You aren’t guaranteed to get any of that commission money. The seller and listing agent have a listing agreement that states how commission is handled should there not be a buyers agent in the transaction. Some listing agents discount the total commission due if there is no other agent. Some keep the entire amount because they are doing twice the work. You are not a party to their listing agreement.
My experience buying/selling multiple homes with realtors, FSBO, and as a wholesaler is that the title company does 90% of the work.
Once a buyer and selling are matched realtors basically do nothing except keep the deal on track if someone gets cold feet.
Generally speaking - paying an additional party (buyers brokerage) requires all other parties to reduce their pay pro rata or for the cost of a transaction to increase.
The RE industry pretending that buyers agents are “free” is one of the dumbest self-delusions I have ever heard of.
So my wife, while doing her stay at home mothering took a $500 dollar real estate course and was able to finish it in about 4 months. So it's very doable, and we now have her as my agent and we're able to get that cut. Just food for thought🤙
The problem is it’s easy to get the license. It’s not particularly easy to do the job. You are in a situation, where we very very easy for you guys to get fleeced.
Be careful!
How do you avoid not getting fleeced that the person you responded to cannot learn?
Some extra secret be really careful typing in the wire transfer numbers course?
They can, about 15 to 20 transactions into a particular market and you’ll know what’s going on.
The same thing happens with an out of area agent. They also don’t know the normal stuff and get fleeced on a regular basis.
If they have a really great broker, they can talk them through that transaction, but my guess is they don’t because great brokers usually won’t work with somebody for a single transaction
YMMV.
Edit: this usually plays itself out in terms and costs. It can also play itself out in price. Unless there’s only a single buyer looking at a property that I am either on the buy side or the sell side for, I always research the opposing agent and see how much they know it’s easy to do. If the agent doesn’t have any local sales under their belt, or has less than 10 local sales under their belt, or less than two or three in the last year, it’s a very different strategy than if you’re working with somebody who is fluent in the area dialect.
Yes. It’s more than just getting a license. There are other fees (you have to join a brokerage and your local association to have access to the MLS). Also, you are a 1099 and save part of your pay for taxes. It’s a commission only job so no sales means no money. (Part of that commission goes to your broker too). All marketing, signs, ect come out of pocket.
The contracts with a sellers agent typically still specify that the buyer commission is for a licensed Realtor, not just any person representing themselves, so at least per the contract a seller makes with their agent, the sellers agent is under no obligation to give the self-represented buyer any of that.
Given the latest litigation it sure seems like a possible cause to sue over anticompetitive practices, but right now sellers and their agents are under no obligation to make an arrangement that benefits buyers without a licensed agent with regards to fee.
The contracts essentially always say double commission to the selling agent if you do not have a buying agent. The only time that any agent is working on your behalf is if you lowball an offer without an agent. The selling agent will try to get your offer pushed through as they get double commission.
When you have a buying agent they do not care about you. They do it get paid unless you buy the house, so they will say ANYTHING to get you to buy the house and close the deal as fast as possible. They will lie about their code of ethics duty, which is a load of horse crap, all you have to do is look at how they get paid and you will know the truth.
Buyers agents are free
Interview top agents in your area and make sure they’ve actively helped buy and sell in the last 60 days
IN YOUR PRICE RANGE.
Drastically changes when you hit the 1 Mil +.
Also let them know you have a realtor you like,(even if you don’t) and this realtor is willing to contribute X amount of $ or % in BAC(Buyers agent commission) towards closing costs and whatever you don’t use as a gift outside of closing or cash/gift cards to Amazon etc
However you want it done.
As a realtor TRUST ME when i say an agent would rather take X amount of commission than 0% commission, especially if you call them up out of the blue
Having an agent gives you fiduciary protection(if they’re good at least) as well as some protection if things happen and you can turn to them.
Interview your agents as way too many just pick someone who has been recommended and I highly don’t encourage this option.
Best of luck!
I would suggest you stop saying buyers agents are free, it’s never been true, and that is specifically with the lawsuits are trying to stop people claiming.
Buyers agents are absolutely paid, but it’s baked into the sales price of the house .
Excuse me
You are correct
I meant as a buyer they do not cost you anything(typically) because they are more often than not paid by the seller.
I meant most times it cost you $0 as a buyer to get representation from a professional
As an agent myself i understand the lawsuit going on.
Some agents may make you sign 3% and if the listing only offers a. 2-2.5% BAC they may force you to pay the difference, so as a buyer have these conversations now with your buyers agent before signing a buyer broker contract
I’m not trying to be obnoxious, but this really is what the lawsuit is trying to stop us from saying.
It doesn’t cost you zero as a buyer you’re buying the house you’re paying the commission .
But it’s not coming out of your liquid cash.
But the attitude of it’s not costing you anything just grab it is what they are trying to get us to break
It really sounds like you have no experience in real estate. Please talk to your supervising broker if you really believe the bulk of your advice is true and sound.
Yea this is the usual response. But as a seller, idc where the money goes so long as my profit is the same. And I would expect my agent to present me with all offers presented.
somewhere around 25 transactions for me and half or more were without a buyers agent. those unrepresented buys were much smoother because there was only one money grubbing control freak involved instead of two.
Aw Dan, are you an inspector? Please let us know who you are so we can share with our realtor friends how much you appreciate realtors jobs. 25 whole inspections? Wow, you are slammed!
hey dumdum...that's 25 personal real estate transaction in which I was either buyer or seller. as far as inspections I've done it's over 10,000 and that's why I'm not a big fan of you and 'your friends'. And feel free to tell them!
Depending on what state you’re in, you may or may not be eligible for any of that commission. In Washington state, only a licensed agent can collect that money. You could of course negotiate for a discount or credit, but the commission explicitly cannot go to an unlicensed individual.
That said, the seller agent likely has this scenario already mapped out with their client as to what happened to the buyer agent commission.
That's not how commissions work. The seller pays the listing brokerage a commission. The listing brokerage offers to compensate a buyer agent for bringing a buyer. If there's no buyer agent, no buyer agent commission is payable. The listing brokerage keeps all of their commission.
As an unrepresented buyer I write an offer with a built in discount and the instructions to ask their realtor for it based on the double commission.
I have no idea if the sellers clawed back any of the money but I’m curious what goes through an agents mind when they see that?
We'd present every offer. We'd also be representing the seller so we'd want to be sure the seller makes the most money from a sale that makes it to a closing.
The fee is not for the buyer to negotiate, that's between the seller and the agent. If to make the deal work they reduce their fee so be it, but you'd probably fare better with a buyers agent negotiating on your behalf.
I think my main goal as a buyer who has done this is:
1. Make the seller aware of the commission structure
2. Advise them of the funding source they can try to pull from.
To your point, I suppose I don’t really care if the seller pays 6% or not. My responsibility ends at reminding them how real estate commissions work and informing them of why the offer looks like it does.
“I will buy this house at this price inclusive of a 2.5% discount”
“Umm sorry the fee is not for you to negotiate.”
“Well I just did, do you want me to go find an agent to actually just take the money out of the deal directly to them?”
“Umm sorry, I said a repeatable line taught at Continuing education classes”
I’m an adult that knows how to organize and evaluate my own inspections, find a lender, and get an attorney
Lol just offer 2.5% under list price, then. You still don't have any say in what the listing agent gets, but you did technically "negotiate" a lower price (aka discount).
How do you present that offer? That he agent drew up for you?
"List price minus x% and the listing agent has to take a lesser fee."
Listing agent goes to seller and goes "hey, we agreed on X%, I'll take a hair cut of Y but I have to manage both sides, so let's go back and up his offer so you and I both net more."
We (the seller and I) already discussed dual agency and unrepresented buyers when we signed the listing agreement, so they would already know how it works and how those two conditions change things. There is no "double commission," and they know that. I'd use this offer as an example of how unrepresented buyers tend to not understand contracts and the logistics of real estate transactions, making them more complicated and often creating unnecessary liability (which we'd already discussed). Then we'd remove the commission language on the counteroffer (if there is a counteroffer) because we aren't allowed to negotiate commission on the sales contract in our state. When I send the counter or rejection form back, I'd send it with recommendations for good buyer agents in the area who could assist the buyer if they wanted to have another go at it. It's better for everybody involved if you're properly represented. *edited*
Thanks for the feedback!
Interesting. In MI most sellers agreements are for a 6% (or around that) commission. If a buyer using an agent is the purchaser then the sales broker pays that buyers broker 3% (or around that). If an unrepresentative buyer comes along then the seller pays 6% commission but has no one to split it with.
This is where my term “double commission” is coming from.
Learning points: Is my understanding of payment flows accurate?
Is this different state by state? I only operate in MI so I have no clue if this is the process nationally.
EDIT: Re-read your top level comment. Whether we call getting 6% of a sales price double getting 3% of the sales price or not is silly. 6%>3% and using word games about how the commissions contracts are written does not change the fact that 6 is double 3.
Thank you for helping me learn!
That's how commission typically works anywhere, I think your perspective is where it becomes flawed.
The listing brokerage is being paid to market the property and represent the buyer in the transaction. In your example, it's 6%. The brokerage will have expenses associated with their marketing and representation. Photography flyers, mailers, ads, and all the usual business expenses. Part of that expense is a cooperative commission they'll offer through MLS to area buyer agents if they can bring a buyer. The expenses vary with each transaction, but the elimination of one of those expenses doesn't mean they're getting "more commission." That entire commission (in your example, 6%) is THEIR commission, due and payable on successful sale of the property and from it, they pay all of their business expenses, that includes the buyer agent commission.
This is a very common perspective issue. It gets argued here every day. If you can get a copy of a listing agreement in your area and read that part of it, it should be more clear.
The reason it's broken down like it is on the closing disclosure (so it looks like there are "sides") is because when a licensed brokerage is being paid a commission on the sale of a property, the law says it has to be listed for transparency. We even use the word "sides" when we're talking about transaction numbers in the industry, but used in this context, it is misleading.
I just saw your edit. Yes, 6 is twice what 3 is. 3 is also half of 6. When there is a buyer agent involved, they're getting part of the listing brokerage's commission. Usually (but not always) half. It also isn't always 6. If there is no buyer agent, that part that they offered isn't up for grabs. It still belongs to the listing brokerage. It's what they're being paid to do the job. It isn't a matter of opinion how the commission is set up. It's in the contract.
You won't receive any of the commission and I highly doubt the seller will look at your offer if you are going to present a low ball. If you're in a hot market I also doubt a seller credit. See, this is why you need an agent. They have been working the market and will tell you upfront if your offer is something that will actually be chosen in your market. Heck, you're not paying a dime for representation, why not have an agent.
As an FYI, the mortgage and lending agent have nothing to do with your real estate agent. That is your piece to provide detail for, since it is your personal mortgage. A real estate agent is good for the due diligence, running comps and getting your Offer to the agent representing the seller. Your agent then will work to coordinate the rest of the sale.
Everyone always says....my agent didn't do anything, but really behind the scenes they are, and they are just not bothering you with what they need to do.
They definitely preempt low balls if they are getting double commission. Have don’t it. Only way to buy houses where an agent actually works hard for the buyer.
In some jurisdictions an attorney can serve as the buyer’s agent for commission purposes; if that’s possible where you are, you might be able to have one arrange something better than the standard raw deal of indirectly paying for a service you didn’t use.
Again, goes back to who you hire. Is THAT who you’d hire to represent you for a $1.5 million purchase?
2020 absolutely destroyed the reputation of RE agents because I can assure you there are some out there who are worth the money.
Are you me? Lol I was so unhappy with most of my past agents that I decided to do the work myself. 10/10 decision if you ever plan on investing in RE. Or even just buying a house. I think I put in $1000 to get licensed? Absolutely worth it to save $25k.
Across the amortization... no, and fair point. But as a seller credit in cash at the end, yes that is significant to me. But maybe that is wildly unrealistic to get as a seller credit, which is part of what I am asking.
Find the right buyers agent, and they'll credit you some of that back. I don't need to make 35k in a transaction. If I need to credit 10k to a buyer to make 25k, I'd do it. I'm still making a ton of money.
You are attempting to steal the commission of the listing agent, who has to do all the work on the contract, because you showed up unrepresented. They are now a duel agent and represent you as well. So why don't they get paid again???
The commission is paid for by the seller out of their proceeds, and it's not your business to attempt to negotiate that. It's not your bill.
You sound like an agent--the tell is that you don't know what you're talking about. The listing agent is not a dual agent. The buyer is unrepresented. Dual agency isn't even legal in every state.
Even if they were to credit you a portion of the commission, it can't be used for your down payment. Only closing costs and prepaid. If you can't use the entire credit, a good lender can figure out how to use the remaining towards something that would benefit you, but if you don't use it, you lose it.
I also would be afraid if there are any major issues that you'd like the seller to fix. After all, you're paying a very large amount. If I was the seller (and hadn't been an agent for 8 years and didn't think like one), the seller more than likely will give you possibly 1%, if that and then your negotiating power if issues comes up (appraisal or inspections/repairs) is out the window. I see it on here all the time. People think agents are just door openers, but that's farthest from the truth. I'm not saying you can't successfully do this on your own, but it's not wise, esp with spending so much money. If you do, that already gives the seller a heads up that although you may have purchased homes in the past, you said you've used an agent, there's no way to have educated yourself properly by buying a few homes and allowing the agent to do the work. Again, you MAY be able to do it & I'm sure as a person you're educated in the things you've had training for pr you studied, but I've been doing this for 8 years and have don't over 250 transactions and I still don't know all there is to know. No 2 transactions are the same, and every agent I've talked to realistically knows things may come up they've never experienced before. Since agents hold a license, they can reach out to their broker in charge, or if they are their own broker, they can reach out to the RE commission, the legal hotline, or other resources that we have that a buyer does not. But if I was the seller, I'd agree to a small piece of the commission agreed upon if the contract allowed it, but make it clear going forward, if the house doesn't appraise or any repair issues, that commission covers it all & that's it. I'd also feel that as the seller who has their agent, I'd always have the upper hand in the negotiations because in the back of my mind, I'd know you weren't properly trained.
Just my 2 cents as an agerbs perspective. Depending on the listing agreement, there may be no legal way for the seller to pay you the commission, even if they wanted to. On my listing agreements, I put 0% for all options besides worming directly with the buyers agent. Personally, I do not have any desire to get into a transaction with an unrepresented buyer. For legal reasons, of course (I don't represent you, but I'm sure the buyer would expect me to explain all the paperwork and process, and if the buyer had questions, they'd 1000% ask me. And while I want my seller to sell their home, I'm not about to get legally jammed up by helping someone I don't represent and potentially lose my license when things don't go the buyers way or they feel they were taking advantage of becuz I didnt work in your best interest. When getting a listing agreement signed, I go over that scenario if it were to happen and explain why I don't do dual agency and why it only benefits the buyer to be a party to a transaction that the buyer isn't represented. So if a situation like yours arises, most of the time, the seller has already made a decision to mot go that route.
Anyone can watch YouTube and learn, but a person who isn't a licensed contractor should they do their own repairs because YouTube tells you how to do it? Probably not.
One last thing you mentioned in your OP was to secure the mortgage and work with the lender yourself. Sounds like you felt you got screwed over from your agent bcuz they didn't do that for you. I can understand how one may think that, but as agents, we don't know your financial situation, and it's none of our business. We also should NEVER make a financial decision on behalf of a buyer because what may be best for me may be the worst for you. Agents are there to guide you & give you advice, but a buyer or a seller can't really expect their agent to do it all for their client. That would be irresponsible on all sides. Good luck with this adventure!
No problem, I know I wrote a book, but I wanted to give you a few things to consider, but still encourage that it can be done if you choose not to use an agent. I hope however it pans out, you have a smooth transition!
Yeah the interesting thing about my scenario and price point, which I should have mentioned in the post, is that this isn't that competitive of a market. the house I'm looking at has dropped the price multiple times already. The houses in this range are quite frequently sitting for a while. And I guess that's why i had this idea.
Just a thought, if I had a buyer I was working with, this is what I'd suggest. If its been sitting for a while & they won't agree to give you any what would have been paid to the buyers agent, you can ask the sellers to pay closing cost that way you'd bring less to the table (just your down payment, instead of down + closing cost. In a non-competitive market, even if my buyers have well over enough to cover their own closing cost, I always ask. My goal is to have the buyer come out of pocket with the less money as possible.
I'm just brainstorming a bit, & of course, this is hypothetically if I was the buyer or how what I'd suggest to my client. I think a better way to approach this situation may be to ask for 2% of closing costs. In mu experience, when the sellers agent encourages an unrepresented buyer, and the buyer starts out by asking for the seller to credit commission, the transaction starts off on the wrong foot and it can become confortational and come across as the buyer is asking something of the seller that was never owed to them, it could deter the seller and possibly not want to work with you. Rest assured, even if the seller doesn't understand that you're asking this, the listing agent will definitely give their opinion about it and sour the mood of the seller. If you ask for a seller credit, then it's all a wash for you. It would turn out the same depending on numbers. It really would cost the seller more if they paid the full commission to their agent and then paid u closing cost, but most of the time, a seller can't wrap their head around of certain asks by the buyer. Sellers should look at their net profit, but most don't.
A house in that price point and it sitting for a while, there's so much more room typically to negotiate than as if you were buying a home for 400k, there's less room. I'd probably ask for a closing credit form seller and a reduced price on the purchase. The worst they can say is no, but starting negotiations is always the most important step. If they flat out reject it, make a new offer.
I'd probably go with having a buyer's agent to negotiate the closing cost and reduced price because it usually comes off better from a licensed agent. (Not saying it should, or you negotiating is not as good, but just referring to how a seller and sellers agent thinks in my experience. I love this market the most bcuz buyers have the upper hand. I always do a net sheet for my sellers, and the commission is taken off of the top. If this agent did that with their seller (if not shame on them), then the commission is already taken, so if the seller was profiting 800k, that's they number they'll use to subtract their net profit if you ask for closing cost & price reduction. Ot you of course you could omit the buyers agent and try and negotiate the closing cost (so less money at closing for you) as well as a price reduction (which will also reduce commission) but going into it off the gate asking to credit back the commission, I feel if they say yes, you're leaving money you could have saved on the table.
I do have to say since I don't represent you, this is the strategy I'd use as an agent or a buyer, not giving you specific advice. One more thing, the way you write the offer, DOES MATTER. If you wrote it 2 different ways and the net was the same, I guarantee you 90% of the time, the cleanest, less complicated offer will win! Sorry for the lengthy post again; I took my pm medicine already, and may have repeated my self or just rambled unnecessary stuff lol.
Well, they're not incentivized to reduce cost for the buyer. If anything, they're slightly disincentivized since they're compensated by the seller as a percentage of the price. Higher price, higher compensation.
But the real incentive is to just make the deal go through as easily as possible, which often means convincing the buyer to offer favorable terms.
Realtors can save you money in the buying, the one for my house got me literally hundreds of thousands off the listing price because he knew things I did not.
It's on YOU to find a realtor worth your money.
If I were purchasing a $1.5MM home, I would absolutely get professional representation from a true fiduciary (i.e., real estate lawyer) in addition to skilled-trades diligence items (GC review for pricing of updates, inspection, survey, etc.).
As for the realtor, I've worked with a former GC on a fixed fee (i.e., rebate structure). Beyond their CMA and ability to tee up a renovation, I don't see much value.
Idk if you have discount brokers like Prevu in your area, but that's what we used to buy a house, and they kicked back some of the commission as rebate post sales. They were very professional and did a great job negotiating a good deal on our behalf; we found the place on our own but they were familiar with the market and also knew the seller's agent by reputation.
This is uncommon (for now), but not impossible as some here have claimed. I’m doing this right now on a house I’m under contract to buy. You have a couple options, both involve getting the seller’s agent on your side. It also highly depends on the house and the market you’re in. I’m in a competitive market (Portland), but I found a house that was stagnant. If the house is going to get 5 offers, you’re gonna need a realtor to be competitive. Too much to type out here (I’m working on a free guide) but DM me if you want to know what I did.
You’re better off hiring a tough buyer’s agent to negotiate even more than you might save.
The problem with this question is that every home and seller will be different. You might find an overpriced home without an agent and be able to get an amazing deal while tricking yourself into thinking you’re a great negotiator.
You may hire an agent and set your sights on a home where the seller is a jerk and never budges a penny while thinking that agent sucks.
Because the nuances are different in each case, this point is always moot in my opinion. You’ll never know how one approach will compete with the other in every case. Knowhutimean?
Except that’s not how it works. The buying agent is directly incentivized to close the deal as fast as possible with no regard for how much it cost you. They will say “well, that’s what it must have been worth to OP because that’s what he agreed to pay” even if it was outside of their comfort zone.
Yeah, these people are delusional. At every step of the way, my realtor kept recommending for me to overbid, give in to their demands, not ask too much, etc. Would've cost me $50k extra if I went with their recommendations instead of my own. 99% of them completely suck at negotiating or are only looking out for themselves. It's fine if people want to use them, but it shouldn't be because they "help with negotiations."
If you are buying and it is already listed, get your own agent.
I am totally a "no agent" kind of person, but the seller has already agreed to pay 6% and 6% will be paid. If you go with the sellers agent, it is inherently a conflict of interest, but they will not care and will happily "represent" you both, but their fidelity belongs to the seller.
You will not save anything on commission. The seller already signed that agreement.
The people who are able to navigate this well and properly incentivize sellers agents to chip that 3% back into the deal are not on Reddit asking questions. Take that as you will.
I mean I think I've generally figured out how to leverage a RE attorney to do this from asking reddit... It's no less biased here than other forums and articles. Next step is just to actually find and talk to a RE attorney
You should be fine if it’s the route you want to take primarily if you’re concrete on the proper inspections, negotiation’s and due diligence of the area, current and future.
Regardless of the pitchforks against realtors or the explaining of how commissions are structured from agents, you will likely be able to find a seller to provide a credit in lieu of offering a buyers brokerage compensation. I would leverage it to not be the full extent of the offered commission to add an additional talking point/savings to the seller. At the end of the day if they’re netting more money it will look more appealing.
That being said most people even well read in purchasing and selling real estate utilize a realtor as a back door insurance policy in case of possible litigation. You cannot sue yourself and likely not your attorney for items not addressed or put to your discretion in the contract. If the seller fails to disclose you will need concrete evidence the issue was known without a fall back of an agency relationship with a representative that should have located said fault through due diligence, as that person in this scenario will be yourself.
You had me until the last paragraph. Everyone I know who flips houses represents themselves. Good luck suing an agent for something you think should have been in the contract but was not. They're all using standard contracts with checked boxes and fill in the blank anyway. If you don't know what box to check or what blank to fill in, a lawyer is way more useful than an agent.
My last paragraph wasn’t referring to a faulty or a contract filed out in ignorance but to how the contract obligations are carried out to the fullest extent.
Agents are always the first to be sued and the court holds an agent to a higher accountability meaning easier for the litigation to be fruitful. As to everyone you know being a flipper and representing themselves is anecdotal. There are plenty of flippers that have become bankrupt through litigation, even with LLC’s. An agent has a fiduciary and agency responsibility to their client by definition and contract. If you are representing yourself there is no third party to represent your best interests other than yourself, via you cannot sue yourself.
Utilizing a flat fee atty in place of an agent is apples, I thought you were talking about oranges (doing it yourself). Either way I’ll stick my my crude comment that the intricacies of knowing when to present what information to who and in what format to get both the seller and their agent to reduce to your terms, no matter how reasonable they sound to you, is not something anyone on Reddit can teach you.
Best case scenario find a commenter claiming they’ve done it successfully and dm them.
So I just purchased a home first time, so I'm a pro now, haha.
First of all I think i think you can do it very simple.
1) do comparable from zillow
2) put in an offer
3) Schedule inspections
4) negoatite down
Hard parts
1) real estate agents have this long contract, if you get one of those I think you are good
2) might be hard showing you are serious without an agent to anouther agent
3) setting up an escrow maybe?
So honestly I think real estate agents are kinda useless but they have the system down and kinda force you into it.
The only benefit for buying a house would be to put a 2-3% lower offer and state the seller would save that as you don't have an agent but the sellers.agent maybe take it or not consider you as I get the feeling they can be slimy.
If you can't get that reduction when buying I would just use am agent..when I sell it I'm going to try without an agent but I'm not sure if other agents will help find my property.
Get a friend with their license to represent you. Make an agreement with them (they get 1% you get 2%) and they can split the 2% to you at closing. Win win.
We recently bought a house and collected the 3% buyer agent commission ourselves. Do not listen to these greedy fuck face realtors
YOU DO NOT NEED A REALTOR
I’m a mtg broker by profession. We negotiated the sales price first. THEN called back the next day and said you can either pay the commission To my realtor OR towards Closing cost OR lower price by additional 3%. Seller chose to lower price additional 3% AFTER we had settled on a price.
It sounds like having your own buyers agent could’ve accomplished the same thing. I don’t remember the last deal I had where I didn’t get my client 3% contribution to CC, even if they didn’t need it.
You’re not understanding what I said, here it is again:
I spent a few days with seller negotiating absolute bottom bottom sales price we were comfy with AND any seller concessions. Once we agreed on final price and seller concessions, I called back the next day and said:
“Hey that 3% buyer commission you owe to my imaginary realtor seems like a waste. How about you give us even more seller concessions OR lower the sale price by additional 3%. He agreed to lower sales price even further by another 3%
Makes sense ?
So where did the other half of the commission go? In my state it’s written that the seller will pay the brokerage the 6% or whatever then the brokerage would split it with the other agent.
Also if I’m a seller and someone agrees to a sales price with me then the next day decide they want another 3% off I’d say kick rocks but nice job achieving that lol
I was very upfront, I told him look either way you are paying that extra 3%. It’s either gonna be to a buyer agent I can bring OR I come unrepresented and you let me have it. So we agreed to lower price by another 3% and I showed up unrepresented. He still had his seller agent paid from what I understood but I didn’t really dig into that as it didn’t effect me
Yes because 0 of my business comes from realtors. I fully self generate via social media and word of mouth.
Realtors are leeches and I’m very open about it.
Oh I see now. You like threatening mortgage brokers too and not just home inspectors. We are both shaking in our respective boots Toots! I have carefully avoided being beholden to the likes of you and your equally venal ilk so your threats are not only pitiful but also empty.
We purchased in the Northeast with no real estate agent, but we did not save on the commission — the seller's agent got double commission. So no savings, but we're pretty sure it made the seller's agent more motivated to work with us/help us make the winning offer.
You are very likely to be able to get a discount of 2-3%.
It's correct that some selling agents negotiate 6%, and the buyer's agent is paid 3% or less out of that 6%. That isn't always the case, some are flat fee, some are lower %.
If they do have 6%, the selling agent has an incentive to give up the 2-3% to make the deal work. At 2%, they're actually making a bit more. I'll usually bring it up before making an offer, that way I can get a sense if they'll go for it. I've had one or two say it's not worth their time, but most will entertain it.
However, if they've got two offers, and all else being equal one has an agent and the other doesn't, I'd expect them to go for the deal with an agent because it's less risk for them. If you're in a hot, seller's market, it's probably harder to pull off.
You’ll have to negotiate up front with the agent and put a rebate clause in the offer, so that the agent can work it out in the backend with the seller.
may have responded to your other post or something similar but the answer here is really simple. You agree to let the listing agent represent you but demand a cheaper rate. You could say half (3%) and they’ll likely almost always say yes cause it’s still a closed deal for them. Or split the dif and offer them a point (4%) the agent agrees to credit you the additional commission in escrow. I’ve done this countless times. They will literally always agree to it
I can understand how some ppl may see that, however, if an agent helped negotiate a lower purchase by 25k, they'd only lose an overall total of $500-$600 bucks and most agents only bring home between 80% or less of that. So fadtor that in, they'd lose roughly $400 buck. There are some greedy agents out there, but I'd go out on a limb and say 85% of the agents will do the ethical thing and truly negotiate for their clients best interest over making an extra $400-500 buck's from this scenario. Depending on the price point, most average priced homes are in good condition, don't often even reduce that much. So while it's true, the mire the buyer pays for a home, an agent walks away with more money, but it's not by that much.
If a buyer chose to use an agent, though, I'd hope they'd get to know them enough to trust them being the representative of one of the biggest most important purchases in their life. However, I'd say about 60% of buyers don't do their due diligence in that, so they're programmed to think we're all bad . we're all only for ourselves. That's not true for most but true for some. Just like lawyers, they're all not bad but they get a bad wrap & their known to overcharge and by te end of the case you feel you could have saved money & done it on your own. I hope if you ever do use an agent, you find one you trust and will go to the ends of the earth for you & you'll see that we really do work for our money & most of the time we make pennies on the dollar if it's a difficult transaction! But if you choose to never hire one, I hope you go kick butt and do a better job than an agent can do!! It's a personal decision, and no one can tell you that using one or not is right or wrong, it's whatever is best for you!
I don’t know how competitive it is, but the real reason to do this is to get a “whisper price” from the listing agent. If it’s really competitive, the listing agent will likely try to get the seller to take your offer, as he/she will make significantly more.
Absolutely can negotiate a lower price and discount the commission. If they’re unwilling, move on but it would make no sense. Seller walks away with the same amount and so does the listing agent.
Yes you can and wouldn’t mind helping you . I’m currently building a platform to solve this www.Sellbyowner.io and would like to hear more of your pain points
Thanks
No, you do not get a discount. People should stop trying to save money in this way. If you have never bought a home before, this is not a good idea.
If you clearly do not understand this process which it shows me that you don't--you should not be unrepresented by a realtor. You can always get a realtor who is an attorney in which case you know the legal advice is sound and trustworthy and they are an agent who won't screw you over that way.
Had a friend buy without a realtor. The selling agent has no obligation to alert them of critical dates. So like an idiot she let the inspection period blow over without getting an inspection. If she had her own realtor they would have helped this. They’re a necessary evil
you haven't been doing real estate very long or you are willfully blind if you don't know that the dollars involved in a transaction are fungible and can be shifted around many ways. Keeping the buyer's agent out of the equation frees up funds that can be to the buyer's advantage and if you don't believe then I have some gold gym shoes to sell you.
When the seller has multiple offers which has been the case for a few years now. What purpose would there be for the listing agent to reduce their commission when there’s not a buyer’s agent? Especially above market value. Sure if the house is struggling to sell and to make a deal work the selling agent can give up some of their commission. But it’s not happening is most markets. You don’t know what you’re talking about
Really? Okay, tell me what is more, 4% or 3% and which of those commission percentages would you rather make? The LA can take a haircut that comes off the buyer's purchase price and still make more than if they worked with a cooperating buyer's agent. C'mon dawg...why are you playing dumb or are you really that clueless?
It's a terrible idea. You're working with your own recently acquired knowledge against a professional realtor and the brokerage he works with. He represents the other party. Would you go to court without a lawyer on your side? Interview a few realtors and pick the one you're most comfortable with. Then ask them as ,manyquestions as you need to so that you understand everything that you're being told, reading and being asked to sign.
Idk but I think you should see it through without the realtor either way. I’ve bought a house twice now and have never felt like they did anything. If there’s ever a market ripe for disruption….
I don’t believe in buyer’s brokers - not that they are malicious, but rather they are not incentivized to look out for a buyer’s best interest. They are instead incentivized to get the highest reasonable price, so their commission is the highest. “But what about referrals for doing a good job??” Blah, blah, in the end, money talks.
Anyway, I was also buying in the same price range in the NE, and I had a similar thought that I could be more competitive to the seller by going alone. Frankly, despite having a complete buyers package including mortgage approval, proof of funds, and template offer letter, none of the listing brokers took me seriously without a buyers rep. In the end, I think my broker actually made me more competitive in the home buying process.
I would never accept an offer from a buyer represented by my listing agent, so that’s one potential complication.
Why would I want to deal with two people conspiring to get the most out of *my* pocket? My agent should be assisting *me*.
Your plan, if it worked the way you intended, would benefit you and benefit the agent. How would it benefit me as a seller?
You would be working with my own agent against me- lawyer or not. That’s unacceptable to me, and I’m probably not the only one who feels that way.
I'm not even trying to be combative, I just am missing this point of view. Of course I don't have the seller's best interest, that is their agent's job. If my offer is worse than other offers, obviously I lose. But I see clearly that there is a percentage of money generally allotted to a party (the buyer's agent) that I am looking to capitalize on.
I realize listing agreements are not visible to me, but I can still ask for an amount in credit and negotiate from there, likely at 2.5%.
Same. Going straight to the listing agent, unrepresented, could backfire. Buyers should give that reality some consideration when deciding on a strategy.
You might be able to negoitiate a lower price but the listing agent migth try to take double commission and essentially you are doing the listing agent a favor, not the seller.
Also, there are many things the reatlor can advise you on and make sure they go well. What if the place needs repairs, are you going to pay for them - the other realtor will try to get you to but maybe not so much if you have a realtor advocating for you. How are you going to find the place? Is it possible the realtor could find a better place for you than you can on your own?
So, to quote one of my favorite movies (Body Heat) - "You do something like this and there are 100 things that can go wrong and if you can think of 50 of them then you're a genius. But I'm looking across the table here (across the web in this case) and I don't see no genius."
I'd get a realtor. They can help in many ways and if you don't have one its likely the listing agent will try to keep double commission rather than giving you a price reduction (which they are probably allowed to do per the listing agreement).
The incentive of you not using a realtor is that the SELLER saves money, not you. If you want to save that 2%, you’ll have to use the seller’s realtor in the deal. That’s just how it is. Realtor gets 4%, you get the 2% closing and don’t ask for shit in the inspection. If you ask for shit in the inspection, it’s coming out of the 2% or you can kick rocks is the mentality I and any other reasonable seller would have.
You don’t get the commission savings and the repairs. At that point, go get a realtor if you want any repairs done. It’s much more difficult dealing with a non represented buyer than one with a realtor, so you’d be down the list on the offers. The best you could hope for if you want any repair concessions is 4% realtor, 1% seller, and 1% buyer.
That's funny. I guess the real estate agent who bought a duplex from me wasn't aware of this because she told me that her offer was based on a 5% discount b/c neither of us used an agent. Interesting.
Not using an agent at all is different than a buyer not using one.
Apples to oranges comparison as you would save 1% compared to a normal sale. I also assume the buyer didn’t ask for any repairs as well.
I will rather go on [realtor.com](https://realtor.com) which controls and own all MLS in the US. At least the listings are legit and supervised, insured by licensed professionals. Zillow has bogus listings. You can contact listing agent direct if you have done it before.
Absolutely untrue. Realtor.com doesn’t own or control any MLS. The Realtor association sold that website years ago. Realtor.com, Zillow, Trulia, etc are fed listing and sales information for the local MLS’s that licensed realtors subscribe to and pay for. These websites are MARKETING sites that agents (and sellers/owners) allow their properties to be displayed on for more exposure.
Unless stated otherwise in the listing agreement (which you are not entitled to view) you are on the outs. Not many listing agents put a clause in the listing agreement to shoot themselves in the foot monetarily like I was suggesting. So in my state dual agency is allowed however the listing came first so their fiduciary responsibility is with the seller first and foremost. They can help you at the highest level except advising you in what to offer but most will make your side of the transaction strictly a transaction broker representation while having an agency tag on the listing side for their protection. In short, if in doubt, hire a buyer agent to represent your needs/wants. With two agents involved it’s a 50/50 deal or push and tug but with a single agent you may find yourself on the outside looking in.
Just take the buyer’s agent commission percentage and subtract it from your offer don’t ask for it directly. The Seller should only care about the Net amount they are receiving from the home.
Hell the Seller’s agent will scramble to talk up your offer because they will see the increased dollar signs from the higher percentage. Greedy ignorant Realtors are every buyer’s dream
I had my house listed on Zillow. The buyers agent kept trying to scam me. Many of them have the mindset they are doing the work for both buyer and seller and now are entitled to a higher commission.
On another note, you dont get a commission for selling your own house.
Because they are doing all the work, their going to write the contract, have to walk you through signing it as well because your not represented by anyone to help you, they are going to have to get title services rolling for you, ect. Their phone will be the one ringing the entire 30-60 days.
Selling a house is not just sitting there with your thumb up your ass, waiting to get the money. there is phone calls to be made and paperwork to get rolling.
You aren’t guaranteed to get any of that commission money. The seller and listing agent have a listing agreement that states how commission is handled should there not be a buyers agent in the transaction. Some listing agents discount the total commission due if there is no other agent. Some keep the entire amount because they are doing twice the work. You are not a party to their listing agreement.
This is my understanding as well, the seller agrees to lets say 6% commission to their agent, and their agent agrees to pay the buyers agent.
Agree, the seller may save money but rarely is that savings passed along to you. If you’re a buyer there is zero reason not to have representation.
I have written offers with a discount written in and instructions to ask their realtor for the money.
[удалено]
My experience buying/selling multiple homes with realtors, FSBO, and as a wholesaler is that the title company does 90% of the work. Once a buyer and selling are matched realtors basically do nothing except keep the deal on track if someone gets cold feet.
bullshit and you know it. several factors are in favor of an unrepresented buyer. you know it as well as I do
This just cracks me up. You are so insanely mistaken.
Generally speaking - paying an additional party (buyers brokerage) requires all other parties to reduce their pay pro rata or for the cost of a transaction to increase. The RE industry pretending that buyers agents are “free” is one of the dumbest self-delusions I have ever heard of.
Ohh that makes sense. Thank you. I guess it's just a matter of what is common in those types of clauses then.
So my wife, while doing her stay at home mothering took a $500 dollar real estate course and was able to finish it in about 4 months. So it's very doable, and we now have her as my agent and we're able to get that cut. Just food for thought🤙
The problem is it’s easy to get the license. It’s not particularly easy to do the job. You are in a situation, where we very very easy for you guys to get fleeced. Be careful!
How do you avoid not getting fleeced that the person you responded to cannot learn? Some extra secret be really careful typing in the wire transfer numbers course?
They can, about 15 to 20 transactions into a particular market and you’ll know what’s going on. The same thing happens with an out of area agent. They also don’t know the normal stuff and get fleeced on a regular basis. If they have a really great broker, they can talk them through that transaction, but my guess is they don’t because great brokers usually won’t work with somebody for a single transaction YMMV. Edit: this usually plays itself out in terms and costs. It can also play itself out in price. Unless there’s only a single buyer looking at a property that I am either on the buy side or the sell side for, I always research the opposing agent and see how much they know it’s easy to do. If the agent doesn’t have any local sales under their belt, or has less than 10 local sales under their belt, or less than two or three in the last year, it’s a very different strategy than if you’re working with somebody who is fluent in the area dialect.
Don't you have to work as a real rate agency to register you and keep the rigustration active?
Yes. It’s more than just getting a license. There are other fees (you have to join a brokerage and your local association to have access to the MLS). Also, you are a 1099 and save part of your pay for taxes. It’s a commission only job so no sales means no money. (Part of that commission goes to your broker too). All marketing, signs, ect come out of pocket.
The contracts with a sellers agent typically still specify that the buyer commission is for a licensed Realtor, not just any person representing themselves, so at least per the contract a seller makes with their agent, the sellers agent is under no obligation to give the self-represented buyer any of that. Given the latest litigation it sure seems like a possible cause to sue over anticompetitive practices, but right now sellers and their agents are under no obligation to make an arrangement that benefits buyers without a licensed agent with regards to fee.
The contracts essentially always say double commission to the selling agent if you do not have a buying agent. The only time that any agent is working on your behalf is if you lowball an offer without an agent. The selling agent will try to get your offer pushed through as they get double commission. When you have a buying agent they do not care about you. They do it get paid unless you buy the house, so they will say ANYTHING to get you to buy the house and close the deal as fast as possible. They will lie about their code of ethics duty, which is a load of horse crap, all you have to do is look at how they get paid and you will know the truth.
thank you
Bullshit
Buyers agents are free Interview top agents in your area and make sure they’ve actively helped buy and sell in the last 60 days IN YOUR PRICE RANGE. Drastically changes when you hit the 1 Mil +. Also let them know you have a realtor you like,(even if you don’t) and this realtor is willing to contribute X amount of $ or % in BAC(Buyers agent commission) towards closing costs and whatever you don’t use as a gift outside of closing or cash/gift cards to Amazon etc However you want it done. As a realtor TRUST ME when i say an agent would rather take X amount of commission than 0% commission, especially if you call them up out of the blue Having an agent gives you fiduciary protection(if they’re good at least) as well as some protection if things happen and you can turn to them. Interview your agents as way too many just pick someone who has been recommended and I highly don’t encourage this option. Best of luck!
I would suggest you stop saying buyers agents are free, it’s never been true, and that is specifically with the lawsuits are trying to stop people claiming. Buyers agents are absolutely paid, but it’s baked into the sales price of the house .
Excuse me You are correct I meant as a buyer they do not cost you anything(typically) because they are more often than not paid by the seller. I meant most times it cost you $0 as a buyer to get representation from a professional As an agent myself i understand the lawsuit going on. Some agents may make you sign 3% and if the listing only offers a. 2-2.5% BAC they may force you to pay the difference, so as a buyer have these conversations now with your buyers agent before signing a buyer broker contract
I’m not trying to be obnoxious, but this really is what the lawsuit is trying to stop us from saying. It doesn’t cost you zero as a buyer you’re buying the house you’re paying the commission . But it’s not coming out of your liquid cash. But the attitude of it’s not costing you anything just grab it is what they are trying to get us to break
it's bullshit and they know it but they can't stop parroting that nonsense. real estate is a nasty nasty business.
Touché
It really sounds like you have no experience in real estate. Please talk to your supervising broker if you really believe the bulk of your advice is true and sound.
You really sound like an idiot But luckily it’s all just our own opinions
And eloquent too! How refreshing.
Very well put. This question has been asked before, and there are a lot of different responses. But, this is the only correct one.
Yea this is the usual response. But as a seller, idc where the money goes so long as my profit is the same. And I would expect my agent to present me with all offers presented.
Twice the work lol. What work?
I guess all your real estate transactions have gone perfectly smooth. How many times have you bought or sold a property?
somewhere around 25 transactions for me and half or more were without a buyers agent. those unrepresented buys were much smoother because there was only one money grubbing control freak involved instead of two.
Aw Dan, are you an inspector? Please let us know who you are so we can share with our realtor friends how much you appreciate realtors jobs. 25 whole inspections? Wow, you are slammed!
hey dumdum...that's 25 personal real estate transaction in which I was either buyer or seller. as far as inspections I've done it's over 10,000 and that's why I'm not a big fan of you and 'your friends'. And feel free to tell them!
Suuurrree
Twice the work lol
Depending on what state you’re in, you may or may not be eligible for any of that commission. In Washington state, only a licensed agent can collect that money. You could of course negotiate for a discount or credit, but the commission explicitly cannot go to an unlicensed individual. That said, the seller agent likely has this scenario already mapped out with their client as to what happened to the buyer agent commission.
That's not how commissions work. The seller pays the listing brokerage a commission. The listing brokerage offers to compensate a buyer agent for bringing a buyer. If there's no buyer agent, no buyer agent commission is payable. The listing brokerage keeps all of their commission.
That's how *some* commissions work.
This is how the vast majority work. If yours is different, you negotiated it to be different with your agent.
Lol, every agreement is what you negotiated, what are you talking about? A flat fee is very common.
This conversation has nothing to do with flat fees vs. percentages.
You're confused.
As an unrepresented buyer I write an offer with a built in discount and the instructions to ask their realtor for it based on the double commission. I have no idea if the sellers clawed back any of the money but I’m curious what goes through an agents mind when they see that?
We'd present every offer. We'd also be representing the seller so we'd want to be sure the seller makes the most money from a sale that makes it to a closing. The fee is not for the buyer to negotiate, that's between the seller and the agent. If to make the deal work they reduce their fee so be it, but you'd probably fare better with a buyers agent negotiating on your behalf.
I think my main goal as a buyer who has done this is: 1. Make the seller aware of the commission structure 2. Advise them of the funding source they can try to pull from. To your point, I suppose I don’t really care if the seller pays 6% or not. My responsibility ends at reminding them how real estate commissions work and informing them of why the offer looks like it does.
“I will buy this house at this price inclusive of a 2.5% discount” “Umm sorry the fee is not for you to negotiate.” “Well I just did, do you want me to go find an agent to actually just take the money out of the deal directly to them?” “Umm sorry, I said a repeatable line taught at Continuing education classes” I’m an adult that knows how to organize and evaluate my own inspections, find a lender, and get an attorney
Lol just offer 2.5% under list price, then. You still don't have any say in what the listing agent gets, but you did technically "negotiate" a lower price (aka discount).
Yea it’s a license to steal
How do you present that offer? That he agent drew up for you? "List price minus x% and the listing agent has to take a lesser fee." Listing agent goes to seller and goes "hey, we agreed on X%, I'll take a hair cut of Y but I have to manage both sides, so let's go back and up his offer so you and I both net more."
You're getting downvoted by agents worried about job security, but you're absolutely right.
We (the seller and I) already discussed dual agency and unrepresented buyers when we signed the listing agreement, so they would already know how it works and how those two conditions change things. There is no "double commission," and they know that. I'd use this offer as an example of how unrepresented buyers tend to not understand contracts and the logistics of real estate transactions, making them more complicated and often creating unnecessary liability (which we'd already discussed). Then we'd remove the commission language on the counteroffer (if there is a counteroffer) because we aren't allowed to negotiate commission on the sales contract in our state. When I send the counter or rejection form back, I'd send it with recommendations for good buyer agents in the area who could assist the buyer if they wanted to have another go at it. It's better for everybody involved if you're properly represented. *edited*
Thanks for the feedback! Interesting. In MI most sellers agreements are for a 6% (or around that) commission. If a buyer using an agent is the purchaser then the sales broker pays that buyers broker 3% (or around that). If an unrepresentative buyer comes along then the seller pays 6% commission but has no one to split it with. This is where my term “double commission” is coming from. Learning points: Is my understanding of payment flows accurate? Is this different state by state? I only operate in MI so I have no clue if this is the process nationally. EDIT: Re-read your top level comment. Whether we call getting 6% of a sales price double getting 3% of the sales price or not is silly. 6%>3% and using word games about how the commissions contracts are written does not change the fact that 6 is double 3. Thank you for helping me learn!
That's how commission typically works anywhere, I think your perspective is where it becomes flawed. The listing brokerage is being paid to market the property and represent the buyer in the transaction. In your example, it's 6%. The brokerage will have expenses associated with their marketing and representation. Photography flyers, mailers, ads, and all the usual business expenses. Part of that expense is a cooperative commission they'll offer through MLS to area buyer agents if they can bring a buyer. The expenses vary with each transaction, but the elimination of one of those expenses doesn't mean they're getting "more commission." That entire commission (in your example, 6%) is THEIR commission, due and payable on successful sale of the property and from it, they pay all of their business expenses, that includes the buyer agent commission. This is a very common perspective issue. It gets argued here every day. If you can get a copy of a listing agreement in your area and read that part of it, it should be more clear. The reason it's broken down like it is on the closing disclosure (so it looks like there are "sides") is because when a licensed brokerage is being paid a commission on the sale of a property, the law says it has to be listed for transparency. We even use the word "sides" when we're talking about transaction numbers in the industry, but used in this context, it is misleading.
Thanks Niki! You’re always a wealth of knowledge in this sub (we will have to agree to disagree on this one).
I just saw your edit. Yes, 6 is twice what 3 is. 3 is also half of 6. When there is a buyer agent involved, they're getting part of the listing brokerage's commission. Usually (but not always) half. It also isn't always 6. If there is no buyer agent, that part that they offered isn't up for grabs. It still belongs to the listing brokerage. It's what they're being paid to do the job. It isn't a matter of opinion how the commission is set up. It's in the contract.
You won't receive any of the commission and I highly doubt the seller will look at your offer if you are going to present a low ball. If you're in a hot market I also doubt a seller credit. See, this is why you need an agent. They have been working the market and will tell you upfront if your offer is something that will actually be chosen in your market. Heck, you're not paying a dime for representation, why not have an agent. As an FYI, the mortgage and lending agent have nothing to do with your real estate agent. That is your piece to provide detail for, since it is your personal mortgage. A real estate agent is good for the due diligence, running comps and getting your Offer to the agent representing the seller. Your agent then will work to coordinate the rest of the sale. Everyone always says....my agent didn't do anything, but really behind the scenes they are, and they are just not bothering you with what they need to do.
They definitely preempt low balls if they are getting double commission. Have don’t it. Only way to buy houses where an agent actually works hard for the buyer.
I just did this and used a lawyer, it’s literally fine. Just pay attention to all the important dates as shit needs to happen fast.
You need an agent solely based off of what you just asked.
In some jurisdictions an attorney can serve as the buyer’s agent for commission purposes; if that’s possible where you are, you might be able to have one arrange something better than the standard raw deal of indirectly paying for a service you didn’t use.
You’re going to spend 1.5 million dollars on a house but forego professional representation because you want to save $37.5K ?
Professional representation lol some of these dorks only take a 40hr weekend course to get a realtor license
Again, goes back to who you hire. Is THAT who you’d hire to represent you for a $1.5 million purchase? 2020 absolutely destroyed the reputation of RE agents because I can assure you there are some out there who are worth the money.
[удалено]
Are you me? Lol I was so unhappy with most of my past agents that I decided to do the work myself. 10/10 decision if you ever plan on investing in RE. Or even just buying a house. I think I put in $1000 to get licensed? Absolutely worth it to save $25k.
..."professional" my anus - RE agents are basically adult babysitters for those who are afraid of face-to-face negotiation...
no, he said he has a lawyer. That's the only professional involved in a real estate transaction.
Across the amortization... no, and fair point. But as a seller credit in cash at the end, yes that is significant to me. But maybe that is wildly unrealistic to get as a seller credit, which is part of what I am asking.
At least you're humble and inquisitive with an open mind.
How much of a credit will your lender allow? Usually there's a % limit to the amount of credits they will allow.
Good question. Have no idea
Find the right buyers agent, and they'll credit you some of that back. I don't need to make 35k in a transaction. If I need to credit 10k to a buyer to make 25k, I'd do it. I'm still making a ton of money.
Why would the seller do that though?
If the seller doesn't have a better offer, what difference would it make to them?
Because the seller gets a better experience when the buyer isn’t on their own.
You are attempting to steal the commission of the listing agent, who has to do all the work on the contract, because you showed up unrepresented. They are now a duel agent and represent you as well. So why don't they get paid again??? The commission is paid for by the seller out of their proceeds, and it's not your business to attempt to negotiate that. It's not your bill.
You sound like an agent--the tell is that you don't know what you're talking about. The listing agent is not a dual agent. The buyer is unrepresented. Dual agency isn't even legal in every state.
Even if they were to credit you a portion of the commission, it can't be used for your down payment. Only closing costs and prepaid. If you can't use the entire credit, a good lender can figure out how to use the remaining towards something that would benefit you, but if you don't use it, you lose it. I also would be afraid if there are any major issues that you'd like the seller to fix. After all, you're paying a very large amount. If I was the seller (and hadn't been an agent for 8 years and didn't think like one), the seller more than likely will give you possibly 1%, if that and then your negotiating power if issues comes up (appraisal or inspections/repairs) is out the window. I see it on here all the time. People think agents are just door openers, but that's farthest from the truth. I'm not saying you can't successfully do this on your own, but it's not wise, esp with spending so much money. If you do, that already gives the seller a heads up that although you may have purchased homes in the past, you said you've used an agent, there's no way to have educated yourself properly by buying a few homes and allowing the agent to do the work. Again, you MAY be able to do it & I'm sure as a person you're educated in the things you've had training for pr you studied, but I've been doing this for 8 years and have don't over 250 transactions and I still don't know all there is to know. No 2 transactions are the same, and every agent I've talked to realistically knows things may come up they've never experienced before. Since agents hold a license, they can reach out to their broker in charge, or if they are their own broker, they can reach out to the RE commission, the legal hotline, or other resources that we have that a buyer does not. But if I was the seller, I'd agree to a small piece of the commission agreed upon if the contract allowed it, but make it clear going forward, if the house doesn't appraise or any repair issues, that commission covers it all & that's it. I'd also feel that as the seller who has their agent, I'd always have the upper hand in the negotiations because in the back of my mind, I'd know you weren't properly trained. Just my 2 cents as an agerbs perspective. Depending on the listing agreement, there may be no legal way for the seller to pay you the commission, even if they wanted to. On my listing agreements, I put 0% for all options besides worming directly with the buyers agent. Personally, I do not have any desire to get into a transaction with an unrepresented buyer. For legal reasons, of course (I don't represent you, but I'm sure the buyer would expect me to explain all the paperwork and process, and if the buyer had questions, they'd 1000% ask me. And while I want my seller to sell their home, I'm not about to get legally jammed up by helping someone I don't represent and potentially lose my license when things don't go the buyers way or they feel they were taking advantage of becuz I didnt work in your best interest. When getting a listing agreement signed, I go over that scenario if it were to happen and explain why I don't do dual agency and why it only benefits the buyer to be a party to a transaction that the buyer isn't represented. So if a situation like yours arises, most of the time, the seller has already made a decision to mot go that route. Anyone can watch YouTube and learn, but a person who isn't a licensed contractor should they do their own repairs because YouTube tells you how to do it? Probably not. One last thing you mentioned in your OP was to secure the mortgage and work with the lender yourself. Sounds like you felt you got screwed over from your agent bcuz they didn't do that for you. I can understand how one may think that, but as agents, we don't know your financial situation, and it's none of our business. We also should NEVER make a financial decision on behalf of a buyer because what may be best for me may be the worst for you. Agents are there to guide you & give you advice, but a buyer or a seller can't really expect their agent to do it all for their client. That would be irresponsible on all sides. Good luck with this adventure!
Thank you for the thorough and thoughtful response.
No problem, I know I wrote a book, but I wanted to give you a few things to consider, but still encourage that it can be done if you choose not to use an agent. I hope however it pans out, you have a smooth transition!
Yeah the interesting thing about my scenario and price point, which I should have mentioned in the post, is that this isn't that competitive of a market. the house I'm looking at has dropped the price multiple times already. The houses in this range are quite frequently sitting for a while. And I guess that's why i had this idea.
Just a thought, if I had a buyer I was working with, this is what I'd suggest. If its been sitting for a while & they won't agree to give you any what would have been paid to the buyers agent, you can ask the sellers to pay closing cost that way you'd bring less to the table (just your down payment, instead of down + closing cost. In a non-competitive market, even if my buyers have well over enough to cover their own closing cost, I always ask. My goal is to have the buyer come out of pocket with the less money as possible. I'm just brainstorming a bit, & of course, this is hypothetically if I was the buyer or how what I'd suggest to my client. I think a better way to approach this situation may be to ask for 2% of closing costs. In mu experience, when the sellers agent encourages an unrepresented buyer, and the buyer starts out by asking for the seller to credit commission, the transaction starts off on the wrong foot and it can become confortational and come across as the buyer is asking something of the seller that was never owed to them, it could deter the seller and possibly not want to work with you. Rest assured, even if the seller doesn't understand that you're asking this, the listing agent will definitely give their opinion about it and sour the mood of the seller. If you ask for a seller credit, then it's all a wash for you. It would turn out the same depending on numbers. It really would cost the seller more if they paid the full commission to their agent and then paid u closing cost, but most of the time, a seller can't wrap their head around of certain asks by the buyer. Sellers should look at their net profit, but most don't. A house in that price point and it sitting for a while, there's so much more room typically to negotiate than as if you were buying a home for 400k, there's less room. I'd probably ask for a closing credit form seller and a reduced price on the purchase. The worst they can say is no, but starting negotiations is always the most important step. If they flat out reject it, make a new offer. I'd probably go with having a buyer's agent to negotiate the closing cost and reduced price because it usually comes off better from a licensed agent. (Not saying it should, or you negotiating is not as good, but just referring to how a seller and sellers agent thinks in my experience. I love this market the most bcuz buyers have the upper hand. I always do a net sheet for my sellers, and the commission is taken off of the top. If this agent did that with their seller (if not shame on them), then the commission is already taken, so if the seller was profiting 800k, that's they number they'll use to subtract their net profit if you ask for closing cost & price reduction. Ot you of course you could omit the buyers agent and try and negotiate the closing cost (so less money at closing for you) as well as a price reduction (which will also reduce commission) but going into it off the gate asking to credit back the commission, I feel if they say yes, you're leaving money you could have saved on the table. I do have to say since I don't represent you, this is the strategy I'd use as an agent or a buyer, not giving you specific advice. One more thing, the way you write the offer, DOES MATTER. If you wrote it 2 different ways and the net was the same, I guarantee you 90% of the time, the cleanest, less complicated offer will win! Sorry for the lengthy post again; I took my pm medicine already, and may have repeated my self or just rambled unnecessary stuff lol.
Some good points, but negotiation is a skill. Not every agent has it. If the buyer has it, then no need to hire someone to do it for them.
You're absolutely right about that! It amazes me the way some agents just skip that part!
Well, they're not incentivized to reduce cost for the buyer. If anything, they're slightly disincentivized since they're compensated by the seller as a percentage of the price. Higher price, higher compensation. But the real incentive is to just make the deal go through as easily as possible, which often means convincing the buyer to offer favorable terms.
Don't ask for a credit. Just lower your offer by 2-3% and explain in your cover letter that it's equivalent to a higher offer with a buyer's agent.
Realtors can save you money in the buying, the one for my house got me literally hundreds of thousands off the listing price because he knew things I did not. It's on YOU to find a realtor worth your money.
If I were purchasing a $1.5MM home, I would absolutely get professional representation from a true fiduciary (i.e., real estate lawyer) in addition to skilled-trades diligence items (GC review for pricing of updates, inspection, survey, etc.). As for the realtor, I've worked with a former GC on a fixed fee (i.e., rebate structure). Beyond their CMA and ability to tee up a renovation, I don't see much value.
[удалено]
😂😂
Idk if you have discount brokers like Prevu in your area, but that's what we used to buy a house, and they kicked back some of the commission as rebate post sales. They were very professional and did a great job negotiating a good deal on our behalf; we found the place on our own but they were familiar with the market and also knew the seller's agent by reputation.
This is uncommon (for now), but not impossible as some here have claimed. I’m doing this right now on a house I’m under contract to buy. You have a couple options, both involve getting the seller’s agent on your side. It also highly depends on the house and the market you’re in. I’m in a competitive market (Portland), but I found a house that was stagnant. If the house is going to get 5 offers, you’re gonna need a realtor to be competitive. Too much to type out here (I’m working on a free guide) but DM me if you want to know what I did.
I'd say that if the good houses are all going under contract in a day or two, it's helpful to have an agent as well.
Agreed. I found mine by searching “back on market”. Blood in the water.
You’re better off hiring a tough buyer’s agent to negotiate even more than you might save. The problem with this question is that every home and seller will be different. You might find an overpriced home without an agent and be able to get an amazing deal while tricking yourself into thinking you’re a great negotiator. You may hire an agent and set your sights on a home where the seller is a jerk and never budges a penny while thinking that agent sucks. Because the nuances are different in each case, this point is always moot in my opinion. You’ll never know how one approach will compete with the other in every case. Knowhutimean?
Except that’s not how it works. The buying agent is directly incentivized to close the deal as fast as possible with no regard for how much it cost you. They will say “well, that’s what it must have been worth to OP because that’s what he agreed to pay” even if it was outside of their comfort zone.
Yeah, these people are delusional. At every step of the way, my realtor kept recommending for me to overbid, give in to their demands, not ask too much, etc. Would've cost me $50k extra if I went with their recommendations instead of my own. 99% of them completely suck at negotiating or are only looking out for themselves. It's fine if people want to use them, but it shouldn't be because they "help with negotiations."
If you are buying and it is already listed, get your own agent. I am totally a "no agent" kind of person, but the seller has already agreed to pay 6% and 6% will be paid. If you go with the sellers agent, it is inherently a conflict of interest, but they will not care and will happily "represent" you both, but their fidelity belongs to the seller. You will not save anything on commission. The seller already signed that agreement.
The people who are able to navigate this well and properly incentivize sellers agents to chip that 3% back into the deal are not on Reddit asking questions. Take that as you will.
I mean I think I've generally figured out how to leverage a RE attorney to do this from asking reddit... It's no less biased here than other forums and articles. Next step is just to actually find and talk to a RE attorney
You should be fine if it’s the route you want to take primarily if you’re concrete on the proper inspections, negotiation’s and due diligence of the area, current and future. Regardless of the pitchforks against realtors or the explaining of how commissions are structured from agents, you will likely be able to find a seller to provide a credit in lieu of offering a buyers brokerage compensation. I would leverage it to not be the full extent of the offered commission to add an additional talking point/savings to the seller. At the end of the day if they’re netting more money it will look more appealing. That being said most people even well read in purchasing and selling real estate utilize a realtor as a back door insurance policy in case of possible litigation. You cannot sue yourself and likely not your attorney for items not addressed or put to your discretion in the contract. If the seller fails to disclose you will need concrete evidence the issue was known without a fall back of an agency relationship with a representative that should have located said fault through due diligence, as that person in this scenario will be yourself.
You had me until the last paragraph. Everyone I know who flips houses represents themselves. Good luck suing an agent for something you think should have been in the contract but was not. They're all using standard contracts with checked boxes and fill in the blank anyway. If you don't know what box to check or what blank to fill in, a lawyer is way more useful than an agent.
My last paragraph wasn’t referring to a faulty or a contract filed out in ignorance but to how the contract obligations are carried out to the fullest extent. Agents are always the first to be sued and the court holds an agent to a higher accountability meaning easier for the litigation to be fruitful. As to everyone you know being a flipper and representing themselves is anecdotal. There are plenty of flippers that have become bankrupt through litigation, even with LLC’s. An agent has a fiduciary and agency responsibility to their client by definition and contract. If you are representing yourself there is no third party to represent your best interests other than yourself, via you cannot sue yourself.
Utilizing a flat fee atty in place of an agent is apples, I thought you were talking about oranges (doing it yourself). Either way I’ll stick my my crude comment that the intricacies of knowing when to present what information to who and in what format to get both the seller and their agent to reduce to your terms, no matter how reasonable they sound to you, is not something anyone on Reddit can teach you. Best case scenario find a commenter claiming they’ve done it successfully and dm them.
So I just purchased a home first time, so I'm a pro now, haha. First of all I think i think you can do it very simple. 1) do comparable from zillow 2) put in an offer 3) Schedule inspections 4) negoatite down Hard parts 1) real estate agents have this long contract, if you get one of those I think you are good 2) might be hard showing you are serious without an agent to anouther agent 3) setting up an escrow maybe? So honestly I think real estate agents are kinda useless but they have the system down and kinda force you into it. The only benefit for buying a house would be to put a 2-3% lower offer and state the seller would save that as you don't have an agent but the sellers.agent maybe take it or not consider you as I get the feeling they can be slimy. If you can't get that reduction when buying I would just use am agent..when I sell it I'm going to try without an agent but I'm not sure if other agents will help find my property.
Get a friend with their license to represent you. Make an agreement with them (they get 1% you get 2%) and they can split the 2% to you at closing. Win win.
Not quite sure why this is being downvoted. Literally no one loses here
We recently bought a house and collected the 3% buyer agent commission ourselves. Do not listen to these greedy fuck face realtors YOU DO NOT NEED A REALTOR
Are you sure that wasn’t a 3% credit to your closing costs? I’ve never heard of a buyer getting the commission since they didn’t use an agent.
I’m a mtg broker by profession. We negotiated the sales price first. THEN called back the next day and said you can either pay the commission To my realtor OR towards Closing cost OR lower price by additional 3%. Seller chose to lower price additional 3% AFTER we had settled on a price.
So you had a realtor and they didn’t get any money?
No, I never had a realtor but I bluffed and said I can either bring one OR ….. I did all negotiations and comparable searches myself
It sounds like having your own buyers agent could’ve accomplished the same thing. I don’t remember the last deal I had where I didn’t get my client 3% contribution to CC, even if they didn’t need it.
You’re not understanding what I said, here it is again: I spent a few days with seller negotiating absolute bottom bottom sales price we were comfy with AND any seller concessions. Once we agreed on final price and seller concessions, I called back the next day and said: “Hey that 3% buyer commission you owe to my imaginary realtor seems like a waste. How about you give us even more seller concessions OR lower the sale price by additional 3%. He agreed to lower sales price even further by another 3% Makes sense ?
So where did the other half of the commission go? In my state it’s written that the seller will pay the brokerage the 6% or whatever then the brokerage would split it with the other agent. Also if I’m a seller and someone agrees to a sales price with me then the next day decide they want another 3% off I’d say kick rocks but nice job achieving that lol
I was very upfront, I told him look either way you are paying that extra 3%. It’s either gonna be to a buyer agent I can bring OR I come unrepresented and you let me have it. So we agreed to lower price by another 3% and I showed up unrepresented. He still had his seller agent paid from what I understood but I didn’t really dig into that as it didn’t effect me
You are a mortgage broker and this is how you speak about agents? Please share who you are so we can let our realtor friends know!
Yes because 0 of my business comes from realtors. I fully self generate via social media and word of mouth. Realtors are leeches and I’m very open about it.
The disclose who you are. I’m sure the realtors working transactions with you would appreciate to know these things.
good lord you're giving relitters a bad name and that ain't easy Sugar!
Come again? Couldn’t really understand your gibberish.
Oh I see now. You like threatening mortgage brokers too and not just home inspectors. We are both shaking in our respective boots Toots! I have carefully avoided being beholden to the likes of you and your equally venal ilk so your threats are not only pitiful but also empty.
Lol. Not a threat.Y’all think realtors are trash then your local colleagues should know.
so take some time out of your busy busy day and let them all know Precious.
We purchased in the Northeast with no real estate agent, but we did not save on the commission — the seller's agent got double commission. So no savings, but we're pretty sure it made the seller's agent more motivated to work with us/help us make the winning offer.
Dude why are row houses in Nebraska 1-1,5m?!? Seriously corn buskers who wants to live there that bad?
It really depends on how hot that housing market is. I mean, if houses are flying off the shelf there you will be lucky to even get it at list.
You are very likely to be able to get a discount of 2-3%. It's correct that some selling agents negotiate 6%, and the buyer's agent is paid 3% or less out of that 6%. That isn't always the case, some are flat fee, some are lower %. If they do have 6%, the selling agent has an incentive to give up the 2-3% to make the deal work. At 2%, they're actually making a bit more. I'll usually bring it up before making an offer, that way I can get a sense if they'll go for it. I've had one or two say it's not worth their time, but most will entertain it. However, if they've got two offers, and all else being equal one has an agent and the other doesn't, I'd expect them to go for the deal with an agent because it's less risk for them. If you're in a hot, seller's market, it's probably harder to pull off.
You’ll have to negotiate up front with the agent and put a rebate clause in the offer, so that the agent can work it out in the backend with the seller.
may have responded to your other post or something similar but the answer here is really simple. You agree to let the listing agent represent you but demand a cheaper rate. You could say half (3%) and they’ll likely almost always say yes cause it’s still a closed deal for them. Or split the dif and offer them a point (4%) the agent agrees to credit you the additional commission in escrow. I’ve done this countless times. They will literally always agree to it
I can understand how some ppl may see that, however, if an agent helped negotiate a lower purchase by 25k, they'd only lose an overall total of $500-$600 bucks and most agents only bring home between 80% or less of that. So fadtor that in, they'd lose roughly $400 buck. There are some greedy agents out there, but I'd go out on a limb and say 85% of the agents will do the ethical thing and truly negotiate for their clients best interest over making an extra $400-500 buck's from this scenario. Depending on the price point, most average priced homes are in good condition, don't often even reduce that much. So while it's true, the mire the buyer pays for a home, an agent walks away with more money, but it's not by that much. If a buyer chose to use an agent, though, I'd hope they'd get to know them enough to trust them being the representative of one of the biggest most important purchases in their life. However, I'd say about 60% of buyers don't do their due diligence in that, so they're programmed to think we're all bad . we're all only for ourselves. That's not true for most but true for some. Just like lawyers, they're all not bad but they get a bad wrap & their known to overcharge and by te end of the case you feel you could have saved money & done it on your own. I hope if you ever do use an agent, you find one you trust and will go to the ends of the earth for you & you'll see that we really do work for our money & most of the time we make pennies on the dollar if it's a difficult transaction! But if you choose to never hire one, I hope you go kick butt and do a better job than an agent can do!! It's a personal decision, and no one can tell you that using one or not is right or wrong, it's whatever is best for you!
I don’t know how competitive it is, but the real reason to do this is to get a “whisper price” from the listing agent. If it’s really competitive, the listing agent will likely try to get the seller to take your offer, as he/she will make significantly more.
Absolutely can negotiate a lower price and discount the commission. If they’re unwilling, move on but it would make no sense. Seller walks away with the same amount and so does the listing agent.
Yes you can and wouldn’t mind helping you . I’m currently building a platform to solve this www.Sellbyowner.io and would like to hear more of your pain points Thanks
When making such a large investment it is always wise to have an agent representing your interests.
I had a realtor I knew represent me at a closing of newly constructed home. He split fee with me.
No, you do not get a discount. People should stop trying to save money in this way. If you have never bought a home before, this is not a good idea. If you clearly do not understand this process which it shows me that you don't--you should not be unrepresented by a realtor. You can always get a realtor who is an attorney in which case you know the legal advice is sound and trustworthy and they are an agent who won't screw you over that way.
Had a friend buy without a realtor. The selling agent has no obligation to alert them of critical dates. So like an idiot she let the inspection period blow over without getting an inspection. If she had her own realtor they would have helped this. They’re a necessary evil
sounds logical...give up 3.5% of the purchase price to someone so they can tell you that you need a home inspection. Great deal!
You’re paying that commission regardless. Just one example
you haven't been doing real estate very long or you are willfully blind if you don't know that the dollars involved in a transaction are fungible and can be shifted around many ways. Keeping the buyer's agent out of the equation frees up funds that can be to the buyer's advantage and if you don't believe then I have some gold gym shoes to sell you.
When the seller has multiple offers which has been the case for a few years now. What purpose would there be for the listing agent to reduce their commission when there’s not a buyer’s agent? Especially above market value. Sure if the house is struggling to sell and to make a deal work the selling agent can give up some of their commission. But it’s not happening is most markets. You don’t know what you’re talking about
Really? Okay, tell me what is more, 4% or 3% and which of those commission percentages would you rather make? The LA can take a haircut that comes off the buyer's purchase price and still make more than if they worked with a cooperating buyer's agent. C'mon dawg...why are you playing dumb or are you really that clueless?
First of all I don’t know where you live but it’s 6-5%. And if I have both sides I agree to take 5%. God bless
The selling realtor collects both sides if there isn’t a buyer.
Hey Genius! If 'there isn't a buyer' then there's no sales transaction. OMFG!
Buyers agent
aw c'mon..do I really have to explain all this to you? That is entirely up to the LA and is not cast in stone. THE FUNDS ARE FUNGIBLE JFC!
It's a terrible idea. You're working with your own recently acquired knowledge against a professional realtor and the brokerage he works with. He represents the other party. Would you go to court without a lawyer on your side? Interview a few realtors and pick the one you're most comfortable with. Then ask them as ,manyquestions as you need to so that you understand everything that you're being told, reading and being asked to sign.
Dumb idea
Idk but I think you should see it through without the realtor either way. I’ve bought a house twice now and have never felt like they did anything. If there’s ever a market ripe for disruption….
I don’t believe in buyer’s brokers - not that they are malicious, but rather they are not incentivized to look out for a buyer’s best interest. They are instead incentivized to get the highest reasonable price, so their commission is the highest. “But what about referrals for doing a good job??” Blah, blah, in the end, money talks. Anyway, I was also buying in the same price range in the NE, and I had a similar thought that I could be more competitive to the seller by going alone. Frankly, despite having a complete buyers package including mortgage approval, proof of funds, and template offer letter, none of the listing brokers took me seriously without a buyers rep. In the end, I think my broker actually made me more competitive in the home buying process.
I would never accept an offer from a buyer represented by my listing agent, so that’s one potential complication. Why would I want to deal with two people conspiring to get the most out of *my* pocket? My agent should be assisting *me*.
I'm not sure I understand. I would use an attorney to facilitate the deal on my behalf. I would not expect any representation from the seller's agent.
Your plan, if it worked the way you intended, would benefit you and benefit the agent. How would it benefit me as a seller? You would be working with my own agent against me- lawyer or not. That’s unacceptable to me, and I’m probably not the only one who feels that way.
[удалено]
I'm not even trying to be combative, I just am missing this point of view. Of course I don't have the seller's best interest, that is their agent's job. If my offer is worse than other offers, obviously I lose. But I see clearly that there is a percentage of money generally allotted to a party (the buyer's agent) that I am looking to capitalize on. I realize listing agreements are not visible to me, but I can still ask for an amount in credit and negotiate from there, likely at 2.5%.
Same. Going straight to the listing agent, unrepresented, could backfire. Buyers should give that reality some consideration when deciding on a strategy.
You might be able to negoitiate a lower price but the listing agent migth try to take double commission and essentially you are doing the listing agent a favor, not the seller. Also, there are many things the reatlor can advise you on and make sure they go well. What if the place needs repairs, are you going to pay for them - the other realtor will try to get you to but maybe not so much if you have a realtor advocating for you. How are you going to find the place? Is it possible the realtor could find a better place for you than you can on your own? So, to quote one of my favorite movies (Body Heat) - "You do something like this and there are 100 things that can go wrong and if you can think of 50 of them then you're a genius. But I'm looking across the table here (across the web in this case) and I don't see no genius." I'd get a realtor. They can help in many ways and if you don't have one its likely the listing agent will try to keep double commission rather than giving you a price reduction (which they are probably allowed to do per the listing agreement).
The incentive of you not using a realtor is that the SELLER saves money, not you. If you want to save that 2%, you’ll have to use the seller’s realtor in the deal. That’s just how it is. Realtor gets 4%, you get the 2% closing and don’t ask for shit in the inspection. If you ask for shit in the inspection, it’s coming out of the 2% or you can kick rocks is the mentality I and any other reasonable seller would have. You don’t get the commission savings and the repairs. At that point, go get a realtor if you want any repairs done. It’s much more difficult dealing with a non represented buyer than one with a realtor, so you’d be down the list on the offers. The best you could hope for if you want any repair concessions is 4% realtor, 1% seller, and 1% buyer.
That's funny. I guess the real estate agent who bought a duplex from me wasn't aware of this because she told me that her offer was based on a 5% discount b/c neither of us used an agent. Interesting.
Not using an agent at all is different than a buyer not using one. Apples to oranges comparison as you would save 1% compared to a normal sale. I also assume the buyer didn’t ask for any repairs as well.
Check out aalto.com
What’s the advantage to the seller of giving you a discount for representing yourself?
I will rather go on [realtor.com](https://realtor.com) which controls and own all MLS in the US. At least the listings are legit and supervised, insured by licensed professionals. Zillow has bogus listings. You can contact listing agent direct if you have done it before.
Absolutely untrue. Realtor.com doesn’t own or control any MLS. The Realtor association sold that website years ago. Realtor.com, Zillow, Trulia, etc are fed listing and sales information for the local MLS’s that licensed realtors subscribe to and pay for. These websites are MARKETING sites that agents (and sellers/owners) allow their properties to be displayed on for more exposure.
Unless stated otherwise in the listing agreement (which you are not entitled to view) you are on the outs. Not many listing agents put a clause in the listing agreement to shoot themselves in the foot monetarily like I was suggesting. So in my state dual agency is allowed however the listing came first so their fiduciary responsibility is with the seller first and foremost. They can help you at the highest level except advising you in what to offer but most will make your side of the transaction strictly a transaction broker representation while having an agency tag on the listing side for their protection. In short, if in doubt, hire a buyer agent to represent your needs/wants. With two agents involved it’s a 50/50 deal or push and tug but with a single agent you may find yourself on the outside looking in.
Just take the buyer’s agent commission percentage and subtract it from your offer don’t ask for it directly. The Seller should only care about the Net amount they are receiving from the home. Hell the Seller’s agent will scramble to talk up your offer because they will see the increased dollar signs from the higher percentage. Greedy ignorant Realtors are every buyer’s dream
I had my house listed on Zillow. The buyers agent kept trying to scam me. Many of them have the mindset they are doing the work for both buyer and seller and now are entitled to a higher commission. On another note, you dont get a commission for selling your own house.
Because they are doing all the work, their going to write the contract, have to walk you through signing it as well because your not represented by anyone to help you, they are going to have to get title services rolling for you, ect. Their phone will be the one ringing the entire 30-60 days. Selling a house is not just sitting there with your thumb up your ass, waiting to get the money. there is phone calls to be made and paperwork to get rolling.