patrick.net

look at the property record to find out who owns the place, from there go to the owner directly.

It is an REO property, so a loan service company (lender) is the owner.

"Even if I want to try avoiding a buyer agent, these companies still end up forcing me to have one."

One reason they do that is to fake that they have ethics. If the listing agent double-ends the sale, then they can't claim (truthfully) that they actually represented both parties to any particular standard. If instead, they get you a buyer agent in the same office, they engage in dual agenting, and can (untruthfully) claim that each person was represented. It's all a sham anyway, especially since there are no real ethical standards for this, as there would be for law, medicine, or certain other licensed professions. There is an obvious conflict of interest for dual agenting.

Second, even when a listing agent double-ends a sale, he/she usually attempts to get twice the commission. The common tactic is to negotiate them down, but the real estate company hates this. At least in California, you have a broker license and an agent license. An agent must be supervised by a broker. This gives the broker (i.e. the owner of the company) the ability to say, hey agent, give me 50% of your fee for "supervising" you. If the agent instead negotiates the fee downward, then the broker also loses 50% of that amount, so instead of getting 50% of 6% for dual agents, they get 50% of 3-4%. When they have dual agents, they can claim 50% of the whole amount. So it's partly also a scam to get more money.

The excuse they gave you is flimsy. And yes, many people have mentioned that the process is not transparent at all.

Typical negotiation tactic: the "higher authority" ploy. The entire RE system seems built around the ability to control the transaction and keep information away from the Buyer and Seller. A certain recipe for unethical practices, including price-fixing. All without third party oversight. Wonderful.

I say get your own General contractor license (it's quite simple), buy a property, hire your own workers and build your own place. Contractors need work right now - you'd be helping the recovery. You still might have to go thru a realtard for the property, This, of course, assumes you have a friendly banker that can lend you the capital to buy the property and materials. Might not be so easy today.

Perhaps the internet will fix things, matching buyers and sellers directly. Unless the NAR lobbies the government to intervene and prevent these "dangerous practices that could collapse the system?" Wait, they're already doing that. /sigh

corntrollio says

If the agent instead negotiates the fee downward, then the broker also loses 50% of that amount, so instead of getting 50% of 6% for dual agents, they get 50% of 3-4%. When they have dual agents, they can claim 50% of the whole amount

Oh boy, now I see it more clearly. Thanks.

This whole process of tying the incentives of these agents with the house price is so shady. I know this has been hammered down to death on this website, and also Patrick's "crash" home pages, but this is my first real experience in trying to go for a property without a buyer agent.

I'm actually learning more without the buyer agent in the picture.

rocketjoe79 says

The entire RE system seems built around the ability to control the transaction and keep information away from the Buyer and Seller

More for the buyer than the seller. They all think that the buyer is a doofus.

rocketjoe79 says

I say get your own General contractor license (it's quite simple), buy a property, hire your own workers and build your own place. Contractors need work right now - you'd be helping the recovery

good idea, will think about this.

rocketjoe79 says

The entire RE system seems built around the ability to control the transaction and keep information away from the Buyer and Seller. A certain recipe for unethical practices, including price-fixing. All without third party oversight.

Yes, this is out the realtor system is designed.

One thing you can do in California is find a friend who is a member of the State Bar who is willing to help you out. A lawyer in California can take the brokerage exam (automatically qualified to be a broker by education and qualification) and become a member of the local real estate association for probably less than $1000 all in.

Your lawyer friend can then take the fee that would have gone to the buyer agent, 2.5-3% or whatever, and refund a portion to you. In addition, your lawyer friend would get all of the standard used house salesmen forms that realtors use for transactions from the local real estate association, so you won't be missing anything you would have gotten from a realtor.

One thing your lawyer friend may want to do is make it clear they are not providing legal advice, but are only providing services as a real estate broker in this case, unless they specifically want to provide legal advice (and are covered by their malpractice carrier for this). Instead, you could hire a real estate lawyer with the money you save to review all the disclosure issues and other material aspects of the transaction.

That way, there's no double-end issue and no dual agent issue, and you can save up to 3% on the deal. I highly recommend that most members of the Bar who are comfortable going without a buyer's agent take the DRE exam and become a member of the local real estate association when they want to buy property. Instead of paying 2.5-3% to a buyer's agent, you can pay $1000 or less. You'd still have to pay the listing agent, of course.

Other benefits are that, by being a member of the local real estate association, you get access to full MLS, not the cheap consumer-facing version that lacks realtors' internal comments and that lacks a lot of pertinent information.

Wow Corntrollio...that's some pretty out there advice. I know we all have lawyer friends that are willing to pony up the costs/time to get this to help a friend buy a place.

Really? In one of the harder hit professions(legal, yes it's hard hit. Ask ANY lawyer, especially the new ones. I'm sure the news ones all went to law school for that dream job of 60 hours a week for 40 grand a year, if they're lucky to even get a job offer), you want them to take time and money out with a chance at getting back if you decide to buy a place?

If I'm going to use a lawyer for something in real estate, I'm going to use him as a lawyer. Why don't you ask your other good buddies to spend thousands and get licenses that will help you too?

austrian_man says

He also tells me there are multiple offers on the property and quotes the H&B (highest & best) offer at the moment and that the lender would be looking to close the current H&B within the next 48 hours.

Seems to happen in every episode of TV shows like Property Virgins as well. And the Virgins never seem to question it. I saw a few episodes of it last weekend and it's like watching an infomercial for paying asking prices on property

As an attorney, I would recommend using an attorney as a buy-side age agent, if, and only if the attorney had considerable experience (which most affordable ones won't). In California, however, they might be more common with real estate service industry layoffs (for example, a laid-off title company lawyer). This is a hard call.

That said, I'm am not sure about the customs in Cali, but a few distinctions are important:

Generally, agents always are working for the seller. A so-called "buyer-side agent," unless paid directly by the buyer, is going to get paid by the listing agent's company.

More accurately (but somewhat confusingly), the so-called "buyer-side agent" is technically called the "selling agent" and that is accurate because that agent is getting the buyer to buy (that is, "selling" the buyer).

So, unless you are paying "your" agent out of your own pocket, usually irrespective of whether you buy AND CLOSE or not, you do not have a true "buyer's agent." You will have a "selling agent" representing you to the listing agent, and the listing agent's broker will pay that agent.

Remember the true relationship is determined by the party literally paying the commission, a the lister is almost always paying "your" agent.

I suspect a major reason for what you are running into this issue is that "unrepresented" buyers are asking for a 3% discount because they're not using a realtor. While there is common sense to this, the agents see this as cheating the system. And to be slightly and grudgingly fair to them, listing agents probably do have an often-justifiable preference to avoid dealing directly with a buyer unless they are getting paid to do so.

So, while there are plenty of people who don't need an agent, it's also very easy "to not know what you don't know in real estate."

Patrick I would seriously advise you to get a broker's license. If you do it via internet the cost is regrouped plus when you buy your place and you get half the split and you circumvent the nasty shite you have to deal with right now... Smart guy like you could do it first try

I wanted to buy a place on the fly in Baltimore and decided to wait and get licensed by Maryland for one reason: The obnoxious idiotic agents that are listing the properties. Withoutn exception they have managed to destroy the sale because they do not know about finance, do not look out for the client but for their interests, and have to go to night school to evolve a prehensible thumb..... These people typically have a picture of her/himself and a small pic of the property if your lucky

I have bought and sold properties using one agent on both sides. I haven't been involved in a transaction using two realtors in more than 15 years and don't plan to. I have never had any problem doing so although the realtors usually complain a little. They don't complain much because I think my expression or the way I carry myself suggests I'm not interested in hearing it. I walk into a house and I tell the selling realtor that I only need them to submit an offer.

In one case when I was selling a house, a buyer without a realtor walked in and I told my realtor that she would handle both ends. She complained a little and then did it.

If for some reason that does not work for you, you can easily find an agent to represent you that will take for 1% or even less. At 1% you can find several realtors willing to submit offers for you. I am in silicon valley and I had several who were more than happy to get 1%.

I have done all of the above in both hot and cold markets.

The realtors are middlemen. The buyer and seller have the power, assuming they are willing to assert it.

If the house was owned by a company and in the company name then you could buy the company and avoid all this realestate "mafia". Possible list the business on www.bizbuysell.com or www.bizquest.com or just buy, say all 100 shares of stock on etrade.

I was going to say use ziprealty and get the buyes rebate but that just ended July 15. You would get 20% of their commission.

For example, if you purchase a home for $350,000 and the buyer side commission is 2.5%- your rebate will be as follows:
$350,000 x 2.5% = $8,750 commission x 20% = $1,750 rebate

darrellsimon says

Patrick I would seriously advise you to get a broker's license.

yup, I took the first class at a city college and the content was generally informative.

To get a broker's license in CA you need a 4 year degree, take 8 courses (available online), and pass the state's test.

http://www.dre.ca.gov/exm_broker.html

Real Estate Practice
Legal Aspects of Real Estate
Real Estate Finance
Real Estate Appraisal
Real Estate Economics/Accounting
plus 3 from 11 options, e.g.:
Real Estate Principles (what I took at city)
Escrow
Advanced Legal Aspects of Real Estate

Each course is doable in a week online I think.

MinnItMan says

So, unless you are paying "your" agent out of your own pocket, usually irrespective of whether you buy AND CLOSE or not, you do not have a true "buyer's agent."

What the hell are you talking about? Every agent's commission is tied to the house price, which the buyer has to fork up.

MinnItMan says

While there is common sense to this, the agents see this as cheating the system. And to be slightly and grudgingly fair to them, listing agents probably do have an often-justifiable preference to avoid dealing directly with a buyer unless they are getting paid to do so.

I want to use the system to my advantage as a buyer and that's cheating?

The listing agent has the incentive to sell the house, they are getting paid by the seller to do so, it is built into the house price - which ties the buyer also into the picture.

Its almost like you are making these statements with complete obliviousness and disregard to the fact that if there was no buyer, there is no deal. Buyer is the guinea pig in the process as well and all prospective buyers are rightfully outraged.

Justselltheplace says

Wow Corntrollio...that's some pretty out there advice.

No, it's actually not.

If you're a lawyer yourself, it's a good way to save on the buying agent portion of the fee (or the listing agent portion if you're selling). The DRE exam is a joke if you're a lawyer -- you already know most of the information.

Justselltheplace says

Really? In one of the harder hit professions(legal, yes it's hard hit. Ask ANY lawyer, especially the new ones. I'm sure the news ones all went to law school for that dream job of 60 hours a week for 40 grand a year, if they're lucky to even get a job offer), you want them to take time and money out with a chance at getting back if you decide to buy a place?

Will you please explain what you're trying to say again? This paragraph is ridiculously unclear and mostly nonsensical. If those young lawyers are out of work, they certainly have time to do this. I'm obviously suggesting that you pay them a reasonable fee for doing this.

Justselltheplace says

If I'm going to use a lawyer for something in real estate, I'm going to use him as a lawyer. Why don't you ask your other good buddies to spend thousands and get licenses that will help you too?

It's not "thousands." It's one thousand at most. And the lawyer can then do this for anybody, including themselves. Again, a lawyer is automatically qualified to take the exam, and the exam is a joke. It'd be a good sideline to your regular job and could even result in referrals.

corntrollio says

I highly recommend that most members of the Bar who are comfortable going without a buyer's agent take the DRE exam and become a member of the local real estate association when they want to buy property. Instead of paying 2.5-3% to a buyer's agent, you can pay $1000 or less. You'd still have to pay the listing agent, of course.

To make this work you need the attorney (or if you are one, you need) to take the RE exam, no biggie, it's much easier than the bar exam and costs way less.

Then become a member of CAR - cost?

Then sign up for access to their forms software - I believe this is $700/year or so.

Then if you are an attorney representing third parties you would probably want E&O insurance, which your existing legal malpractice insurance would not cover, which probably costs thousands a year.

All in all, it would not be worth the time, effort, and money to assist others in most cases, who would probably be better off going with a Realtor who not only had all of this in place already but is active in the local market on a regular basis.

For an attorney doing this to buy his/her own place, and not needing the E&O insurance, it may be an OK idea.

OP - Be very clear when you are dealing with real estate agents, in your own mind and in your communications with them, are they representing you in general, on one property only, or not at all (e.g., you are only interviewing them or asking them about one of their listings)?

JG1 says

For an attorney doing this to buy his/her own place, and not needing the E&O insurance, it may be an OK idea.

It probably makes the most sense for a lawyer buying their own house, but if they did all the work already for themselves, it wouldn't be hard to do some of this as a sideline. Yes, you may need insurance, but I don't think it would be thousands at all, unless you were doing volume, which is not the suggestion.

For most attorneys, it would make sense to do this for themselves at minimum. If you are concerned about the legal issues, you could hire your own real estate attorney. Much cheaper on a $500K house to pay a real estate attorney for actual legal advice than pay 3% to a used house salesman for fake legal advice for a seasoned buyer.

corntrollio says

JG1 says

For an attorney doing this to buy his/her own place, and not needing the E&O insurance, it may be an OK idea.

It probably makes the most sense for a lawyer buying their own house, but if they did all the work already for themselves, it wouldn't be hard to do some of this as a sideline. Yes, you may need insurance, but I don't think it would be thousands at all, unless you were doing volume, which is not the suggestion.

For most attorneys, it would make sense to do this for themselves at minimum. If you are concerned about the legal issues, you could hire your own real estate attorney. Much cheaper on a $500K house to pay a real estate attorney for actual legal advice than pay 3% to a used house salesman for fake legal advice for a seasoned buyer.

I would imagine the insurance would be thousands, but don't know. Insurance companies often don't offer short term, low volume, part time type insurance, only one size fits all, one year at a time policies. Again, I don't know this to be the case for sure.

Regarding hiring an attorney, i agree, hard to believe people make the biggest purchase of their life, sign all kinds of legal documents, and have no idea what they are signing. But I did have a lawyer friend in CA try to represent himself in buying a house without becoming a real estate broker. The listing agent was a real pain in the ass about it, saying he wouldn't accept an offer unless on a CAR standard form, saying he would maybe present the offer but would advise the seller not to take it due to potential issues involved with a know-nothing buyer representing himself, etc. Finally, my friend had to let the guy double pop the deal at a reduced commission to make the deal work. This was during boomtimes, and he made a tidy profit of ~ 40-50% holding the house for only 2 years. But the listing agent made it clear he didn't want any outsiders invading his club.

JG1 says

I would imagine the insurance would be thousands, but don't know. Insurance companies often don't offer short term, low volume, part time type insurance, only one size fits all, one year at a time policies. Again, I don't know this to be the case for sure.

Let me put it to you another way. Malpractice insurance for lawyers with a $500K claim limit doesn't necessarily cost thousands. And that's despite the fact that you can cause more than $500K damage on a $500K transaction in some cases, as a lawyer.

Even if you assume the biggest possible screwup by a realtor and the whole house value is at stake (virtually impossible because it would likely be a title issue if it's of that value -- e.g. I forgot to tell you that there's a huge easement that lowers the value of the property), coverage for a $500K transaction would not cost "thousands." Even if it's a random disclosure issue, you're talking $25K at best for something more serious and single-digit thousands for the typical screw up. You would have to make sure you adequately said "I am not representing you as attorney, but rather only in my capacity as a real estate agent."

JG1 says

But the listing agent made it clear he didn't want any outsiders invading his club.

Yes, this is very common. Many realtors are quite antagonistic about Redfin and similar ideas too. They treat it like a cartel and engage in anti-competitive behavior quite frequently.

JG1 says

But I did have a lawyer friend in CA try to represent himself in buying a house without becoming a real estate broker.

If you're a real estate lawyer, this might work, but for non-real estate lawyers, I'd recommend spending a token amount to hire someone, rather than going on your own.

JG1 says

Regarding hiring an attorney, i agree, hard to believe people make the biggest purchase of their life, sign all kinds of legal documents, and have no idea what they are signing.

Yes, it's sad but true. People will go to great lengths to do all kinds of menial things, and then not take any safeguards for the largest purchase of their life. I know people who will do research to buy $20 items, but when it comes to cars and houses, it's "what's my payment again?" and "where do I sign?"

One question about the "we have multiple offers" thing? Has anyone actually demanded a list of the people who submitted these multiple offers along with the offer amounts(which of course would not be disclosed), proclaimed that you won't participate in a rigged blind bidding process that clearly places you, the buyer, at a disadvantage, flashed the listing agent the twin middle fingers, then wrote a note directly to the seller listing exactly how much you would have offered and why you didn't ?

I am confused. Why would anyone pay full commission to a realtor? It does not take serious negotiating skills or arm twisting to reduce a realtor's commissions.

As a buyer, if I ask 6 realtors to represent me and to reduce their commission to 1% (instead of 3%, one half of the transaction commission) and let them know I am asking the same of 5 other realtors, at least 5 of the 6 will immediately come down to 2% or less. If I press a little, at least 4 of them will go below 2% and probably 3 will go straight to 1%.

Are people having difficulties getting realtor's to drop their commission percentages? Getting a realtor to drop their commission is easier than getting Mary Jane Rottencrotch to drop her pretty pink panties.

What does it matter if your buyers agent drops their commission? Is it truly coming out of your pocket? Maybe the house value is inflated, but can you go to the seller and say "hey, my agent is only taking 1%, so knock the house price down 2%"

Biff Baxter says

I am confused. Why would anyone pay full commission to a realtor? It does not take serious negotiating skills or arm twisting to reduce a realtor's commissions.

As a buyer, if I ask 6 realtors to represent me and to reduce their commission to 1% (instead of 3%, one half of the transaction commission) and let them know I am asking the same of 5 other realtors, at least 5 of the 6 will immediately come down to 2% or less. If I press a little, at least 4 of them will go below 2% and probably 3 will go straight to 1%.

Are people having difficulties getting realtor's to drop their commission percentages? Getting a realtor to drop their commission is easier than getting Mary Jane Rottencrotch to drop her pretty pink panties.

One potential issue with that approach is yes, you can get some yeses, along with some nos. The yes group is more likely to be inexperienced, not busy, not as good - on average. The busy best in the area guy is going to tell you to take a hike when you ask for a reduction, in most cases.

See, e.g., http://blog.franklyrealty.com/2007/02/realtor-rebates-free-money-or-expensive.html

http://blog.franklyrealty.com/2011/02/6-realtor-commissions.html

PS - I'm not this guy, never used him, no affiliation, etc.

When I started out in my line of work, I used to drop my price if someone asked and it looked like that would get me the business. Now that I have more experience, referrals, repeat business, they ask, I say no, I offer the best value not the lowest price.

dodgerfanjohn says

One question about the "we have multiple offers" thing? Has anyone actually demanded a list of the people who submitted these multiple offers along with the offer amounts(which of course would not be disclosed), proclaimed that you won't participate in a rigged blind bidding process that clearly places you, the buyer, at a disadvantage, flashed the listing agent the twin middle fingers, then wrote a note directly to the seller listing exactly how much you would have offered and why you didn't ?

How does it place anyone at a disadvantage? The buyer is still free to offer whatever he wants to, whether there are multiple offers out there or not.

I have been successful in getting an idea about the other offers, e.g., one is a little low but it's all cash, one is high but FHA we're ignoring that one, etc.

UAVMX says: "What does it matter if your buyers agent drops their commission?"

Apparently not clear on the whole money thing.

JG1 says I may be getting a lesser realtor (oxymoron) if I pay less.

On the sell side there can be a difference between realtors skills but I have never had difficulty getting any realtor to drop their commission significantly.

On the buy side realtors are virtually a commodity assuming you know the basics about getting inspections and market prices. Inspection knowledge takes all of 5 minutes to learn and every buyer or seller should learn about market prices no matter which realtor they choose or how much they pay. If you can figure out a good price for a gallon of milk, you can figure out prices in your local real etstate market. Granted, learning about real estate prices takes longer.

UAVMX says

What does it matter if your buyers agent drops their commission? Is it truly coming out of your pocket? Maybe the house value is inflated, but can you go to the seller and say "hey, my agent is only taking 1%, so knock the house price down 2%"

This is not true. The buyer comes up with the cash that pays everybody. Effectively, each party pays half. It's naive to think you pay nothing as a buyer.

If you didn't have to pay a realtor fee, that $500K house is now $470K with a 6% fee. You are CERTAINLY paying the fee. When it gets rolled into your mortgage, you pay that fee for 30 years.

You didn't read the links, where a realtor explains some of the things he has done on the buy side that your commodity type realtors don't.

I chose to pay full price as a buyer because I was moving to an area where I was not that familiar with its neighborhoods, streets, etc., and I wanted someone who was active in the area on a long-term basis to provide guidance on these issues, as well as just the stuff you are talking about. I did talk to some other real estate agents and, yes, I got some to drop their commission as much as one-third. Personally, for my circumstances, I chose to go full price and am fine with it - the guy ended up throwing me a $1,000 gift at the end anyway - but I obviously considered the discount route since I approached some realtors about it. I was also turned down by a couple who said, no, I'll negotiate the hell out of the deal for you, but I won't drop my commission.

Let's see. You paid full commission but got a $1,000 gift.

I can't top that.

People are looking at me like I'm an idiot for laughing so loud.

JG1 says

dodgerfanjohn says

One question about the "we have multiple offers" thing? Has anyone actually demanded a list of the people who submitted these multiple offers along with the offer amounts(which of course would not be disclosed), proclaimed that you won't participate in a rigged blind bidding process that clearly places you, the buyer, at a disadvantage, flashed the listing agent the twin middle fingers, then wrote a note directly to the seller listing exactly how much you would have offered and why you didn't ?

How does it place anyone at a disadvantage? The buyer is still free to offer whatever he wants to, whether there are multiple offers out there or not.

I have been successful in getting an idea about the other offers, e.g., one is a little low but it's all cash, one is high but FHA we're ignoring that one, etc.

Dodge - I suggest you try this some time. Most likely the seller will gladly throw your lowball offer in the trash.

Biff - Again, you didn't read.

JG1, just so you can get comfy, I wanted to let you know that I did read the links you provided before my subsequent comments.

One restatement in general, I have never had to use any heavy handed or arm twisting practices with realtors. The idea that realtors are in a position of strength is a facade that is easily broken through. This is always true and possibly even more so in the current market. I have the money or the property. The realtor wants to facilitate the sale or purchase of a house. There are lots of realtors available (big supply). I tell them the price at which I will sell or the price that I am willing to pay, for both the realtor and the house.

And your statement that you only got some realtors to drop their commissions by as much as one third means one of two things. Either you are a realtor (hence the propoganda) or you shouldn't be allowed to negotiate your way to the bathroom.

And your statement that "the seller will gladly throw your lowball offer in the trash" is ridiculously unrepresentative of the current market. Sellers aren't doing much "gladly" lately.

First, I am not a realtor. Second, considering most buyers just pay full commission, any negotiation and concessions on price are way above average. The results you may have obtained would not be directly comparable to mine, regardless, as factors such as timing, market, price range, whether you're also selling a property and offering both a listing and a purchase to a realtor, etc., etc. come into play. And my negotiated commission was for regular full service, not for 'put an offer in on this one property, you won't have to do much work or drive me around, I promise.' So a third of list price for full service doesn't seem too bad to me - you (guys) try it at your local store or service provider and see how you fare. Third, I would be willing to bet that in most situations where "best and final" and "multiple offers" are bandied about by the listing agent, this is indeed the case, and the offer of someone who 'doesn't buy into this kind of thing' is unlikely to be compeititve in that situation. Which doesn't stop them from submitting a best and final that's the same as their original offer, or less, or only at their predetermined best price for the property, or whatever the hell they want to offer. In other words, write it up, submit it, there you go, your offer is in and the sellers can consider it. If the prospective buyer doesn't want to believe the information that there are multiple offers, then fine, but to the buyer who wants the property and does believe it's true, it's useful information, because it means the opportunity to lowball or go back and forth with the seller in small upward increments is likely not there.

Finally, someone mentioned the Property Virgins being an ad for paying full (list) price. In multiple offer situations on that show where the buyers have ignored the multiple offer situation and stuck to their original offer, guess what, just like in the non televised world, they usually lose out to a higher offer.

In my own personal experience, when I have been told there were multiple offers, I was outbid multiple times.

If there really are not multiple offers and the listing agent says they are, he is doing both his client and himself a disservice or at the very least, taking a risk. Risks include someone could find out and report the ethical violation or post about it online for future buyers to see. Another risk is the one and only offer walks away, leaving the seller without a sale and the realtor without a commission. A little bit higher sales price is not worth the risk of not selling the property at all to most realtors, as explained in the book Freakanomics, so the incentive for most realtors is to get any deal closed, rather than do anything possible to get the last dollar out of the sale, at the risk of going back to the seller and saying bluffed and lost the only offer we had, no sale for you, no commission to me, back to the drawing board...

MinnItMan says

you do not have a true "buyer's agent." You will have a "selling agent" representing you to the listing agent, and the listing agent's broker will pay that agent.

This is exactly what is happening in RE industry now.
Every Agency has two major groups of agents: one or few, usually brokers- owners, who focus only on listing properties. Those are RE Kings, use they connections to list as many properties as possible. Most agents, who work for agency, are the guys who run around town and shows properties to prospective buyers. Whenever they work for listing agency or shows properties from MLS, they STILL represent the SELLER- The owner who agreed to pay commission.
Every agent can say, regardless if it’s true or not “we have multiple offer” simply because buyer has no power to check it out.
When listing agent approach the owner who wants to sell property, he usually shows him for how much the similar property were sold recently. To make owner happy he is adding 6% commission on a top of that. This fact alone artificially drive prices higher with every listing.
Now is the hint: If your offer is 6% below listing price, you are the closest to the real market value.

This is exactly what is happening in RE industry now.
Every Agency has two major groups of agents: one or few, usually brokers- owners, who focus only on listing properties. Those are RE Kings, use they connections to list as many properties as possible. Most agents, who work for agency, are the guys who run around town and shows properties to prospective buyers. Whenever they work for listing agency or shows properties from MLS, they STILL represent the SELLER- The owner who agreed to pay commission.
Every agent can say, regardless if it’s true or not “we have multiple offer” simply because buyer has no power to check it out.
When listing agent approach the owner who wants to sell property, he usually shows him for how much the similar property were sold recently. To make owner happy he is adding 6% commission on a top of that. This fact alone artificially drive prices higher with every listing.
Now is the hint: If your offer is 6% below listing price, you are the closest to the real market value.

Another problem home buyers face is not being shown the best deals. I've seen several nice homes sold without my knowledge. I've learned that buyers are often only advised of more desireable homes after the realtors, the builders, the appraisers, bankers, and all their relatives and friends don't want it.

JoesAttic4us says

I've learned that buyers are often only advised of more desireable homes after the realtors, the builders, the appraisers, bankers, and all their relatives and friends don't want it.

Yes, this is very true. Of course, what happened during the boom is that realtors bought shitty houses and then lost money on them (read some of the San Diego housing blogs, especially, but this happened everywhere). After the boom, the smart realtors who still had money left were buying deals and flipping them. I detailed one such flipping realtor on Patrick.net in a prior thread.

Yes.... agents well connected often get the preferred listings.
Yes.... Now Banks often have agents that won't talk to anyone outside a small circle jerk that allows buying of mass properties for pennies on the dollar.

So instead of helping Joe and suzie lose their real estate cherry, instead of that look of joy and bliss, the first timers are more or less told to beat it, put off, told of multiple offers and then we hear of collusion and other conspiracies that are the tip of the iceberg and the slap on the wrist is delivered and on we go.

And Yes Agents are a hinderance to property sales in this market where owner financing, the house as collaterial would pull us out of this crunch so fast we would be AAmmmmericcca again!

Yes yes yes but be careful of the conclusions you draw cause everyday in our fair state properties came on line that somehow avoid the all seeing eye of the pundits. I say this from experience. Aome posters have alluded to the fact that the buyer holds the mojo, and that can be so very true. Maybe not in a fixed up cottage in Redwood City but certainly in a flooded out foreclosure in Oakland that the bank does not wish to maintain.... and four uinits later this property could net you a small fortune!

The bottom line is that much like Wall Street if you put 100 of these brokers/agents in a room, 10% would have real smarts, maybe 10% real experience and of those some would be ethical. Like so many things it does not take but a few to give all a bad name.

My point in this post is to entertain the notion that yes having a buyer agent forced upon oneself is bad BUT, getting to know some smart agents/Brokers hanging out and befriending them and asking them to help you find a decent property at a particular price could work wonders.

If you work this way the commission should not matter, state your price, which should always be at a discount in any market, and let the broker/agent price it so he/she gets his/hers.

People have these problems mentioned because the system sucks, there is collusion all over the place, and the interests of the sales team & the banks comes first.... but there are loopholes and there are a lot of opportunities

JoesAttic4us says

Another problem home buyers face is not being shown the best deals. I've seen several nice homes sold without my knowledge. I've learned that buyers are often only advised of more desireable homes after the realtors, the builders, the appraisers, bankers, and all their relatives and friends don't want it.

Why would the seller(s) allow this?