votes Thank Flag Link Thu Dec 20, 2012
Well, it all depends on how much attention and representation you want? I personally would always utilize a buyers broker, to best represent me. A house is a large investment, therefore; you want someone, tottaly in your corner. If you have any other questions or comments, you can contact me, I am an agent at Exit Realty Top Properties.

Ciro Traino
347-255-0863
cctraino@gmail.com
http://www.facebook.com/C Ciro Traino
http://www.exittopproperties.com/
0 votes Thank Flag Link Tue Mar 6, 2012
Ginny Lee
I dont know how to reply to your statement regarding transactional brokerage, TB. In FL law a TB agent doesnt represent either party in the transaction, but the transaction itself. Furthermore you have a CUSTOMER relationship with a buyer or seller, not creating a CLIENT relationship as defined by agency law and the NAR code of ethics. TB is worse than disclosed dual agency as far as watering down representation vs. zero representation of TB.
0 votes Thank Flag Link Sat Mar 3, 2012
1 2 3
Search Advice
Ask our community a question
Email me when…

Learn more

Copyright © 2016 Trulia, Inc. All rights reserved.   |  
Have a question? Visit our Help Center to find the answer