jmood

Aaah, I remember now, I must have asked before and been told the same thing.
Makes sense given the state of the marketplace but yet makes no sense whatsoever to me personally. I AM CREDIBLE I want to yell, but never ever want to use an agent if I can avoid it. All my experience of them - except one - so far has been that they are annoying, don't keep their word, waste your time etc etc....
But then again, I am a control freak.

Pulaski

A buyers agent can probably be a pain, but you just need to make sure they know who is in charge, and who is the servant. Our buyers agent provided advice but we didn't allow her to push us around.

dunroving

My experience was that the seller's realtor (the listing realtor) wouldn't help me to see the property she was (supposed to be) responsible for selling.

Only a realtor could help me get access to a property, and the seller's realtor wouldn't "do the work of your realtor" as she put it. She wouldn't ask the seller if they would show me the house, either.

So essentially, where I was in TN, without a buyer's realtor, I couldn't get inside any house I wanted to buy (unless it was For Sale By Owner).

The fact that the commission is 6% is a side isue - I was simply pointing out that for each sale, there are two sides who get commisssion causes silly petty political posturing at times. In the end, realtors sometimes spite themselves, the seller and the buyer.

Michael

It's pretty tough not to use an agent. You can sell by owner in the US but 99% of the homes are on the MLS. You can pay to have your home listed on the MLS but you have to indicate what you are willing to pay the buyer's agent. If you indicate 0%, no agents will show the home or if it is too low, only a few will show the home. You may be able to find someone that isn't using a buyer agent but who is going to do all the paperwork for you and will each other trust the other that the paperwork is being done correctly when neither has done it before or are both of you going to have to hire a real estate attorney. Companies also sell services to do the paperwork (about $2,900 including MLS) but everything is done from afar. If you use one of those companies and go to the title company, you have no one with you to make sure that all the title company paperwork is correct so again you'll probably have to hire a real estate attorney.

Therefore I have never tried to sell my home without an agent since it's too complicated, will likely cost as much, will get fewer buyers, the buyer will expect a discount since you aren't paying real estate commissions, neither trusts each other, and in the end, you are a nervous wreck and not sure if everything was done correctly.

jmood

I didn't know that the estate agent does the sale/purchase paperwork. I thought all that was done by the attorneys.

So, in the US you can complete a purchase without an attorney because the estate agents are "licensed" to do the paperwork???

sir_eccles

There is often another finger in the pie. The escrow/title agency. They are the ones that will actually prepare the paperwork and file it with the state.

hungryhorace

I wouldn't not use an attorney to complete the paperwork. It cost us just under a grand. Why would you not use one??

jmood

I wasn't saying I wouldn't use one. To the contrary, I was reacting to Michael's post and asking about needing/not needing to use one.

p.s. If you later (after completion) find out that something is wrong with the house is the attorney liable, like they are in the UK?

jmood

But I thought it was written above that the seller pays all the commission. I think I'm confused about the EA commissions in sale/purchase situation.

jmood

This.

S Folinsky

It depends upon the locality. Here in California, it is extremely uncommon for an attorney to be involved in a residential real estate transaction. One of my offspring recently purchased in another state and the services of an attorney was required. From what I understand, state law provided that a residential purchase contract was not valid until an attorney signed off on it.

S Folinsky

Notionally speaking, there is really no such thing as a "buyer's agent." The realtors cooperate via "multiple listing services" ["MLS"].

At least here in California, it is quite possible, in fact common for the buyer and seller to go through the same agency and that agency pockets the entire commission. This usually happens when a seller lists with another agent already working "for" a prospective purchaser. Given the fact that there is a lag period between a prospective seller listing with a realtor and the listing hitting the MLS, the agency has an opportunity to keep the transaction in house on both ends of the sale.

hungryhorace

Unfortunately not. Though I would sue the Attorney anyway just for good measure. An owner is compelled to take Lenders Title Insurance, and can also purchase Owners Title Insurance to protect against any claims / liens - see my thread on this recently.

dunroving

But isn't that like both sides in a divorce case using the same attorney? In negotiations of price for example, how can a realtor be fighting for a lower price for you and a higher price for the seller, at the same time?

Seems counterintuitive - and certainly advised against in a lot of the "How to" guides I read before buying in the US.

Pulaski

People should learn to play poker, because that is what "negotiation" of a house price is. The buyer who does best is the one who best communicates a willingness to walk away, while the seller who does best tries to get a buyer "on the hook" then pretends there is a better offer. The best bluffer wins. If either side betrays their position of weakness they might as well fold. My realtor does what I tell her, even if it makes her uncomfortable on occasion!