Default User wrote:
46erjoe wrote:

WOW! What a bunch of great ideas and tips. Thanks everybody.
I'm going through a realtor who unfortunately works for the company
selling the home. So he is in the employ of the seller, not me the
buyer.



I hate to tell you this, but the buying agents ALWAYS work for the
seller. Why? Because you don't pay them, they get a split of the
commission.
That was true but nowdays many states, not all, have Buyer's Brokers in
addition to the traditional Seller's Brokers. Also, some states have
Dual Brokers to handle situations such as a large brokerage house that
is both buying and selling houses. And still worse, there are Neutral
Brokers in some states. Call your state Division of Registration for
Real Estate and ask!

Very often a "Buyer's Broker" is just another name for the buyer's
attorney. All buyers should employ technical advisers such as home
inspectors, title researchers, surveyors, etc. In some states Appraisal
is a licensed profession so be certain your inspector has a license.
Check the Yellow Pages.

You bank may want some inspections. But always remember these are to
protect the bank's interest, not necessarily yours.



That being said, good veteran agents will look out for you. That's
because they're smart enough to know that the real money isn't in
screwing you on a single sale, it's the repeat business and referrals.

During my last house buying round, there was a house that not only was
listed by my agent's company, but was her listing, so she would get the
entire commision if I bought it. Additionally, it was a limited listing
(transfer situation, the seller's employer would buy the house if not
sold in a short period) that was going to run out in a few days. She
recommended that I buy a different house in the same area.

I like the idea of hiring an independent appraiser. How do I find one?
Obviously I'm not going to ask the realtor, and what will they
typically charege?


If you don't trust your buying agent enough to even take referrals, I'd
get a new agent immediately. You have no contract with this agent.

A good agent should be able to give you a list of appraisors and provide
you with a comparative market analysis of homes in the area.



Brian

dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

If you go to a broker and say, "I want to buy a house" agents working
for him will show you houses but that does not make them buyer's
agents... they are still representing the seller and are compensated by
a portion of the commission arising from any sales they make.

Which is how virtually all properties in the US are bought. It's almost
certainly the relationship the OP was describing.

3. You are perfectly free to go to a broker and say, "I want to *hire*
you as a buyer's agent".

You can, in theory. Almost no one does. What kind of fee would you have
to pay, considering that the normal commission split is about 3% of the
sales price? Even in a very moderately-priced market like St. Louis,
that's going to be an average of around $3000.



Brian

ccsikyr wrote:

Brian rightly points out that buyer's agents have an incentive that
pushes the other way: to treat you right so they get referrals.
OTOH, in a large hot market, agents will rely on referrals to differing
degrees. Some agents will be able to simply cater to ill-informed
buyers and treat them poorly, not caring much about referrals. Agents
with large cheesy ads in the paper are prime suspects here.


It certainly wasn't my intention to say that there aren't stupid agents,
or greedy agents, or lazy agents, or poorly informed agents, or any
number of other bad types. There are. Usually you hear about bad sales
agents versus buying agents, but there are any number of horror stories
out there.

Caution is always warranted. Unreasoning paranoia is not.



Brian

Stubby wrote:
Default User wrote:

46erjoe wrote:

WOW! What a bunch of great ideas and tips. Thanks everybody.
I'm going through a realtor who unfortunately works for the company
selling the home. So he is in the employ of the seller, not me the
buyer.




I hate to tell you this, but the buying agents ALWAYS work for the
seller. Why? Because you don't pay them, they get a split of the
commission.

That was true but nowdays many states, not all, have Buyer's Brokers in
addition to the traditional Seller's Brokers.


Yes, and I should have clarified that I was speaking of traditional
practice. It's (from reading between the lines) very likely the set-up
the OP is describing.

As I mentioned elsewhere, I don't know anyone who's used a paid broker.
I'm also not sure of what happens with the commission in those cases,
whether the buyer gets the half that would normally go to the buying
agent or what.



Brian

It certainly wasn't my intention to say that there aren't stupid agents,
or greedy agents, or lazy agents, or poorly informed agents, or any
number of other bad types. There are. Usually you hear about bad sales
agents versus buying agents, but there are any number of horror stories
out there.

Actually, smart, diligent, well-informed agents will act just the way I
described. There are, in all markets, an abundance of people who
simply choose not to be thorough in their search process. Some agents
will do a steady business in serving those clients, call them
"tourists". Since referrals aren't the focus of their business, they
are less of a check on their behavior.

Caution is always warranted. Unreasoning paranoia is not.

I agree. Unreasoning? As I just explained, the existence of those
agents is quite rational.

Default User wrote:
dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

If you go to a broker and say, "I want to buy a house" agents working
for him will show you houses but that does not make them buyer's
agents... they are still representing the seller and are compensated
by a portion of the commission arising from any sales they make.

Which is how virtually all properties in the US are bought. It's
almost certainly the relationship the OP was describing.

I never said it wasn't. You were misusing/couldn't get your head around
the term "buyer's agent"... I was explaining.
________________

3. You are perfectly free to go to a broker and say, "I want to
*hire* you as a buyer's agent".

You can, in theory. Almost no one does.

Nonsense. Lots of people do. I have.
________________

What kind of fee would you
have to pay, considering that the normal commission split is about 3%
of the sales price? Even in a very moderately-priced market like St.
Louis, that's going to be an average of around $3000.

As explained previously, fees depend upon what is agreed to between the
hirer & hiree. Commissions may or may not enter into that fee.

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

Default User wrote:

As I mentioned elsewhere, I don't know anyone who's used a paid
broker. I'm also not sure of what happens with the commission in
those cases, whether the buyer gets the half that would normally go
to the buying agent or what.

You are being incredibly thick.

Repeat after me...THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "THE BUYING AGENT" UNLESS
YOU HAVE SPECIFICALLY HIRED A BROKER FOR THAT PURPOSE. The agent who
showed you the property, relayed offers to the seller, etc is NOT a
"buying agent". They are seller's agents dealing with a buyer.

If you or someone else *has* hired an actual buyer's agent, that has no
effect on the divvying up of the commission between the listing agent
and the agent who sold the property (who may also be the listor).


--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

You are being incredibly thick.

Ah yes, a bit of name-calling. That gets your point across.

Repeat after me...THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "THE BUYING AGENT" UNLESS
YOU HAVE SPECIFICALLY HIRED A BROKER FOR THAT PURPOSE.

Nonsense. YOU may define it that way, but that is certainly not common
parlance.

It's also most likely what the original poster in this thread was
talking about when he used the term. Very few people use what you call a
"buyer's agent", almost all property is bought the way I described.


Brian

ccsikyr wrote:

Caution is always warranted. Unreasoning paranoia is not.


I agree. Unreasoning? As I just explained, the existence of those
agents is quite rational.

I'm not sure that we're talking about the same thing. I was referring to
the OP's "I can't trust my agent, not even to recommend an appraiser!!!"


Brian

dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

You can, in theory. Almost no one does.


Nonsense. Lots of people do. I have.


What percentage of housing sales are completed with the help of such an
agent each year?



Brian

Default User wrote:
dadiOH wrote:

Default User wrote:


You are being incredibly thick.


Ah yes, a bit of name-calling. That gets your point across.

Repeat after me...THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "THE BUYING AGENT" UNLESS
YOU HAVE SPECIFICALLY HIRED A BROKER FOR THAT PURPOSE.


Nonsense. YOU may define it that way, but that is certainly not common
parlance.

It's also most likely what the original poster in this thread was
talking about when he used the term. Very few people use what you call a
"buyer's agent", almost all property is bought the way I described.

I suggest you call the State division of Registration to find out the
answer in your state.

Default User wrote:
dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

You can, in theory. Almost no one does.


Nonsense. Lots of people do. I have.


What percentage of housing sales are completed with the help of such
an agent each year?

Who gives a rat's ass?


--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

Default User wrote:
dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

You are being incredibly thick.

Ah yes, a bit of name-calling. That gets your point across.

Apparently not.
________________

Repeat after me...THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "THE BUYING AGENT" UNLESS
YOU HAVE SPECIFICALLY HIRED A BROKER FOR THAT PURPOSE.

Nonsense. YOU may define it that way, but that is certainly not common
parlance.

Fine, stay ignorant.

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

dadiOH wrote:

Default User wrote:

You can, in theory. Almost no one does.


Nonsense. Lots of people do. I have.


What percentage of housing sales are completed with the help of such
an agent each year?


Who gives a rat's ass?

Feeling the argument slipping away from you? Don't feel bad.



Brian

Default User wrote:

Feeling the argument slipping away from you? Don't feel bad.

There was no argument as far as I'm concerned. Someone took exception
to kokonutty's 100% accurate post, I explained his misunderstanding and
then you jumped in full of ignorance.


--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

Stubby wrote:
Default User wrote:
Very few people use what you call
a "buyer's agent", almost all property is bought the way I described.


I suggest you call the State division of Registration to find out the
answer in your state.

Oh I'm far too lazy for anything like that. Let me know what you find.



Brian

dadiOH wrote:

There was no argument as far as I'm concerned. Someone took exception
to kokonutty's 100% accurate post, I explained his misunderstanding and
then you jumped in full of ignorance.


I believe that you have mischaracterized the discussion to this point.

Kokonutty's post was in response to mine, directed at the original poster.



Brian

46erjoe wrote:
All things being equal, how much should a prospective home buyer offer
to a home seller. If I go too far below the asking price, I could
insult the seller and he won't want to deal with me again. If I go too
near the seller's asking price, I stant to lose a lot of money. Any
general rule of thumb?

1% less, 5% 10% ?????

****ing tight ass ****!

Default User wrote:
dadiOH wrote:

There was no argument as far as I'm concerned. Someone took
exception to kokonutty's 100% accurate post, I explained his
misunderstanding and then you jumped in full of ignorance.


I believe that you have mischaracterized the discussion to this point.

Kokonutty's post was in response to mine, directed at the original
poster.

OK, he corrected *your* misunderstanding.



--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

In article , e
says...
On 12/31/2005 6:23 PM or thereabouts, George E. Cawthon appears,
somewhat unbelievably, to have opined:

That's not totally true. In some cases the assessor is far behind (like
5 years). OTOH, some are fairly up to date, but all assessors offices
record the sales prices of homes, so you can check recent sale prices of
similar homes.


This is not true in every state. Texas, for example, will not provide
this information to the public, considering it to be a matter of privacy.


Bexar County is in Texas. Have a look at
http://www.countyclerk.bexar.landata.com/default.asp?

photo copies of deeds and a lot more.

dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

Kokonutty's post was in response to mine, directed at the original
poster.


OK, he corrected *your* misunderstanding.


Once again, you are incorrect. There's no misunderstanding on my part
whatsoever.

You've decided that you get to define terms, but that isn't the case. If
you'd like to use something more specific like, "fee-based buyer's
agent" or some such, that would be fine. However, you're incorrect as it
stands. That fact that traditional buyer's agents get their money from a
split of the sales commission doesn't make them selling agents.

You're wrong, and you'll continue to BE wrong no matter how much want to
it be otherwise.


Brian

In article ,
says...
dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

Kokonutty's post was in response to mine, directed at the original
poster.


OK, he corrected *your* misunderstanding.


Once again, you are incorrect. There's no misunderstanding on my part
whatsoever.

You've decided that you get to define terms, but that isn't the case. If
you'd like to use something more specific like, "fee-based buyer's
agent" or some such, that would be fine. However, you're incorrect as it
stands. That fact that get their money from a
split of the sales commission doesn't make them selling agents.

Brian


dadiOH did not define the terms. There is so much confusion about
who represents who and who pays who that in Texas, and I'm sure in
other states, specific Representation Disclosures must be made.

Go to http://www.capitol.state.tx.us and look up Tile 7 Chapter
1101. I'm sure other states also have online codes.

Here a few quotes from the Texas Code.
"Before working with a real estate broker, you should know that the
duties of a broker depend on whom the broker represents. If you
are a prospective seller or landlord (owner) or a prospective buyer
or tenant (buyer), you should know that the broker who lists the
property for sale or lease is the owner's agent. A broker who acts
as a subagent represents the owner in cooperation with the listing
broker. A broker who acts as a buyer's agent represents the buyer.
A broker may act as an intermediary between the parties if the
parties consent in writing. A broker can assist you in locating a
property, preparing a contract or lease, or obtaining financing
without representing you. A broker is obligated by law to treat
you honestly."

"IF THE BROKER REPRESENTS THE OWNER: The broker becomes the
owner's agent by entering into an agreement with the owner, usually
through a written listing agreement, or by agreeing to act as a
subagent by accepting an offer of subagency from the listing
broker. A subagent may work in a different real estate office. A
listing broker or subagent can assist the buyer but does not
represent the buyer and must place the interests of the owner
first. The buyer should not tell the owner's agent anything the
buyer would not want the owner to know because an owner's agent
must disclose to the owner any material information known to the
agent."

I suspect that Brian's "traditional buyer's agent" is legally a
*subagent* that legally represents the owner/seller.
As defined in the Code. "Subagent" means a license holder who:
(A) represents a principal through cooperation with and the
consent of a broker representing the principal; and
(B) is not sponsored by or associated with the principal's broker.

There are Buyer's Brokers .... and once again from the standard
required Texas Representation Disclosure ...

"If you choose to have a broker represent you, you should enter
into a written agreement with the broker that clearly establishes
the broker's obligations and your obligations. The agreement
should state how and by whom the broker will be paid. You have the
right to choose the type of representation, if any, you wish to
receive. Your payment of a fee to a broker does not necessarily
establish that the broker represents you. If you have any
questions regarding the duties and responsibilities of the broker,
you should resolve those questions before proceeding"

MikeP wrote:

I suspect that Brian's "traditional buyer's agent" is legally a
*subagent* that legally represents the owner/seller.
As defined in the Code. "Subagent" means a license holder who:
(A) represents a principal through cooperation with and the
consent of a broker representing the principal; and
(B) is not sponsored by or associated with the principal's broker.

It's something along those lines. That's what I said in the first place,
the buyer's agent is working for the seller. Call it a subagent if you
like, that's the agent that the vast majority of buyer's use currently.



Brian

Default User wrote:
MikeP wrote:

I suspect that Brian's "traditional buyer's agent" is legally a
*subagent* that legally represents the owner/seller.
As defined in the Code. "Subagent" means a license holder who:
(A) represents a principal through cooperation with and the
consent of a broker representing the principal; and
(B) is not sponsored by or associated with the principal's broker.

It's something along those lines. That's what I said in the first
place, the buyer's agent is working for the seller.


Then he/she isn't a buyer's agent. aside...gad, what a dolt

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

Default User wrote:
dadiOH wrote:
Default User wrote:

Kokonutty's post was in response to mine, directed at the original
poster.


OK, he corrected *your* misunderstanding.


Once again, you are incorrect. There's no misunderstanding on my part
whatsoever.

Then you should stop referring to a broker representing a seller but
dealing with a buyer as a "buyer's agent".
________________

You've decided that you get to define terms, but that isn't the case.

I'm not defining anything, I'm just telling you how it is but you are
too inexperienced and/or semantically challenged and/or thick to
understand.
_______________

If you'd like to use something more specific like, "fee-based buyer's
agent" or some such, that would be fine. However, you're incorrect as
it stands.

I'm right as rain.
_______________

That fact that traditional buyer's agents get their money
from a split of the sales commission doesn't make them selling agents.

And yet you say they are working for the seller.

You are still clueless. Avoid any and all real estate transactions.
You might also want to check on the legal meaning of "agency".


--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico