A win-win in dual agency
Letter to the Editor
By Inman News, Tuesday, January 26, 2010.Re: 'The dual-agency double standard' (Jan. 21)
Dear Editor:
I have heard this argument for over 30 years. And it is flawed. The seller has hired me to develop a qualified buyer interested in buying their property. People espousing this argument would suggest that in every negotiation there is a definitive winner and loser. In any successful negotiation, it must result in a win-win agreement.
One doesn't have to beat up the other party to feel that they have been well-represented. A reputable agent can present both positions and let those parties make their own decisions. Professional negotiation is the art of bringing two parties together, not crucifying one over the other.
Rick Scott
Associate broker
Lexington, Ky.
***
What's your opinion? Leave your comments below or send a letter to the editor. To contact the writer, click the byline at the top of the story.
All rights reserved. This content may not be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in part or in whole, without written permission of Inman News. Use of this content without permission is a violation of federal copyright law.
You must login or register to post a comment.
Submitted by Paul Howard on January 26, 2010 - 4:48am.
Rick says: "In any successful negotiation, it must result in a win-win agreement."
Rick confuses 'win-win' with letting the two parties work it out themselves and not feeling 'beat up'. Being an advocate has nothing to do with 'beating up the other party'.
If the other party doesn't agree to the price proposed or the repairs requested by a buyer they can just say no and wait for the next buyer - if there is one.
The job of an advocate (for a buyer) is to help their client get the best terms, price and house possible by providing them with information, alternatives and advice that will lead to that result.
If all you want to be is a transaction broker and consumers will pay for your clerical services - go for it. But don't downplay the importance of advocacy.
Paul Howard, Broker/Owner
http://www.facebook.com/homebuyers
NJHomeBuyer.com Realty
Cherry Hill NJ 08002
Submitted by Nick Chucales on January 26, 2010 - 9:02am.
Mr. Scott,
Your philosophy regarding dual agency is what I would expect of someone that is more concerned about their commission check than they are about representing their client. You have a fiduciary duty to your client, regardless of seller or buyer, to ensure they get the best deal possible. That means not leaving "money on the table" for the seller and making cetain that your buyer isn't over paying for the home and is protected from unseen and/or undisclosed issues with the home. The latter occurred quit a bit during the real estate boom. As long as there are agents that believe that you can "serve two masters" the consumer will never look at residential real estate agents as true professionals.
Submitted by William Metzker on January 26, 2010 - 9:38am.
Hey Rick--if you were seeking a divorce, would you go to your wife's lawyer to represent you and ask for a win-win?
Submitted by Cindy Morgan on January 26, 2010 - 11:09am.
If Rick is the listing broker of a property, and Rick also represents two buyers, both of whom make offers to the Seller Rick is representing, is it possible for a win-win-win situation to exist?
Alternatively, if Rick listed two sellers' properties which were located next door to each other, each property having very similar characteristics, and a Buyer came forward requesting Rick to represent the Buyer in purchasing one of the two properties, is THAT also a possible win-win-win situation?
How will Rick fulfill his specific duties of loyalty and confidentiality in these two scenarios? In the second (alternative) scenario, would Rick have a duty to inform both of his Seller principals of the terms of the offers presented? An agent is obligated to safeguard his/her principal's confidence and secrets or that which might weaken the principals bargaining position if it were revealed . . so how would that be fulfilled here???
Just wondering . . . .
Submitted by George Maso, Broker Associate on January 26, 2010 - 1:25pm.
Rick's statements and those of the four following
comments all have their merits But the problem is that no one is approaching the State lawmakers in those states which have Dual Agency, (try SC with Dual Agency and/or Designated agency) and convincing them that it is in the publics' best interests to have either full representation, No represetation or Transaction (limited representation) brokerage.
Cindy Morgan's comments are paricularly pertinent to the difficulties of dual agency representation.
Submitted by Nick Chucales on January 26, 2010 - 3:12pm.
Mr. Maso,
While I agree with your statement the reality is that agents/brokers, such as the one that started this thread, will lobby with the NAR against such attempts. I would like to see it go a step further and have either full representation or no representation, this way there will be no confusion as to what type of representation the parties have.
Submitted by Ileri Ogunfiditimi, REALTOR® on January 29, 2010 - 10:04pm.
Rick,
I agree with you that dual agency has utility in the real estate brokerage business. But the problem is that many agents don't understand how to use it as an effective tool. Dual agency presents an additional option to working with parties involved in the real estate transaction.
And although real estate agents have legal agency obligations when working with clients and customers, agents are not attorneys. Agents are brokers of "the deal" and are not retained by the public in the same capacity as attorneys.
Real estate agents and attorneys perform very different functions when serving their constituents so care must be taken when comparing the two professions. Those who want more information on real estate agency should check out John Reilly's book, "Agency Relationships in Real Estate."
The book does an excellent job of explaining the different agency relationships that agents engage in during the course of doing business. Practical examples are also included to reinforce one's understanding of the subject as well. Highly recommended reading.
Ileri Ogunfiditimi, REALTOR®
Ileri Ogunfiditimi, LLC/Jobin Realty
7825 Tuckerman Lane, Suite 201
Potomac, MD 20854
Direct Dial (240)403-3400, Ext 742
Direct Fax (866)283-7840
Email: ileri@ileriogunfiditimi.com
www.ileriogunfiditimi.com
www.jobinrealty.com
Submitted by Peter C. Fyler on January 31, 2010 - 10:34am.
Rick,
It is astounding to me that someone who implies being engaged in the real estate profession for “over 30 years” can make a statement like this. There is so much more involved in the advocacy of buyers, as well as sellers, that bringing the two parties together in a negotiation is just the half of it. With all due respect, your MO is simplistic and clearly self-serving. The mere fact that you have been hearing this argument for so long is testimony to the reality that dual agency has been, is, and will continue to be a problem for consumers. “No man can serve two masters ….”
Peter C. Fyler, CRS, REALTOR®
SplitRock Real Estate, LLC
Exclusively Representing Buyers
Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts
BuyersOnly@SplitRockRE.com
http://www.SplitRockRE.com