Anonymous wrote:99 percent of realtors are morons that have gone into the business because they have realized they truly have no marketable skills; their only option to feed themselves is to join the NAR gestapo. On the high end of the market around here where the buyers and sellers are both well educated (and oftentimes attorneys), realtors truly serve no purpose other than unlocking the door. My 8 year old could put together better marketing material than what you see on most MLS listings, and when a house goes under contract in 3 days, what work has the realtor actually done. All you need to buy/sell a home is a set of comparable sales (which, with a lag, are public record), an inspector, an attorney, and a bank. Anyone else involved in the transaction is simply a parasite. I just hope I live to see the day when the traditional real estate brokerage is killed off for good. Another antitrust suit from the FTC against the MLS might do the trick.
I encourage the OP to contact the seller directly; if the agent did not fulfill her fiduciary duty to the seller to the letter of the contract, go after her license. Until buyers and sellers start holding these idiots responsible for their behavior, this bullshit will continue. Best of luck.
Yes, but I make a lot more money than you do and did not have to settle for a job at the antitrust division of DOJ or FTC. Unlike you I deal with partners at big law who respect and trust me and who have first year assocaites easily answer your silly pleadings. You deal at your level, I will deal at mine. And I don't do it from my piss poor quality "million" dollar home in wherever it is government lawyers can afford to live. I don't deal with the likes of you, so I wouldn't know.
Anonymous wrote:Is this Washington fine properties? I called to ask if there was going to be an open house on a condo and they said no. But they offered to show it to me. Then they sent someone random person who was not the selling agent to show it to me. He acted like I had decided to hire him as my agent and said He would get three percent and the listing agent three percent. I was like whaaaa? I didn't hire you!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP you are a piece of work. You're a hotshot lawyer who is so smart that you think your expertise will entitle you to horn in on a commission situation between 2 parties, neither of which is you. The commission has nothing to do with you and you don't pay any of it, and when you don't get the answer you want from a listing agent WHO YOU ARE NOT PAYING ANYWAY, you want to report her. That. Is. Hilarious.
Agents do not have to work with anyone they don't want to, and so she doesn't have to deal with your bs phone calls and as the pp's mentioned, she deemed you as not serious and as such, doesn't have to do anything.
At this point you've created more drama than you're worth.
As a lawyer, don't you hate when people harass you for free advice or somehow try to get out of paying your fees?
You are both right and wrong. You are right that the OP has no power to change a commission arrangement between two parties, neither of whom is she.
However, the agent absolutely does have a responsibility to convey to the seller all the offers that come her way. She may not like that idea, but she does in fact have to do that.
You are also wrong that the the buyer doesn't pay the listing agent. It may not happen directly, but the buyer is the only person that leaves money on the table in this transaction. So the buyer does in fact pay everyone's fees, listing agent, buying agent if there is one and whatever else.
OP, you may not need representation, but you do need an agent to give you access to the house. Whoever provides that access will be entitled to the commission - I don't care if you call them a buyer's agent or a listing agent. As for your idea to get a 3% rebate, you are free to suggest that, but the agent absolutely does not have to agree.
The reason agents dislike deals like this is that they prefer dealing with another agent on the other end, and perceive an agent-free buyer as more work. As in, she'll have to do the work normally done by your agent (make sure things are signed off on time, all the logistics etc. it may seem minor but someone still has to do it.)
Anonymous wrote:OP you are a piece of work. You're a hotshot lawyer who is so smart that you think your expertise will entitle you to horn in on a commission situation between 2 parties, neither of which is you. The commission has nothing to do with you and you don't pay any of it, and when you don't get the answer you want from a listing agent WHO YOU ARE NOT PAYING ANYWAY, you want to report her. That. Is. Hilarious.
Agents do not have to work with anyone they don't want to, and so she doesn't have to deal with your bs phone calls and as the pp's mentioned, she deemed you as not serious and as such, doesn't have to do anything.
At this point you've created more drama than you're worth.
As a lawyer, don't you hate when people harass you for free advice or somehow try to get out of paying your fees?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
OP here. Thanks, PP. The listing agent's attitude goes squarely against her fiduciary duties to the homeowner. I wonder if I should notify the Real Estate Commission.
That's what I was thikning too. Her job is to represent the interests of her clients. She's not doing so by cancelling the showing. Very unprofessional at least.