RE agent ethics question:
 

I'm looking at a property in MN. that I found on Zillow. I wanted to talk to the listing agent, so I called the agent who's picture and number was right under the photos and description.

It turns out that he wasn't the listing agent, just some random dude who pays for his placement on Zillow listings. I made an appointment with him and viewed the property before realizing that he was not the listing agent. I do not need the buyers agent on this and would like to deal directly with the listing agent. Since he did show me the property, (twice actually because I needed to get in there with my contractor), I guess he is entitled to his cut of the commission if I buy the place.

Lesson learned on the whole Zillow thing, but now I would like to deal directly with the listing agent myself because this is an all cash deal with no contingencies, no appraisal or inspection, etc. can I just call the listing agent myself and explain to him what happened and that I'd like to deal with him myself? I don't need a middleman to possibly alter communication between us or otherwise screw things up. Did I mention that my "buyer's agent" is all of about 25? :rolleyes:

He's actually a good kid and I like him. He's working for a living, shows up on time to the minute and he has a lot of hustle. He will do ok in life.

What say you? :)

You'll do better going through him than you would if you were dealing directly with the seller's agent and the commission will be the same either way. If you represented yourself the listing agent would get the whole commission. With a buyer's agent they just split it. But the dynamics of simply having someone else present your offer makes a huge difference in your favor. I can't explain it, but it is true, at least in my experience.

Anyway, no, I don't think it was unethical or even unusual for an agent to advertise like that. I would not have expected the agent in the advertisement on Zillow to be the listing agent. The listing agent is always identified as such. If you see an agent and it doesn't specifically say "listing agent" you're not dealing with the listing agent.

I did not think that it was unethical for him to advertise on Zillow, it was just a learning experience because I thought I was calling the listing agent. Lesson learned. If I wanted to use a buyers agent, I have one here that I've known since 1st grade. That was 1966. :)

I also have no interest in screwing the kid out of his commission, as I plainly stated in the OP. I'm simply asking about the ethics of dealing w the listing agent directly. He has all the info I need. Time is of the essence.

There is no questionable ethics on your part dealing directly with the listing agent. They'd probably prefer that as they will claim 100% of the sales commission.

There are plenty of opportunities for the listing agent to do unethical things to either the buyer or seller in that situation. The agent may or may not give into temptation.

I essentially used the listing agent to buy a house a few years ago. It worked out great for me, as she wanted the sale and had a good idea what offers the seller would realistically entertain.

I would not hesitate to cut the agent out of the picture if all he's done is show you the property a few times.

Deal, as you say, directly with the listing agent. Too many chefs spoil the sauce, and you need to communicate as well as possible with the seller.

I pay a LOT of commissions and never screw an agent out of his pay. But in this case, the guy knew or should have known that he's not really entitled to a commission.

Depending on the laws in your state, dealing directly with the listing agent means you're essentially unrepresented. The listing agent will owe you nothing more than fair and honest dealings while his fiduciary responsibilities lie exclusively with the seller. This could result in you not receiving material information that you would have otherwise been privy to.

If all the buyer's agent did was show you the property a couple of times then you have no legal responsibility to him, unless, that is, you signed a Buyer's Agency Agreement with him. That said, you contacted him, questioned him and consumed his time. I doubt he's any more excited to work for nothing than you are.

ethically? as in a high moral standard?
why would you choose to not pay for his services?

If you don't plan to give the kid the shaft, perhaps you should discuss it with him. There might be a way to get him paid, while dealing directly with the seller's agent. Alternatively, perhaps this discussion may alleviate your concerns about having him act on your behalf.

Norm K also raises some valid concerns...

If the "agent" was truly acting as his agent, that would be one thing. That means being hired to go out and look for property for you to buy, and contact the sellers, perhaps assist with due diligence if you're really unsophisticated, etc etc. But being stumbled upon by chance and erroneously contacted through Zillow does not create an obligation, whether it be professional, moral, or ethical, to pay the guy. He did not earn it.

Please read the OP post before commenting. No one is talking about cutting him out of his commission. :rolleyes:

Thank you from the Pelican community.

And now it's a moot point anyways because 5 min. after writing post #4, the listing agent returned my call and told me that it was sold an hour before.

THAT'S why I wanted to deal w the ****ing listing agent.

Trust me Denis, the kid will learn that he can't be hired by accident. And you are smart enough to know that too many layers will screw up your deal. Go direct. There is an aphorism in Proverbs I think that says do not trust your message to be carried by a fool. I never forgot that lesson. It's very appropriate here, and in all real estate deals.

Edit: OK, I think the point was made. Sorry man!!!

Thanks. This was a house I really wanted. I acted as fast as possible getting my contractor in to see it, (a necessary step in this case), it was a project but w great essentials.

I don't need a buyer's agent. And I'm dealing w properties where my offer might not be the highest but I offer other incentives so every thousand dollars matters and I want the listing agent to be motivated to push my offer.

My offer on places like this goes like this: all cash, no inspection, no appraisal, no contingencies and here is a check for X dollars, (5 figures), if the deal falls through for ANY reason on my end, you keep that $$. 7 day closing.

It gets their attention. This was an estate/probate deal. :(

You should list it, that's the only way to sell RE. I'm not in the market for property in Rochester or anywhere outside of very specific areas of Minneapolis and St. Paul.

Oh noo! I can only imagine how sweet that price was. Double sorry :(

The kid seemed to think that it was worth $50k under the asking price as well. He's a nice guy but I know the market better than him and I don't even live here. Just started looking.

He had no sense of urgency on it, thought no one would want it. It was beyond cool and it had a 2.5 car garage w heat. GD it.

If he showed you the house and was not the listing agent, he had every right to the portion of the commission that goes to the buyer's agent. You implicitly hired him and his time is of value. He could have sued you and/or the selling agent for a portion of the commission. He should have had you sign an agreement as such to protect himself, but not having one does not limit his ability to sue. Be sure that if the house sold to you, he would check the public records and know...and his broker would go after the commission.

He would have presented whatever offer you instructed him to.

Does no one read the fking OP before replying?

Why you want to shaft the nice young RE agent, Denis?????

Normally you do not want to purchase from the listing agent. In theory, you won't be represented correctly in what is typically a risky, complex transaction. The buyer's agent works on your behalf, and with supposed expert knowledge of the property and market in general. The buyer's agent helps you negotiate a fair price based on the property's condition and other market factors. The listing agent doesn't care about these factors. He only wants to sell the house. That's the theory, anyway. I've had buyer's agents work on my behalf and do some pretty ruthless negotiating that have saved me tens of thousands in purchase prices.

I've never felt the need to...does it bother you :)?

Apparently in Minnesota, they commonly use arbitration to determine if there is an ethical violation where there is a commission dispute. Here are some of the things they look at:
http://www.saarealtors.com/PDF/ProStandards/ProcuringCauseGuidelines.pdf
This is the applicable portion:
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1470263982.jpg

I read the OP and every subsequent post. Perhaps you could explain what I missed instead of being sarcastic. Don't ask for help if you really just want to piss folks off who attempt to provide advice.

Yes, I have bought a great deal of real estate (and sold some) and my wife has a license.

Now for a serious question...maybe it varies by state. Here, unless you specificially contract a "buyer's agent" as a purchaser to be your agent, then both the listing agent and the agent showing in the OP have fiduciary oblgations that lie with the seller...there is no buyer's agent???

There is no such thing as an implicit contract when it comes to real estate transactions.

Secondly, Denis would be teaching the kid how these transactions work. I don't know where you guys get the idea that he would not be properly represented.

Third, what Denis was asking about was breaking protocol, which I do all the time to my agent, who by the way, is a lazy POS. What I pay him for is to cold call, and that is worth a few 100K per year. Otherwise, running title, posting notices, Phase I, appraisals, insurance, etc is beyond what a rookie agent can do.

If you purchase a property subsequent to a realtor showing you the property, he can likely make a very good case that the selling realtor should pay him his portion of the commission. If the Selling agent and his broker are not asking the question, they are very much in danger of being sanctioned for violating ethics and paying the commission (even if they did not collect the entire commission). A selling agent that did not ask you if you had talked to another agent (or shown the house by one) would be unethical and an idiot. Your not disclosing it would be equally unethical.

The reason why there are listing agreements is so that the agreement can be depositied into escrow. If the realtor makes the claim that he has some sort of agreement outside of escrow, then he's the idiot, and frankly also unethical. No written agreement equals no agreement. Anyone who has taken the real estate exam knows that. Otherwise, there would be a jillion guys claiming they should get paid, from the mailman to the gardner, who's lawn mowing skillz undoubtedly led to the sale.

No thanks. Just lookin'.

That's what I used to say in Home Depot when they cared about customer service.

The law regarding real estate transactions does vary state to state. It is wise to get an agreement with your agent in place early on to prevent confusion. Here is Minnesota's:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=82&view=chapter

The only houses I have bought in NC was without any realtor. If you buy a "for sale by owner" or convince someone to sell their home to you without it being listed...all you need is a lawyer to draw up the documents...or a closing company if you need a loan, title search, etc..

i did the exact same thing.

the zillow guy forwarded me to "michelle". we chatted and i decided to meet her...i fired my agent five minutes later and went with michelle. she was a hard working agent!!

The reason I'm getting so frustrated w this thread, (besides being livid about missing out on a house I would have bought), is because I never suggested screwing the guy who showed me the house out of his commission. I know how that part of the business works and he was very clever, IMO, getting his name on the listing on Zillow w/o actually having anything to do w the listing. He knew nothing about the house.

If I had bought the house, he would have been entitled to his share of the commission but I still wanted to communicate directly w the seller. I did not trust that he would represent me properly and I'm 100% sure that he would have fk'ed up the proposed transaction or at least not presented it as well as I could have.

In fact, when I told the listing agent my terms, he took my number "in case anything falls through."

It won't. :(

The other thing is that I have no problem w using a buyer's agent but I have my own whom I've known for decades and trust completely, plus I'd want to give them the business.

The dumbest thing you can do in RE is to try to go it alone w/o using agents. They are a major resource and if chosen carefully and taken care of properly, they can make you a lot of $$. It's a 2-way street, of course. I have friends who have been buying lots of stuff in CA. for a while, they are pros to the core and they always utilize RE agents or brokers, or at least they'd never try to go around one or cheat them. Besides being ethically inexcusable, it would be very dumb business wise. :cool:

Fair enough, but for someone who seems to think he doesn't need a buyer's agent, the very first words out of your mouth concerning a property should be: "Are you the listing agent?". As you said, lesson learned there.

Just keep in mind that anytime you deal with a listing agent as an unrepresented buyer, it just muddies the waters. In a dual-agency situation, the listing agent cannot give either party their full attention and both buyer and seller get a lower standard of care by default (which you will likely agree to in writing). That is if the listing agent is ethical and treats both parties fairly/equally. In reality, most listing agents will still favor the sellers in a dual-agency deal. The more savvy/experienced you are as a buyer (and with as few moving parts to the deal as possible), the less of an issue in may become. However, if/when things go sideways, you can come up on the short end.

For sure, you are correct. I did not ask him if he was the listing agent until 5-10 minutes into looking at the house when it became apparent that he did not know much about it. I did not know how Zillow works, now I do. :cool:

I think it's clear you weren't trying to screw the kid.

If the property does become available again, the issue can be addressed/remedied with a compensation agreement, tied to that specific property, for a specific amount of time, ignited only upon a successful closing and sale. ;)

Sold an hour before? Really? Lame.

The fact that the listing agent took your info tells me it may have an accepted offer, but that is a far cry from being "sold" (as in funded/closed/recorded).
It couldn't hurt to throw him a legitimate back-up offer. That way he will have something to present the seller (as opposed to just a verbal), and it might bode well if the deal starts to crumble.

Ahh, well if that's the case, you probably dodged a bullet. Probate sales can be an absolute nightmare that drag on for several months.
That said, in many instances/jurisdictions an accepted offer may not be binding, and is subject to confirmation by the court. It can serve just to "get the ball rolling" so to speak.
You might ask the listing agent if that offer has just been submitted, or if it has actually been confirmed/accepted by the court.

Brother could be selling the family home before mom's family entire 50/50% probate between two kids has been settled.

Your offer accepted in the meantime and finalized in writing.
Done deal?
Not by a long shot.

Sister now correctly claims crackhead brother unilaterally sold other mutual property which should have been split fairly with her, such as the car and silverware.
And (more importantly to you), that the property price was unilaterally undervalued for a quick sale and should be re-listed at market value.
Judge agrees.
Sale nullified.

(Just making this stuff up, but I'm sure it's probably already happened in the legal system whether in the hundreds or millions).

Denis has considerable resources he could call on in Minnesota if he really needed help. He's just asking for informal advice and opinions for the brain trust and he's not the kind of guy who is going to stiff a realtor who works with him. Not that you suggested that, Fint, but others did.

Not sure any of them would help me w this, Mike. Anyways, I'm saving those favors for when I kill someone and need a pardon. :)

Aw shucks Denis. If you ever kill a man who needs killin', I'll be happy to help you out.

Please don't offer your "hit man" services here on a public.....oh wait..

Nevermind....:)

Whew...thought MY "go to guy" for legal advice was headin' to the slammer....carry on!!!