Biden admin going after realtors!

[Anonymous]

https://www.wsj.com/real-estate/jury-finds-realtors-conspired-to-keep-commissions-high-awards-nearly-1-8-billion-in-damages-b26f9c2f

Roasted pig on the menu!

[Anonymous]

Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

Services will become a la carte for buyers.

This ruling is really going to make RE attorneys a lot more valuable in the process. Most buyers were relying on their agent to advise on various aspects of the process. When, really, they should've been working with an attorney on the contract and ensuring they were not getting taken for a ride.

The contracts are boilerplate - you fill out the various pieces: price offer, contingencies, lender info, etc. I had to make all those decisions myself - my Redfin agent just filled it out.

My agent then talked to the other agent....and that was it. Contract accepted, here's the dates we are thinking of closing, etc.

Then the closing is all done with a title company in your jurisdiction....there's nothing for your agent to do.

So really the only important thing for a buyers agent is to fill in the blanks on a NAR standardized contract according to your directions. That's about it. And it should probably be a RE attorney doing that for you, not some agent who has no fiduciary duty and can have only a HS diploma.

It's been such a stupid system for a looooooooooong time.

[Anonymous]

Zillow stock crashed today realtors charged today with conspiring to keep commissions high

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This Missouri class action lawsuit will spur copycat suits in all 49 other states + DC.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/missouri-jury-finds-nar-brokerages-170500477.html

There’s already another class action that is perhaps even bigger covering many other metro areas. Not sure what’s left that isn’t covered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

Services will become a la carte for buyers.

This ruling is really going to make RE attorneys a lot more valuable in the process. Most buyers were relying on their agent to advise on various aspects of the process. When, really, they should've been working with an attorney on the contract and ensuring they were not getting taken for a ride.

The contracts are boilerplate - you fill out the various pieces: price offer, contingencies, lender info, etc. I had to make all those decisions myself - my Redfin agent just filled it out.

My agent then talked to the other agent....and that was it. Contract accepted, here's the dates we are thinking of closing, etc.

Then the closing is all done with a title company in your jurisdiction....there's nothing for your agent to do.

So really the only important thing for a buyers agent is to fill in the blanks on a NAR standardized contract according to your directions. That's about it. And it should probably be a RE attorney doing that for you, not some agent who has no fiduciary duty and can have only a HS diploma.

It's been such a stupid system for a looooooooooong time.

I’m a lawyer and I’m very sure that:

1) you’re indulging yourself in wishful thinking here
2) you are not a lawyer

[Anonymous]

Yay! I have nothing against realtors, who can provide a useful service. But their fees should be set competitively, and clients should be able to choose how much hand-holding they want and pay accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

Services will become a la carte for buyers.

This ruling is really going to make RE attorneys a lot more valuable in the process. Most buyers were relying on their agent to advise on various aspects of the process. When, really, they should've been working with an attorney on the contract and ensuring they were not getting taken for a ride.

The contracts are boilerplate - you fill out the various pieces: price offer, contingencies, lender info, etc. I had to make all those decisions myself - my Redfin agent just filled it out.

My agent then talked to the other agent....and that was it. Contract accepted, here's the dates we are thinking of closing, etc.

Then the closing is all done with a title company in your jurisdiction....there's nothing for your agent to do.

So really the only important thing for a buyers agent is to fill in the blanks on a NAR standardized contract according to your directions. That's about it. And it should probably be a RE attorney doing that for you, not some agent who has no fiduciary duty and can have only a HS diploma.

It's been such a stupid system for a looooooooooong time.

I’m a lawyer and I’m very sure that:

1) you’re indulging yourself in wishful thinking here
2) you are not a lawyer

As an agent, I would love for about 80%of the nonproductive agents to disappear. It would make the business much more professional. With teams becoming more common in the last 5 to 10 years, a large number of people are people lured into a business where they have no hope of doing more than enriching the person at the top of the team. IMHO, teams are now the real problem in real estate. They form joint ventures with settlement companies, mortgage companies, even pest control companies and there are fees which only increase prices to the consumers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.wsj.com/real-estate/jury-finds-realtors-conspired-to-keep-commissions-high-awards-nearly-1-8-billion-in-damages-b26f9c2f

Roasted pig on the menu!

Here's that story:

Agents and Brokers were forced to return commission fees to buyers of homes in three states - Kansas, Illinois, and Missouri. According to the ruling it only affects homebuyers from 2012-2015.

The case is Burnett et al v. The National Association of Realtors et al, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, No. 4:19-cv-00332-SRB.

https://www.justice.gov/media/1031891/dl?inline

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

Services will become a la carte for buyers.

This ruling is really going to make RE attorneys a lot more valuable in the process. Most buyers were relying on their agent to advise on various aspects of the process. When, really, they should've been working with an attorney on the contract and ensuring they were not getting taken for a ride.

The contracts are boilerplate - you fill out the various pieces: price offer, contingencies, lender info, etc. I had to make all those decisions myself - my Redfin agent just filled it out.

My agent then talked to the other agent....and that was it. Contract accepted, here's the dates we are thinking of closing, etc.

Then the closing is all done with a title company in your jurisdiction....there's nothing for your agent to do.

So really the only important thing for a buyers agent is to fill in the blanks on a NAR standardized contract according to your directions. That's about it. And it should probably be a RE attorney doing that for you, not some agent who has no fiduciary duty and can have only a HS diploma.

It's been such a stupid system for a looooooooooong time.

I agree that the system has been messed up for a long time, but I don't think that a la carte services or RE attorneys paid for by buyers is the solution. There's just no need for that. There's a standard form and the buyer makes selections. The process would become more transparent for the buyer. Then the title attorney handles the legal aspects and coordinates with the lender.

The best solution is to just have one realtor for each home. The seller selects the realtor and pays 2%. Buyers contact the seller's agent to see the property, and the seller's agent shows it to the buyer. There would be fewer realtors. The realtors left would make 2%, which is close to their current standard of 2-2.5%. They would do a little more work to earn it though.

Some people have a very misguided understanding of what a buyer's agent actually does for you. They don't look out for the buyer or provide any legal support. NRA is banking on the fear and neediness of first-time buyers, but this hand-holding is unnecessary and results in higher costs for the consumer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

Services will become a la carte for buyers.

This ruling is really going to make RE attorneys a lot more valuable in the process. Most buyers were relying on their agent to advise on various aspects of the process. When, really, they should've been working with an attorney on the contract and ensuring they were not getting taken for a ride.

The contracts are boilerplate - you fill out the various pieces: price offer, contingencies, lender info, etc. I had to make all those decisions myself - my Redfin agent just filled it out.

My agent then talked to the other agent....and that was it. Contract accepted, here's the dates we are thinking of closing, etc.

Then the closing is all done with a title company in your jurisdiction....there's nothing for your agent to do.

So really the only important thing for a buyers agent is to fill in the blanks on a NAR standardized contract according to your directions. That's about it. And it should probably be a RE attorney doing that for you, not some agent who has no fiduciary duty and can have only a HS diploma.

It's been such a stupid system for a looooooooooong time.

I agree that the system has been messed up for a long time, but I don't think that a la carte services or RE attorneys paid for by buyers is the solution. There's just no need for that. There's a standard form and the buyer makes selections. The process would become more transparent for the buyer. Then the title attorney handles the legal aspects and coordinates with the lender.

The best solution is to just have one realtor for each home. The seller selects the realtor and pays 2%. Buyers contact the seller's agent to see the property, and the seller's agent shows it to the buyer. There would be fewer realtors. The realtors left would make 2%, which is close to their current standard of 2-2.5%. They would do a little more work to earn it though.

Some people have a very misguided understanding of what a buyer's agent actually does for you. They don't look out for the buyer or provide any legal support. NRA is banking on the fear and neediness of first-time buyers, but this hand-holding is unnecessary and results in higher costs for the consumer.

Fully agree!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

Services will become a la carte for buyers.

This ruling is really going to make RE attorneys a lot more valuable in the process. Most buyers were relying on their agent to advise on various aspects of the process. When, really, they should've been working with an attorney on the contract and ensuring they were not getting taken for a ride.

The contracts are boilerplate - you fill out the various pieces: price offer, contingencies, lender info, etc. I had to make all those decisions myself - my Redfin agent just filled it out.

My agent then talked to the other agent....and that was it. Contract accepted, here's the dates we are thinking of closing, etc.

Then the closing is all done with a title company in your jurisdiction....there's nothing for your agent to do.

So really the only important thing for a buyers agent is to fill in the blanks on a NAR standardized contract according to your directions. That's about it. And it should probably be a RE attorney doing that for you, not some agent who has no fiduciary duty and can have only a HS diploma.

It's been such a stupid system for a looooooooooong time.

I agree that the system has been messed up for a long time, but I don't think that a la carte services or RE attorneys paid for by buyers is the solution. There's just no need for that. There's a standard form and the buyer makes selections. The process would become more transparent for the buyer. Then the title attorney handles the legal aspects and coordinates with the lender.

The best solution is to just have one realtor for each home. The seller selects the realtor and pays 2%. Buyers contact the seller's agent to see the property, and the seller's agent shows it to the buyer. There would be fewer realtors. The realtors left would make 2%, which is close to their current standard of 2-2.5%. They would do a little more work to earn it though.

Some people have a very misguided understanding of what a buyer's agent actually does for you. They don't look out for the buyer or provide any legal support. NRA is banking on the fear and neediness of first-time buyers, but this hand-holding is unnecessary and results in higher costs for the consumer.

Am I correct that you’re proposing having a joint buyer/seller agent as the norm? Wouldn’t this create conflicts of interest and even more ethical problems?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

Services will become a la carte for buyers.

This ruling is really going to make RE attorneys a lot more valuable in the process. Most buyers were relying on their agent to advise on various aspects of the process. When, really, they should've been working with an attorney on the contract and ensuring they were not getting taken for a ride.

The contracts are boilerplate - you fill out the various pieces: price offer, contingencies, lender info, etc. I had to make all those decisions myself - my Redfin agent just filled it out.

My agent then talked to the other agent....and that was it. Contract accepted, here's the dates we are thinking of closing, etc.

Then the closing is all done with a title company in your jurisdiction....there's nothing for your agent to do.

So really the only important thing for a buyers agent is to fill in the blanks on a NAR standardized contract according to your directions. That's about it. And it should probably be a RE attorney doing that for you, not some agent who has no fiduciary duty and can have only a HS diploma.

It's been such a stupid system for a looooooooooong time.

I’m a lawyer and I’m very sure that:

1) you’re indulging yourself in wishful thinking here
2) you are not a lawyer

As an agent, I would love for about 80%of the nonproductive agents to disappear. It would make the business much more professional. With teams becoming more common in the last 5 to 10 years, a large number of people are people lured into a business where they have no hope of doing more than enriching the person at the top of the team. IMHO, teams are now the real problem in real estate. They form joint ventures with settlement companies, mortgage companies, even pest control companies and there are fees which only increase prices to the consumers.

Ah, this explains why all the former MLM ladies in my neighborhood became real estate agents. A natural progression.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

Services will become a la carte for buyers.

This ruling is really going to make RE attorneys a lot more valuable in the process. Most buyers were relying on their agent to advise on various aspects of the process. When, really, they should've been working with an attorney on the contract and ensuring they were not getting taken for a ride.

The contracts are boilerplate - you fill out the various pieces: price offer, contingencies, lender info, etc. I had to make all those decisions myself - my Redfin agent just filled it out.

My agent then talked to the other agent....and that was it. Contract accepted, here's the dates we are thinking of closing, etc.

Then the closing is all done with a title company in your jurisdiction....there's nothing for your agent to do.

So really the only important thing for a buyers agent is to fill in the blanks on a NAR standardized contract according to your directions. That's about it. And it should probably be a RE attorney doing that for you, not some agent who has no fiduciary duty and can have only a HS diploma.

It's been such a stupid system for a looooooooooong time.

I agree that the system has been messed up for a long time, but I don't think that a la carte services or RE attorneys paid for by buyers is the solution. There's just no need for that. There's a standard form and the buyer makes selections. The process would become more transparent for the buyer. Then the title attorney handles the legal aspects and coordinates with the lender.

The best solution is to just have one realtor for each home. The seller selects the realtor and pays 2%. Buyers contact the seller's agent to see the property, and the seller's agent shows it to the buyer. There would be fewer realtors. The realtors left would make 2%, which is close to their current standard of 2-2.5%. They would do a little more work to earn it though.

Some people have a very misguided understanding of what a buyer's agent actually does for you. They don't look out for the buyer or provide any legal support. NRA is banking on the fear and neediness of first-time buyers, but this hand-holding is unnecessary and results in higher costs for the consumer.

Am I correct that you’re proposing having a joint buyer/seller agent as the norm? Wouldn’t this create conflicts of interest and even more ethical problems?

No way in hell I'd have a joint agent. Way too conflicted. Just give me my own agent who's skilled at negotiating in my best interest. Although I agree let the rate be competitively set. People will pay more for the good agents and less for the crappy ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't wait for buyers to have to pay for their own agents. When we get buyers' agents out of the picture (because most buyers won't pay for one), it will be a much more honest system.

Services will become a la carte for buyers.

This ruling is really going to make RE attorneys a lot more valuable in the process. Most buyers were relying on their agent to advise on various aspects of the process. When, really, they should've been working with an attorney on the contract and ensuring they were not getting taken for a ride.

The contracts are boilerplate - you fill out the various pieces: price offer, contingencies, lender info, etc. I had to make all those decisions myself - my Redfin agent just filled it out.

My agent then talked to the other agent....and that was it. Contract accepted, here's the dates we are thinking of closing, etc.

Then the closing is all done with a title company in your jurisdiction....there's nothing for your agent to do.

So really the only important thing for a buyers agent is to fill in the blanks on a NAR standardized contract according to your directions. That's about it. And it should probably be a RE attorney doing that for you, not some agent who has no fiduciary duty and can have only a HS diploma.

It's been such a stupid system for a looooooooooong time.

I agree that the system has been messed up for a long time, but I don't think that a la carte services or RE attorneys paid for by buyers is the solution. There's just no need for that. There's a standard form and the buyer makes selections. The process would become more transparent for the buyer. Then the title attorney handles the legal aspects and coordinates with the lender.

The best solution is to just have one realtor for each home. The seller selects the realtor and pays 2%. Buyers contact the seller's agent to see the property, and the seller's agent shows it to the buyer. There would be fewer realtors. The realtors left would make 2%, which is close to their current standard of 2-2.5%. They would do a little more work to earn it though.

Some people have a very misguided understanding of what a buyer's agent actually does for you. They don't look out for the buyer or provide any legal support. NRA is banking on the fear and neediness of first-time buyers, but this hand-holding is unnecessary and results in higher costs for the consumer.

Am I correct that you’re proposing having a joint buyer/seller agent as the norm? Wouldn’t this create conflicts of interest and even more ethical problems?

You sound like a realtor. The motives of buyers agents are already in direct conflict with the best interest of buyers. Buyers agents want the buyer to pay as much as possible and offer the best terms to close the deal. No joint agent. Just a seller's agent who shows properties to buyers, just like the sales guy at the car dealership, appliance store, clothing boutique, etc. all show their wares to the buyer.

You're towing the NAR party line of pretending to serve in the best interest of the buyers. Realtors never have.