Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:here is the kick - I know one agent who was hired as a dual agent in DC. He hid all offers that were above the offered price from his buyer client because he had vested interest. Very bad.

Bullshit. You don't. You're just lying.

Yeah, this sounds super fake. The agents know that the other bidders will almost certainly look up the sale when it closes, because they’ll want to know how much they lost by. If the agents don’t just talk about it before the close. When they see they lost to a lower offer, they’ll call to find out more. It would escalate quickly.

I’m not saying agents don’t ever do unethical things, but this one would make no sense. The risk would be extremely high, and the payoff comparatively small.

Anonymous wrote:here is the kick - I know one agent who was hired as a dual agent in DC. He hid all offers that were above the offered price from his buyer client because he had vested interest. Very bad.

Bullshit. You don't. You're just lying.

Anonymous wrote:here is the kick - I know one agent who was hired as a dual agent in DC. He hid all offers that were above the offered price from his buyer client because he had vested interest. Very bad.

This is a fantasy

I don't think your realtor is dumb enough to not show you offers OP, given that they work on commission thus you and they both win with a higher sale price. They would not be motivated to undersell to a colleague who is the buying agent because they would hurt their own income. This is why realtors cannot be the buying and selling agent.

Very paranoid question TBH

here is the kick - I know one agent who was hired as a dual agent in DC. He hid all offers that were above the offered price from his buyer client because he had vested interest. Very bad.

By law, agents are supposed to present you all the written offers on the property that he/she is listing for you.

Anonymous wrote:Yes. But the bad outcome is stronger on the buyer agent side: they have an incentive to not show houses to the buyer which have a low buyer agent fee %.

People don’t wait for agents to “show” houses. The apps are where buyers see houses and the agent just unlocks the door if they want to see the house inperson. The fee is what it is.

Yes. But the bad outcome is stronger on the buyer agent side: they have an incentive to not show houses to the buyer which have a low buyer agent fee %.

Written offers - yes, unless the sellers has given instructions to ignore certain parameters

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t they?

Because they or their agency has a vested interest in or excluding a specific offer. For example, the listing agent is also representing a buyer, or the listing agent’s colleague has a buyer, or a buyer has no agent and wants to transact through a RE attorney.

They're the agent of the seller. It would be a breach of their fiduciary duties to exclude offers from the seller, and would open them to civil liability.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t they?

Because they or their agency has a vested interest in or excluding a specific offer. For example, the listing agent is also representing a buyer, or the listing agent’s colleague has a buyer, or a buyer has no agent and wants to transact through a RE attorney.

Yes, all agents are required by the state ethical restraints to present all offers.

Yes but the seller would never know if they don’t and the buyer lacks privity. So if the agents breaches this fiduciary duty there is no recourse.

Anonymous wrote:Why wouldn’t they?

Because they or their agency has a vested interest in or excluding a specific offer. For example, the listing agent is also representing a buyer, or the listing agent’s colleague has a buyer, or a buyer has no agent and wants to transact through a RE attorney.

Why wouldn’t they?

Pretty much the title. Are realtors obligated to show the seller all buy offers?