Honesty, integrity and dual agency
Letter to the Editor
By Inman News, Tuesday, March 2, 2010.Re: 'Fairness in Dual Agency' (March 1)
Dear Editor:
I have had one transaction as a dual agency, because the seller and buyer agreed.
Not to create any issues, I suggested that both parties meet and discuss and negotiate the price on neutral grounds: my office. Everyone was pleased with the outcome. Honesty and integrity were not compromised.
Tina Bilazarian
Principal
Tina Bilazarian Inc.
Shrewsbury, Mass.
***
What's your opinion? Leave your comments below or send a letter to the editor.
Copyright 2010 Inman News
All rights reserved. This content may not be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in part or in whole, without written permission of Inman News. Use of this content without permission is a violation of federal copyright law.
Tweet This Page
Facebook
LinkedIn
Digg This
You must login or register to post a comment.
Submitted by Joseph Marovich on March 4, 2010 - 3:21pm.
In a perfect world there would not be dual agency. We're not there yet. That being said, it can and is being practiced perfectly well by educated agents. With a full explanation of the limitation of the fiduciary duties to both the buyer and seller and asking for their permission (consent) to act in that capacity, most of the buyers and sellers are eager to move on with the transaction and with the agent who has limited fiduciary duties. There is always the option that the buyer and/or seller seller ask for represntation from another company/agent, but I have found that very unusual. For the consumer, it's a matter of TRUST. And they trust their agent to be fair to both parties. Are some agents too much of an advocate for one side than the other, of course. And having the buyer and seller meet CAN sometimes be helpful, as mentioned.
Joseph Marovich, ABR,ASR,e-PRO, GREEN, GRI, PMN, RSPS,SRES
Inductee REBAC Hall of Fame
MAROVICH BUSINESS INSTITUTE
www.MarovichBusinessInstitute.com
732 961-9618
Submitted by chris young on March 4, 2010 - 5:46pm.
In Maryland, dual agency means that there are two agents involved in the transaction who work for the same company. One represents the buyer, the other the seller. The company has the dual agency, but the buyer and seller each have an agent representing their interests.
In a transaction where one is writing an offer for one's own listing, the agent represents the seller and the buyer signs a document acknowledging that fact. If the buyer desires representation, he/she must create that relationship with another agent, not the listing agent.
Submitted by Cindy Cara on March 7, 2010 - 3:10pm.
I had a client once, a Seller getting a divorce. Any offers needed to be submitted to her attorney who was there to protect her and her only. (I did not have the Buyer). The attorney protected the Seller so well in the Counter Offer she proposed, that the Buyer walked away. It was years ago, early 80’s, bad market, and just after the buyer walked the lender foreclosed and the seller lost the home and had a foreclosure on her record. Yes, she was protected. The buyer was not allowed to move in a week early, the patio furniture remained with the seller, and the seller did not have to pay to have a surveyor locate the corners. The attorney could never be criticized for misrepresenting or not protecting her client, but… the seller lost out while being protected.
It seems to be forgotten that we are trying to work out a solution that works best for each, not beat up the other guy. Why is it assumed that the attorney model is the best model? To me it has a major conflict of interest. Being paid by the hour, (and not when the job is done) encourages fostering dissent and prolonging dissent by the professional. If one makes more money by doing that, it that not a conflict of interest? If one is viewed as a competent professional because they looked at the transaction as a situation where they need to come out on top, not give anything away to the other side, does that not produce a conflict of interest? That type of representation is definitely appropriate for certain situations, being falsely accused of a crime etc. But a selling situation where a broker is trying to assist a seller to sell and a buyer to buy, well, it is interesting that some people recognize that they are better off working with a dual agent and actually seek them out! Dual agents will come up with creative solutions that will assist the seller and buyer to get it done!
It is fine to say we shouldn’t represent both sides. So we list a home and advertise it like the seller wants us to do. Then, as soon as a buyer calls on our ad, we have to send them away to another company (in California the agent is the designated broker – company) Huh?? We can’t show the house. We can’t write an offer if the buyer says, “I want this house”!!
There is a lot to think about with the integrity and honesty being the most important.
Cindy Cara
General Manager
Network Real Estate
generalmanager@network-realestate.com