Home » Opinion » Letter to the Editor

The dual-agency 'slam dunk'

Letter to the Editor

By Inman News, Tuesday, March 2, 2010.

Inman News

Re: 'Fairness in Dual Agency' (March 1)

Dear Editor:
If you honor the profession, and treat all parties fairly, dual Agency is a slam dunk. As a matter of fact, I prefer dual-agency transactions.

Thoroughly verify all information, inspections, deadlines, requirements and be proactive with each party.

Barbara Christ
Broker-owner
RE/MAX Gold Country
Hamilton, Mont.

***

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.

You must login or register to post a comment.

 
Submitted by Bruce Hahn on March 2, 2010 - 2:43pm.

American Homeowners Grassroots Alliance

About that "proactive" thingy: If the buyer wants to get the lowest price and the seller wants to get the highest price, how does a dual agent proactively help each attain their goal?
Bruce Hahn
American Homeowners Grassroots Alliance

 
Submitted by Nick Chucales on March 2, 2010 - 2:51pm.

Barbara,

Why would you care about honoring the profession when you act as an agent/broker? Dual agency does not allow you to honor your fiduciary duty. A true professional acts to ensure their clients needs and wants are met.

 
Submitted by Paul Howard on March 2, 2010 - 3:35pm.

So Barbara, do your customers realize before they get involved with you that you are not going to be their advocate?

Paul Howard, Broker
NJHomeBuyer.com Realty
Cherry Hill NJ 08002

 
Submitted by on March 2, 2010 - 5:45pm.

"Dual agency" is almost a self-canceling phrase.

 
Submitted by John Rakoci on March 2, 2010 - 9:13pm.

Dual agency assures no party receives representation. Dual agency - two parties same agency can work,, one agent representing both equates to 'greed before the client'.

 
Submitted by james downing on March 3, 2010 - 5:37am.

Its only legal in 2 of the 3 jurisdictions I work in (DC and VA - not MD). I won't do it.
It only takes 1 person on 1 side to even think for a second you are helping "the other side" and your image is tarnished forever. Why is risk that?

 
Submitted by Doug Miller on March 3, 2010 - 7:19am.

The description of your services sound more like those of the attorney, appraiser or closer. So perhaps the client would be better off paying an expert in those fields to do your job?

Even a discounted commission wouldn't justify paying you for those services. Dual agency is a complete degradation of services, therefore shouldn't your fee be adjusted commensurate with that loss in service?

If you're going to provide dual agency to your clients, then you might as well give up your license and open the MLS to the public. You are no longer needed in the transaction.

Dual agency was born out of a need for large brokers to become larger than was legally possible. So they changed the laws on dual agency to prevent class action law suits. This is not a good thing.

 
Submitted by Joan Lorberbaum Moore on March 4, 2010 - 12:57pm.

There is just too much vitriol (and a mis-statement or two) posted here that I need to respond.

Those that choose to practice as a Transaction Agent (as it is called here in Florida) or Dual Agency in other states are acting within the laws of their state. In Florida, one acting as a Transaction Agent "cannot work to represent one party to the detriment of the other party."

There have been times within the 30 years of my licensure in 3 states (NY,CT,FL) where circumstances were such that I acted as a "dual agent." None of my clients ever suffered a degradation of my services, concerns, honesty, and fairness. I advocated long and hard and equally to and for both parties until there was a meeting of the minds on all issues just as I do when acting as a "Single Agent."

Joan Lorberbaum Moore
Broker Associate, GRI
Lang Realty
9858 Clint Moore Road
Boca Raton, FL 33496
www.boca-delray-boynton.com

 
Submitted by Paul Howard on March 7, 2010 - 6:51pm.

Joan, now you have confused me - with this statement:

"There have been times ... I acted as a "dual agent." None of my clients ever suffered a degradation of my services, concerns, honesty, and fairness. I advocated long and hard and equally to and for both parties until there was a meeting of the minds on all issues just as I do when acting as a "Single Agent."

You did use the word 'clients'.

I have a basic need to eliminate confusion and ambiguity - so help me out here.

Are you saying: As a dual agent you advocated equally for a buyer and a seller in the same transaction at the same time. You negotiated a better price for the buyer AND you negotiated a better price for the seller AND you did this exactly the same as if you were a single agent?

I am amazed. Did you do this leaving both the buyer and the seller convinced that you did they best job for them that you could?

And you are further stating that you couldn't have done better for either one, if you had been acting as a single agent? For what reason, then, do your clients retain you - or don't they understand either.

Paul Howard, Broker
NJHomeBuyer.com Realty
Cherry Hill NJ 08002

 
Submitted by ADAM henry on April 9, 2010 - 8:09am.

The method employed is based on a position weight matrix approach improved by a frequency correction which takes in to consideration the amino acid bias present in proteins.

5.11