Firefly,

Joseph is correct. Not only is there no "standard industry commission or co-broke" All commission and fees are negotiable. In fact, agents who discuss commission with agents from other firms in person or online are violating federal anti-trust laws. It may be considered "collusion".

A broker that doesn't co-broke is neither unethical or illegal. There are different types of brokerage business models. There are flat fee and discount brokers and VOWS, they are not illegal or unethical they are different.
They may not be full service brokers. They offer limited services. I personally don't think they are very good business models but I seriously believe that we have to avoid being quick to accuse others of unethical and illegal actions.

Is it ethical to accuse a broker of unethical or even "illegal" behavior without specific knowledge of unethical or illegal actions?

I'm associated with the largest brokerage in NYC. We co-broke, we are a full service brokerage but other real estate business models exist albeit a small market segment but they are not illegal.

The condo in Astoria is not a pocket listing because it was advertised. You saw it on Craigslist. A pocket listing is when a broker has a listing and keeps it a secret except for certain clients usually in their own firm.

While I recommend buyer representation and in NY buyers are entitled to representation there is no law that a buyer's agent must be paid by the seller or seller’s agent. Co-broke agreements are between member firms that belong to the same real estate board or MLS or have reciprocal cooperation agreements. Buyers in NY are entitled to their own representation but in some cases the buyer pays their broker not the seller or seller's broker.

Most brokers co-broke because it's smart business, it makes sense, it is the best way to sell a property but there is no state law that mandates cooperation between brokers.

I bought my apartment without a broker years before I became a broker. It turned out to be a great financial decision. It wasn't brain surgery. In my opinion a bad broker is worse than having no broker. I have seen brokers lose apartments for their clients because they were incompetent and lacked training.

You live in the neighborhood, you did research, you know prices and what you are willing to pay. By law the seller’s agent must disclose who she represents. As a seller’s agent she does not represent your interest as the buyer. However in dealing with you the buyer, a seller’s agent should exercise reasonable skill and care in performance of the agent’s duties. She must deal honestly, fairly and in good faith; and disclose all facts known to the agent materially affecting the value or desirability of property, except otherwise provided by law.

Knowing that make the offer, specify your price terms and contingencies. Don’t tell her any personal information that gives the seller an advantage. Make sure your lawyer protects your deposit and interests in the contract.

Go for it! Good Luck! I hope you get it.

Mitchell Hall, Associate Broker
The Corcoran Group
917-312-0924
mhall@corcoran.com

"I personally would always utilize a buyers broker, to best represent me. A house is a large investment, therefore; you want someone, tottaly in your corner."

Great, can you explain what happens in your corner that gives that "best" representation and totality that exists in your corner? 99.999% of agents say this. Not one can explain anything different that is done more than the listing agent. Never heard how an agent can get the house for less, nor can they explain what they do that makes it better. It is just a self serving remark to make a buyer come to you for the sale.

"however it's well worth the effort to engage the services of your own agent"

Ahh.. Explain the "well worth" part.. how so?

"Only then do you know there is someone who is putting your interests ahead of all others"

Sure, because the buyer agent is getting paid.. that is why you have their "best interest". But why would you think the listing agent could not offer the same service?

Well, it all depends on how much attention and representation you want? I personally would always utilize a buyers broker, to best represent me. A house is a large investment, therefore; you want someone, tottaly in your corner. If you have any other questions or comments, you can contact me, I am an agent at Exit Realty Top Properties.

Ciro Traino
347-255-0863
cctraino@gmail.com http://www.facebook.com/C Ciro Traino
http://www.exittopproperties.com/

I will echo the comments of those who suggest using a Buyers Broker. I know things work different in NYC and that may complicate things a bit, however it's well worth the effort to engage the services of your own agent. Only then do you know there is someone who is putting your interests ahead of all others. It may also complicate things in that you have viewed the condo on your own, which in this case likely means with the listing agent. In that case it may be too late to bring another agent into the picture and you will then want to engage legal representation.

Ginny Lee
I dont know how to reply to your statement regarding transactional brokerage, TB. In FL law a TB agent doesnt represent either party in the transaction, but the transaction itself. Furthermore you have a CUSTOMER relationship with a buyer or seller, not creating a CLIENT relationship as defined by agency law and the NAR code of ethics. TB is worse than disclosed dual agency as far as watering down representation vs. zero representation of TB.

" It sounds to me like the seller's agent is only thinking of their bottom line which causes great concern"

What is your great concern? Why does it sound to you like te seller agent s only thinking about their bottom line? Where do you read that?

The post reads the seller agency does not co-broke. Maybe it is an exclusive listng...

Detail that concern.. why should this buyer be concerned? What do you imagine will happen?

You are entitled to have representation by a Buyers Agent that can guide you through the negotiations and purchasing process. I highly recommend you continue with the aid of representation. The attorney will take care of the legal aspects of clear title and condo documents etc. It sounds to me like the seller's agent is only thinking of their bottom line which causes great concern. Just because you see a property with one agent does not mean that you are forever bound to work through them especially if they are representing the seller. I hope this helps, maybe also consult with your attorney for his advice.

"But a buyer's broker can help you out tremendously. A buyer's broker is required by law to get you the best price and terms in your housing search. A buyer's broker is a home buying specialist that can help you through this process. It is good to have someone on your side."

This is where the whole "demand a buyer’s agent" thing gets silly.

What Dom, do you do or would you do to get this house for the buyer more than the listing agent would do? Let’s get past the whole adversarial thing.. it is nonsense. What are your specialist tactics that will get this house cheaper? What exactly will you do on the "side" of the buyer that the listing agent cannot?

The Listing agent can pull comps and do a "cma" for the buyer also.. And present that to the buyer, yes. Same as you would.

People say the Realtor is "greedy" o.k.. How so? The Listing agent wants to sell the house them self because the buyer came to them directly .. Now, I spend 3 hours with someone and show them the house and all of its advantages and so on, create a relationship with them too.. Which the listing agent can do.. Why would I want to have that person call in another agent.. for what? There is nothing that a new agent can now do to get this house any cheaper than the seller wants to sell it. Period.

When I work as a buyer’s agent, yes, I take care of my client and close the transaction. But never in an adversarial stance. Usually I want the buyer and seller to speak and have a good relationship. It makes for a great deal.

The worst transactions I have ever had was with some schmoes that call themselves exclusive buyers agents.. Horribletransactions, which in fact, the poor buyers actually PAID MORE for the homes that they bought BECAUSE of the agents! Yes! Both Transactions!

So, what are the specialist tatics and what on your side stuff do you do?

Simply, the seller's agent does not want to co-broke because he does not want to split his commission. But a buyer's broker can help you out tremendously. A buyer's broker is required by law to get you the best price and terms in your housing search. A buyer's broker is a home buying specialist that can help you through this process. It is good to have someone on your side. Alot of condo sellers use high pressure tactics and are not interested in helping you COMPARE AND CONTRAST other apartments.

DOM PASCUAL, J.D., ESQ.
ASSOCIATE REAL ESTATE BROKER
"We combine excellence with intelligence."
Green Homes NYC
1140 Broadway
New York, NY, 10001
Cell: (631) 741-2764
E-mail: dompascual@gmail.com
Blog: http://dompascual.wordpress.com/
Listings: http://dompascual.postlets.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/dompascualesq
Facebook Profiles: Dom Pascual; Manhattan Broker

Buyers agents are paid by the seller. That means that experienced representation will cost you nothing. I would be weary of a listing agent that would not co-broke. It is also not in your best interest since she represents the seller.

Dual agency is legal in Las Vegas not sure about NY but from what people are saying here it sounds like it is legal in NY too. I would have your agent look it up on the MLS and see if it offer a co-op fee. If it does and she is refusing to show her seller offers I would have your broker contact the sellers broker and see if you can get your offer in. It sounds like the agent may just be being greedy. If so, that is the last person you want representing you especially on a dual agency deal. The seller pays the commission for the buyers agent vs real estate attorney you will have to pay for out of pocket. Hope this helps.

I think it is important to understand dual agency in this situation. If the Broker doesn't co-broke (weird- why would you be selfish and limit potential buyers for your listing? Maybe it's a NY thing?), they have a duty to act in their seller's best interest (obviously), but if they are representing both sides, they have a fiduciary duty to you, the buyer as well. It is hard to work for both sides in many situations... but it could work- just depends on the integrity of the Broker/listing agent.

Attorneys don't negotiate a sale- they look over contracts and make sure the legal aspect is just that- legal and reinforced when needed. Leave the legal to the attorneys and the Real Estate transaction to a REALTOR =)

Good Luck!

It sounds like you decided to move forward without an agent based on what you have mentioned. You can certainly use an attorney to close the transaction but my question would be did you do everything possible or even know how to research everything concerning the property to make sure your best interest is covered?

So many things can occur in a property transaction and no two are exactly alike. Why risk making costly mistakes or missing opportunities when you can have expert representation without cost to you?

Buyer agency commissions are factored into the list price. Just because buyers don't utilize a real estate agent doesn't mean anyone is going to credit that savings to you.

Purchase price is just one of many important factors in a real estate transaction. Do yourself a big favor and have someone guide you through the process. The next time you purchase.

Firstly- if this apartment is in NYC - and the listing firm is a member of REBNY and the property has also been advertised to other firms through sites such as :OLR, or an MLS (which does exist in Manhattan by the way)- 'not co-broking' is not an option, unless of course, the seller has asked it not be co-broked with a particular firm or other broker. Best for you to have a Buyer's Agent to represent your interest, and negotiating- because ultimately, unless the listing broker becomes a Dual Agent in this transaction, she only represents the best interest of the seller.

You need as many people looking out for your best interests as possible.

Firefly -

There are no "sides" until you make sides.

Buying a house is not a game of sides for people to take an adversarial stance. The thought is ridiculous. If you make it adversarial, you probably will have a tough transaction. Most everyone that lists their home for sale are good people, not lying and making stuff up or hiding mutant forming defects in their home. If you make it that way… then it will be.

It is o.k. to get an agent of your own, of course. But don’t be sold on the whole buyers agent get you more and protect you thing.. there is nothing more that agent can do for you to get the house cheaper than the owner wants to sell it for.

You should of course, get an attorney to look out for your best interest. Your attorney is going to complete the contract to your benefit, negotiate home repairs during attorney review and complete the transaction.
Besides, the agent said she does not co-broke.. So it is a moot point.

Go buy the house. Get an attorney and a good home inspector.

Yes. A good buyer’s broker can give valuable information about the area and values - what to look for and how to get a deal done. It's really a free service anyway - so pick wisely. The seller is already contracted to pay a certain amount.

You can use a transaction Broker because they can represent both sides so you can get more information and it won't be so one sided,

You need to have SOMEONE on your side. You either pay an attorney out of your own pocket or hire a buyer's agent and let the seller pay for it.

It looks pretty simple - if the seller's broker does not have to co-broke this listing (assuming she is not a REBNY member and is not obligated to co-broke ), then you do not have a broker and can make your offer by yourself. In this case the Seller's broker will become a dual agent and has to provide a dual representation disclosure that she represents both, a seller and a buyer.

This opens the door to a conflict of interest on the broker's part because as a seller's broker she should negotiate in his best interest and as your broker - in your best interest, and it is difficult to make sure you are adequately represented throughout all the stages of the process from making and negotiating an offer to the closing.

Another point - usually, commission is shared between 2 brokers and you may want to check with the seller's broker what percentage her commission is and if she will be willing to reduce it because you do not have a buyer's broker.
If the broker is a member of REBNY - she/he has to co-broke.

C.J., your posting sounds like a solicitation for attorneys. What do you get out of it?

FYI, attorneys don't negotiate deals, they just make sure the contract is valid. If you want a negotiator, get a buyer's agent.

It is always beneficial to have a broker working for you on your side but not 100% necessary. The sellers broker could be breaking his/her fiduciary duties to their client by not doing everything they can to sell the property as soon as possible and looking after their own interests first. My advise, for this one apartment, make an offer without a broker but definitely use the assistance of your attorney. There are many factors that play into purchasing a new condo or co-op, for instance, the benefits of purchasing a condo or co-op. So should it not work out with this unit, use a broker for the next one. Let me know if you need help! - Elan (646) 808-9494.

Attorneys Practice Law--A Realtor is the Real Estate Expert! You do not need a Buyer's Broker-mainly because the seller is paying the commission and will communicate and negoiate through thier Agent. My best advice is to research the area and work with an Experienced Agent who is familiar with the area of your choice and can advise you of the values, recent sales and guide you through the process.

You can always be sure an ATTORNEY will bill you and go after you if you do Not pay.

You can be a Dual Agent. Meaning that you represent both the buyer and seller. In all my years in real estate I saw attorneys kill a lot of transactions that should not have happened. DISCLOSURE in WRITING is the key. Do NOT accept anything orally. Get it in Writing. That way you have a paper trail in case of non-disclosure issues. To me my license was worth far more than any commission. I was very lucky, I always had more clients than I could work with, and at times I had to tell potential clients that I was sorry but that I had so many clients that I could NOT give them the time that they desearved. MY best advice is "GET IT IN WRITING". Was I ever sued? Yes I was. It took 7 years in the legal system..but the end result was the judge gave the other side a tongue lashing that you would not believe. I have never seen any two grown men slink out of a court room as fast as they did. Did I get a lot of Money out of the lawsuit. NO, because I did not ask for any. I believe in the fact that "equity begets equity"

In California where I did real estate for over 25 years I would tell the buyer or seller to run as fast as they could. Every time you get an attorney involved they try to prove their worth (even though they are probably charging you hundred of dollars per hour already) They try to prove they are doing something for your benefit. In 99% of the cases I saw all the attornies did was make money. Some of them never even met with the people they supposedly were representing. A reputable real estate agent or broker wants to keep you as a client for life. If they screw you they know they are only stabbing themselves in the back. It would hurt my feelings when I could hear my clients whispering in the back of my Mercedes"she may only want the commission". I would Thank them and tell them that NO I wanted them for LIFE, I wanted their children, their aunts and uncles as clients as clients. If I screw them I am only hurting myself.

Congratulations Firefly. You learned before you were squashed like a bug.

I suggest that all buyers use a Buyer's Agent to represent them in the purchase of their home. This is a huge investment for most people. A buyer's agent will represent the buyer's best interests and be on their side. A buyer's agent is able to pull comparable sales and provide professional advice on how much the buyer should pay, which home inspectors are recommended to use, and guide them throught the many intricacies of the purchase. A buyer's agent will typically have alot more time and be much more available to the buyer than a real estate attorney can be.

In all cases if you have problems the Buyers Agent Agreement if you signed one will not be valid. It is better to use a full time Real Estater Broker or Agency. I was the Judge in Arkansas for over 6 years and these buyers agency agreements will not hold up if problems arise.

Hello Firefly,

It is always wise to have someone looking after your own personal interests when brokering a real estate deal. Most agents would prefer not to split commissions with another party but who is looking out for your interest? Just allowing your buyer's agent to have the open conversation with the sellers agent levels the playing field and helps you ask the important questions about the neighborhood, school district and soundness of the property. Here is a page that discussed what you can expect from a buyer's agent relationship.
Good luck!
Val

In any Real Estate transaction, there are multiple factors that you need to be aware of - market value, negotiations, condition of the house, zoning, permits, potential hazards etc. It's in your best interest to have a qualified licensed Real Estate professional with you to help you through the maze. There just isn't any downside to having a Buyer Agent. Remember, the Listing Agent works for the Seller (or Builder).

Find a REALTOR® that specializes in buyer representation. The listing agent represents the seller and has a fiduciary responsibility to look out for their best interest. Always ask for a CMA on the property you are interested in. This will show the kind of potential equity you might be buying into. If the average sale price in the subdivision (given the appx same sq. ft., bed and bath) is 175k, but the home you are interested in is selling for 150k. This means you have the potential to get 25k in instant equity if there are no repairs that need to be done to the property. I am licensed in Texas, but have connections to buyer's agents all over the country.

Alan Harper
Keller Williams Southwest
http://alanharper.yourkwagent.com
281-905-2414

I would suggest hiring a buying agent to look out for your best interests-Yes.

-Mike

You can choose to pay an agent yourself to negotiate the property. It may also be that the listing agent does not have an exclusive agreement on the property. Craigslist is a swamp.

"A real estate attorney is not an expert buyer's agent.."

Well put, Jason. In most cases and in most states attorneys don't negotiate for you, they just make sure the contract is valid. Attorneys don't pull up comparables and discuss offering strategies. They just help you fill out the papework.

Unless your someone who has purchased several properties prior to this one. I suggest you interview several buyers agents until you find one you feel comfortable with, one that you believe has your best interest at heart and not just the commission they will receive, they need to be working for you since this purchase is a major decision in your life not theirs.

Only hire a buyer's agent if you want someone protecting your best interest. You have the right to representation if you want it, but that is your decision. A real estate attorney is not an expert buyer's agent... not even close and that can make a big difference.

If the buyer's agent didn't show you the property, why get the agent involved

""Just to update everybody, I ultimately decided not to proceed with this condo. I did feel that the seller's agent was not working in my best interest, and since this is my first time buying a home, I would appreciate having a buyer's agent on "my side". ""

Way to go, Firefly! You made a good decision!

I feel that it is important to have your own agent that will be dedicated to protecting your best interests.
The sellers agent will most likely make the commission for both the sellers and buyers agent whether you hire you have your own agent or not, so why not have someone in your corner.
The commission agreement is predetermined in the sellers listing agreement.

the average buyer doesn't know the difference between a listing agent and a buyers agent.

I would recommend you hire a buyers agent even if you have to pay them to assist you. Be VERY careful - I know of a buyer who found a condo on craigslist and was dealing directly with the "owner" of the condo. The buyer was paying cash and the "owner" wants to close quickly. As things turned out it was a scam and the so called "owner" didn't really own the unit.

Sounds a little sketchy - let us know how it went.

You do not have to involve a buyers-broker, you can deal direct with the sellers broker, but know that he/she is NOT on your team and has very few obligations to you! Most often the seller pays the buyers broker so their services are often free - not a bad deal - but your situation may be different where-as the sellers agent does not co-broke (this is however often a red flag!).

did the buyer agent you didnt use find this place in the local MLS as well? If so, stated compensation in the MLS agent description is protected. If it was an in-house listing, meaning no reciprocity for other agents since it was MLS exempt, then seller can "save" the co-op commission. That doesnt make sense though, then its like a FSBO with an agent to handle the details for partial commission.

You can purchase the condo with a sellers agent or a buyers agent. The sellers agent is working as an advocate for the seller. The buyers agent is an advocate for you.

Different states have different rules for buyer brokerage. If you signed an agreement with the agent, you need to be sure that document doesn't hold you liable for commission to that agent even if you proceed without them. Trying to avoid a "co-broke" fee could leave you without your interest being fairly represented. Be careful. Good luck.

Did you sign a buyers agency agreement with your buyer's agent? If you did, you may have to pay the buyer's agent a commission if the seller's agent does not allow a co-op.
I always recommend having a realtor representing you. It doesn't cost you anything since all commissions are paid by the seller to both agents.

ShuRee Coffin
Equity Real Estate - Select
801-710-8888 Mobile
shuree10@gmail.com

Yes you definitely can do this. The most likely reason behind why a co-broke is not allowed is because there is probably not enough commission to go around.

Using a buyer's agent is the only way you can be sure a professional is working for you and your best interests only. Buyer's agents do more than buyers (and sellers) are aware of from negotiating a fair price, assisting with the inspection process, and facilitating a host of other services buyers need to smoothly make it to the settlement table......