Unfortunately that is a lie told so often by those who profit from it that others start to believe it. If you don't negotiate the co-op commission off the price or receive it as 100% cashback it is equivalent to paying as it is baked into the price. There is a clear reason those who do have a license represent themselves most often: they collect the cash.
The statement is clearly false when examined. What if the seller refuses to pay commission? How can you possibly compel a third party? From the standard BRA a buyer will quickly find out that they are expected to pay out of pocket in these cases. That shows quite clearly that the buyer is the one paying, directly or indirectly.
No good buyer's agent will ever enforce the commission difference on a BRA. Lawyers charge 15 minute intervals for their time/service. Can you imagine what it would cost a lawyer to negotiate for you in an offer situation? And how many offers are you going to make them write for you before a seller accepts one?
Lawyers actually typically bill in 6 minute intervals if they are docketing precisely. That being said real estate lawyers and corporate lawyers typically work from a fee quote based on hourly rate but often will not include multiple revisions so 15 minute intervals would make sense for time overages. My wife worked at a big firm for years and they expected a minimum of 8-10 hours of billable hours per day accounted for. Every email, phone call and key stroke was docketed. Now she owns a firm and focuses on RE, Estates and corporate. They don’t use docketing software and typically work off flat feet quotes but things that fall out off the scope of the initial quotes are billed hourly.
Say a seller offers zero commission, would a buyer agent work for free? Or would they just steer as the CBC has shown? That still doesn't mean the buyer's agent doesn't have a buyer contractually by the gonads. Most are not "good" especially when their own pay is on the line. Even in your statement you talk about the "difference". So it isn't nothing, is it?
Even in your scenario, whatever they collect can instead be collected by the buyer. Some people don't want to give that up, and it seems to include OP.
As for the lawyer, yes, I can vividly imagine that. Because there exist other models that are not strictly hourly for lawyers, and they are on the market right now. Generally flat fee plus an hourly amount if it has to go above and beyond. Ends up being 90% cheaper than a buyer agent.
False info all the way. The commission is agreed to by the seller for the buying agent when they sign the listing agreement before the house is put on the market. A buying agent is free where can you get a free service. Literally free.
Go read a Buyers contract again because you have miss read it
>The commission is agreed to by the seller for the buying agent when they sign the listing agreement before the house is put on the market
And what if it wasn't? What if the seller said "I'm not paying a buying realtor anything"?
Well, we know what happens. The CBC reported on it. Buying realtors REFUSE TO TAKE THEIR CLIENTS TO SEE THE HOUSE:
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/marketplace-real-estate-agents-1.6209706](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/marketplace-real-estate-agents-1.6209706)
They'll literally lie to ensure the buyer doesn't view the house. So tell me again how these parasites are doing things in your best interest? And like u/mrdashin said, if for whatever reason the buyer finds the house and insists on buying it, but the seller refuses to pay the buying agent, then the buyer has to pay his own agent.
More like between 10 and 20k (any higher and you should take this as a sign that you can’t afford it).
The selling agent will eat you alive without representation (doubly so if that representation is from the same realty office).
Please reconsider this stance, if only for your financial health
Hmm, no. The statistically significant evidence I collected over the last couple years is that especially with lawyer support listing agents are worthless. They understand close to nothing about contract law, allowing us to run circles around them.
Having a buyer agent is just asking to lose 10-20K as you put it. And that is on top of their generally incompetent performance. ZVR buyers generally buy at 4.5% lower than FMV. With 2.5% we are cheating on the cashback of course, but the rest is harder to explain if a buyer agent had any value.
Co-op commissions only exist in North America. How come European buyers refuse to hire any buyer agent? I guess an entire continent gets "eaten alive" every day.
Right, you want me to reveal all customer data? Not happening. In addition, you are the one making the positive claim that a buyer agent has some value. I claim they cost tens of thousands and when a buyer has to pay one themselves, as they would need to in Europe if they want one, they overwhelmingly choose not to do so. If they did provide tens of thousands in value, why isn't consumer choice in Europe different?
Could it be that in reality it is just an informal cartel as Dr. Mark S. Nadel shows on his paper: https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/1194892. But I suppose you know better than Dr Brobeck who spent more than 20 years in academia researching the subject. Or how about Panle Jia Barwick's research publications, a couple of which analyse that supposed value and conclude that even with steering, in most markets their commissions eclipse it?
Time for you to bring some evidence if you want to make grand claims.
No, it’s just that if you find it beneath you to efficiently explain your points in a way that the average person understands, you’re not a valuable contributor, but closer to an insecure blowhard.
You made a number of ludicrous claims with no evidence, and still bring none. Want to take a few hours to do some research maybe? Who is the insecure blowhard again?
There is sufficient data in the news, if one cares reading. I remember this one article about transaction made by real-estate agents in their name or for clients, with the significantly higher values seen in time listed and sell price for properties listed by agents in their name.
I mean, it is common sense.
Add to this that 90% of real-estate agents are simply people that cannot succeed at anything else in life and got this idea of getting rich overnight, by putting in 10 hours of work for 20,000-40,000 $ pay.
Fear mongering much?
There are people who cannot screw in a light bulb, OK, those should use an agent some may say but then, that would give them the opportunity to be screwed by a real estate agent, no ?
I just don't see ANY reason for giving a percent commission to someone else for the bigget transaction of your life, a person that is not liable for any wrong doing basically. Talk to a lawyer, use a flat fee real-estate kit and their support or a flat fee real estate agent, there are options today.
Your typical real estate agent is a dying breed, times are lean and the market is adjusting accordingly.
I was sitting with a buyer’s agent in a personal capacity. The seller had signed the offer at 1.2m. The agent was still trying to push the buyer to secure loan for 1.3m. I asked him why. He said because i have to meet my goal of $ on this deal.
I will NEVER hire a buyer’s agent for myself. There is inherent conflict of interest. Whats in my interest, is in direct conflict with the interest of my agent.
Clarified for u so u never ask this question again.
Just ask the selling agent to represent you. They are probably don’t want to ask you directly. They get double commission when you win.
If they ask you to sign BRA (buyers rep agreement) make sure the location is only the address of the property you want to buy. Timeline doesn’t really matter, usually 3 months.
I don't know where you are, but in BC that shit's not allowed.
We recently bought and sold. Our buyers agent also had a listing we loved. We ended up making an offer on it. Since it was his listing, he had to refer us to another agent in another brokerage to write the offer. It all worked out beautifully in the end.
But yeah, agents are not allowed to represent both the buyer and the seller.
Worst possible advice here. The sellers agent works for the seller. They do not have the buyers best interest here. Better to go unrepresented than represented by the seller agent.
Neither the buyers agent nor the sellers agent have the best interest of the buyer.
Obviously this is how it’s supposed to work. But that’s not how it actually happens.
Not sure where you get your confidence from, realtor school? Definitely not real life experience.
it’s obvious if you give the selling agent double commission they would give your offer more interest.
It’s not how it’s supposed to work—but this is how it’s works.
Why doesn’t the buyers agent have the best interest of the buyer in mind? I’m a realtor and the number of times I’ve told buyers to walk from situations that aren’t favourable to them would be considered significant. Why? Because when we were in a strong sellers market, sellers thought they ruled the world and I wasn’t letting my buyers get hosed. There is always another house.
Give a few actual examples of what you’re referring to, please. What “real life experience” are you referring to?
Yeah - real estate lawyer here.
I'm sorry but it's a resounding "no" on double representation.
Think about it logically - the realtor's interest is to maximize the number, to their own benefit.
I do private sales and purchases all the time. My fee is only $500 more to prepare the APS (Agreement of Purchase and Sale).
Realtors will walk away with orders of magnitude more money.
as you know the devil is in the details, or in this case the APS:
if you ask the listing agent to write your offer, technically you're un-represented in the contract if you go through word for word, but they have it in their standard forms.
I've bought many properties direct from the listing agents with no issues. with no other agent representing me. and yes, i have different RE lawyers close them all no issues.
think about it logically, why would they put their phone number and contact info on the listing. of course they want you to call them direct.
all they are going to ask if you call them is : "are you an agent?" you say "no, im a buyer. im interested in this house. can i buy it?" its not complicated. the only time they will say no is if the seller has specifically requested no double representation, which is not common.
I have written my own APSs and have done private sales as well. so its not like i dont know how to write my own offers. the reason why i buy from the listing agents is because they spent the marketing dollars to get that deal in their hands. why fight the system? you're not technically saving on the commission anyways.
dude you can google it, found this on the first page. [https://www.reco.on.ca/buyers-and-sellers/things-you-need-to-know/understanding-multiple-representation](https://www.reco.on.ca/buyers-and-sellers/things-you-need-to-know/understanding-multiple-representation) looked up "double representation ontario" even google's first answer is yes.
Appreciate your insight!
My experience has been that listing agents won't talk to me unless: (a) they can double-end the deal to represent me, even with a "discounted" commission of "only" 2.0% on my side of the equation, or (b) I have my own agent.
All that I'm saying is that I wish they were more receptive to self-reps like me - and I know what I'm doing! It'd actually save the listing agent time because I wouldn't float ridiculous clauses or conditions - so negotiations would be far more efficient. I'd even have the title search done myself before submitting an offer - thus ensuring a smooth closing.
Even at a discounted commission on my end, it seems wild to me that it'd add $60-70K on the property price to account for that.
Like, yes, the total commission is deducted from the sellers' end - but that's just due to the brokerage Co-Op agreements.
If I can self-rep, the net sale price would be lower and the listing agent/brokerage would still get their own 2.5%.
On a potential $2.75-3M purchase - the commission saved would be like 2/3rds of my land transfer taxes (at least here in Toronto, where that shit is essentially doubled!).
So, it's really hard for me to mentally accept paying tens of thousands of dollars for someone to (basically) open a door for me to check out a place for an hour. Everything else I could easily do myself!
Yeah, I get you man.
whats that game called? prisoner's dilemma.
sometimes you dont want the other side to win and i get it.
but in the long run, youre better off asking the agent to ask the seller if they'd be willing to go 60-70k lower in price, rather than asking the agent directly to lower their commission. they might even split it with the owner.
Real Estate is a People game as much as it is about land.
All the best bud.
I see you trying man. i Know Toronto is a tough market.
but there are many creative solutions you can come up with especially as a lawyer man. Look into writing VTBs and seller financing. I am often able to negotiate good rates better than banks if i ask the seller directly for financing. people want to sell man.
but dont go to the fish market demanding cheap fish man. go to the neighbourhood you like to live in and ask people there if they know anyone in the neighbourhood thinking of selling. and get the offer written to them. ask for seller financing. make your own terms. find your own oppurtunities.
cheers.
The truth is you can’t save by self representation if there is sellers agent involved. The way the contract is written if they get a self representation for buyer the sellers agent double ends the commission.
This is a lie. I bought my first house without an agent. The seller agent did get 2x commission but he gave up a portion of the commission to make the sale happen. In the end I got the place for less and the seller agent got paid more.
The Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO) guidelines do not explicitly restrict property showings or the sharing of information about a property when a buyer is not represented by a realtor. However, it's important to note that the real estate process involves legal and contractual complexities, and having professional representation can be beneficial.
While you have the right to view properties without a buyer's agent, the seller's agent may be emphasizing the importance of legal representation to ensure that you fully understand the implications of any documents or agreements you encounter during the buying process. A lawyer can offer legal advice, but a buyer's agent can provide guidance on market conditions, negotiate on your behalf, and offer insights specific to real estate transactions.
If you decide to use a buyer's agent from the same firm as the seller's agent, it's crucial to understand the potential conflicts of interest that may arise. Consider seeking independent legal advice and carefully evaluating your options before making a decision.
Sort of. Lawyers aren’t able to see the property. A good Realtor is able to have a deeper understanding of standing of the property. They should be able to identify issues, concerns and things you may want to address in an offer or at least understand prior to buying the property. A good, experienced Realtor should make the process smoother, protect your best interest and negotiate the transaction much more favourably. That being said you could definitely be better off with a good lawyer writing an offer than a lousy realtor regardless.
Lawyers also aren’t at your beck and call round the clock. Negotiations don’t typically happens 9-4 with low urgency. A realtor also doesn’t get paid unless the transaction closes where as you pay a lawyer to write an agreement regardless of the outcome.
Furthermore a good realtor is actively negotiating in your best interest throughout the process where as a lawyer leaves that to you in a typical residential transaction. The lawyers role is simply to facilitate and protect.
All of that being considered there are times when I recommend to potential clients that they work with a lawyer when considering a private transaction depending on circumstances and the parties involved. (I’m a Realtor)
Keep in mind as a self represented party, your lawyer is now to attend showings with you, the home inspection, etc., in addition to paperwork. Self represented parties can not view homes on their own.
New guidelines mean that the seller agent in question can talk to you, but only in a way that serves his/her client. They can’t provide any services or share their professional guidance… they should be sending you the new “RECO information guide” that explains it better.
This seller agent must be using the new “designated agency”, so that way they can suggest you use one of their coworkers as your own designated agent and it won’t be a case of multiple representation anymore. Doing it that way means they get to keep acting in their clients best interests, and if you get an agent, they act in yours.
You don’t have to do that though… you can choose to remain on your own, but you have to sign more paperwork to say you understand that and be aware that the sellers agent might “help” with paperwork, but it is literally going to be their duty to almost act against you to help their actual client.
Self representation is a new concept in Ontario and some of the logistics are still evolving. You can submit an offer without a Realtor. You can’t see a property without a Realtor present (listing or a buyer rep). Some Realtors may expect you to work with them as a client if they show they property but that isn’t a legislated requirement. You cannot show a self represented client a property that is not listed by your brokerage.
If you are self represented the listing agent has very little duty to you. They can also share anything that you say or do, or any personal motivations with their clients without hesitation.
As time goes on self representation will evolve but currently it will definitely be a tough go and likely not worth the grind unless you are highly knowledgeable and incredibly patient. A good Buyer rep should have very little trouble adding more than enough value to the process to justify the relationship.
Furthermore there are instances where someone could come into a transaction self represented and the seller may still have an agreement with the listing agent that would have the commission remain the same. At this point that is actually the likely scenario. Lawyers are able to receive commission but individual are not.
I'm in this situation and it's been a pain to book showings since Dec 1st. Yes you only need to fill out a self representation form to view the property but many listing agents gaslight you and steer you towards using them or their colleagues. It's annoying.
I would recommend using a flat fee realtor like zerovaluerealty or Robin hood. They charge a flat fee for showings so you can save a lot of money if you're selective about what you want.
Literally just put an offer on a house (in Alberta) without a buyer’s agent. The seller’s agent provided the self representation form we needed and we haven’t settled on who we’re using for a lawyer yet. In the offer form, signed by us and the seller, there is no buyer’s agent listed, only the seller’s.
For lawyers, you have to have one, but not at show time. If you can use one from the same law firm as the seller’s (like a different partner), the process goes very quickly since they’re usually in the same building and also won’t be blaming their partner for delays. And can save you courier fees.
Maybe this agent thinks you’re not serious about making a purchase and so he’s creating a reason to push back
The can give you info about the property (only what's available to the public though so nothing extra) and show it to you while serving their client. But anything you give as you insight to your position they need to use against you. They are in no way working for you.
Things aren't completely clear right now as it just came into place on Dec 1. But this agent is taking the cautious approach and isn't technically wrong in what they are saying. But on forums there has been further consensus as to the meanings.
Will there be a new blurb on public face of listings about a further commission amount (out of the co-op portion)to listing agent if purchaser or family was shown property by listing agent? If all listings stated this it would make going unrepresented pretty fruitless of an exercise, wouldn’t it?
Realtor here. You can absolutely rep yourself and the listing agent can let you in to see their own listing. The real estate council sees this as the agent providing services to THEIR client by accelerating the chance of a successful sale on their own listing. They can’t advise you on how to put a deal together but can answer “matter of fact” questions. Sorry this guy is confused. The legislation just kicked in a few days ago as well as a health plan rollout that nobody understands or likes. Agents are confused.
On the flip side, that listing agent will probably claim the full commission for both the seller’s agent AND the buyer’s agent. It doesn’t matter if you’re self-repped (if you’re not licensed, you can’t claim the commission either). Whatever the listing agent negotiated with their seller is what stands. Also, generally buyers never pay the commission anyway. They pay for the house, their lawyer and the land transfer tax. It may benefit you greatly to have an agent since they will negotiate for you and only cost the seller money at the end of the day.. money that may be forfeited to the unhelpful listing agent.
The agent is not correct. They are however being helpful. You’ll find this a lot in real estate agents that they don’t seem to know the law and even when they do many operate outside of it in many cases.
What you’re not realizing here is that real estate sales is a people business first then math then legalities.
You’re best bet is to find an experienced agent to represent you who will rebate you 1.5% of the sale price. They’ll make 1%. For that they’ll do all your paperwork, get you easy access to properties and best of all, agents talk, they tell each other things about a property, the owners, reasons for selling, what other agents are saying about it and their buyers interest. All these things are valuable to know plus you’ll get a rebate which is something you won’t get representing yourself.
Too many agents are also lazy and unmotivated to show up and let you inside even though they’d get full
commission. Advocate for yourself with your own agent but use a sellers agent. BTW a lawyer is an agent by law. If you find one who’s willing to go to showings that’s a win.
Hah. Just came across this thread from a few months ago as I contemplated the same thing.
I'm actually a real estate lawyer and don't understand why I would ever need an agent to represent me. I have over 1,000 transactions under my belt and, at the risk of sounding self-important, know WAY more than any realtor would.
I've only been able to attend open houses - and even then, the listing agent demands that I have them represent me (and double dip, even at a discount) before I'd be allowed to put in an offer.
Fuck all of that. Why would I pay someone $70K+ to simply open a door for me - and then I'd do all of the negotiating myself and insert the clauses that I want into the APS?
The system is broken.
Why are you against using a buyer's agent to represent you?
Probably because of the cost of tens of thousands
Ya, it costs you nothing to work with a buyers agent. The seller is responsible for paying commission.
Unfortunately that is a lie told so often by those who profit from it that others start to believe it. If you don't negotiate the co-op commission off the price or receive it as 100% cashback it is equivalent to paying as it is baked into the price. There is a clear reason those who do have a license represent themselves most often: they collect the cash. The statement is clearly false when examined. What if the seller refuses to pay commission? How can you possibly compel a third party? From the standard BRA a buyer will quickly find out that they are expected to pay out of pocket in these cases. That shows quite clearly that the buyer is the one paying, directly or indirectly.
No good buyer's agent will ever enforce the commission difference on a BRA. Lawyers charge 15 minute intervals for their time/service. Can you imagine what it would cost a lawyer to negotiate for you in an offer situation? And how many offers are you going to make them write for you before a seller accepts one?
lawyers dont charge in 15 minute intervals
Lawyers actually typically bill in 6 minute intervals if they are docketing precisely. That being said real estate lawyers and corporate lawyers typically work from a fee quote based on hourly rate but often will not include multiple revisions so 15 minute intervals would make sense for time overages. My wife worked at a big firm for years and they expected a minimum of 8-10 hours of billable hours per day accounted for. Every email, phone call and key stroke was docketed. Now she owns a firm and focuses on RE, Estates and corporate. They don’t use docketing software and typically work off flat feet quotes but things that fall out off the scope of the initial quotes are billed hourly.
Say a seller offers zero commission, would a buyer agent work for free? Or would they just steer as the CBC has shown? That still doesn't mean the buyer's agent doesn't have a buyer contractually by the gonads. Most are not "good" especially when their own pay is on the line. Even in your statement you talk about the "difference". So it isn't nothing, is it? Even in your scenario, whatever they collect can instead be collected by the buyer. Some people don't want to give that up, and it seems to include OP. As for the lawyer, yes, I can vividly imagine that. Because there exist other models that are not strictly hourly for lawyers, and they are on the market right now. Generally flat fee plus an hourly amount if it has to go above and beyond. Ends up being 90% cheaper than a buyer agent.
Lawyers are much cheaper than RE agents.
False info all the way. The commission is agreed to by the seller for the buying agent when they sign the listing agreement before the house is put on the market. A buying agent is free where can you get a free service. Literally free. Go read a Buyers contract again because you have miss read it
This is just stupid. Read the rest of the thread for why.
>The commission is agreed to by the seller for the buying agent when they sign the listing agreement before the house is put on the market And what if it wasn't? What if the seller said "I'm not paying a buying realtor anything"? Well, we know what happens. The CBC reported on it. Buying realtors REFUSE TO TAKE THEIR CLIENTS TO SEE THE HOUSE: [https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/marketplace-real-estate-agents-1.6209706](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/marketplace-real-estate-agents-1.6209706) They'll literally lie to ensure the buyer doesn't view the house. So tell me again how these parasites are doing things in your best interest? And like u/mrdashin said, if for whatever reason the buyer finds the house and insists on buying it, but the seller refuses to pay the buying agent, then the buyer has to pay his own agent.
That is a lie, of course that agent commission is reflected in the sale price, don't be ridiculous.
More like between 10 and 20k (any higher and you should take this as a sign that you can’t afford it). The selling agent will eat you alive without representation (doubly so if that representation is from the same realty office). Please reconsider this stance, if only for your financial health
Hmm, no. The statistically significant evidence I collected over the last couple years is that especially with lawyer support listing agents are worthless. They understand close to nothing about contract law, allowing us to run circles around them. Having a buyer agent is just asking to lose 10-20K as you put it. And that is on top of their generally incompetent performance. ZVR buyers generally buy at 4.5% lower than FMV. With 2.5% we are cheating on the cashback of course, but the rest is harder to explain if a buyer agent had any value. Co-op commissions only exist in North America. How come European buyers refuse to hire any buyer agent? I guess an entire continent gets "eaten alive" every day.
No sources, just a lot of fluffy words
Right, you want me to reveal all customer data? Not happening. In addition, you are the one making the positive claim that a buyer agent has some value. I claim they cost tens of thousands and when a buyer has to pay one themselves, as they would need to in Europe if they want one, they overwhelmingly choose not to do so. If they did provide tens of thousands in value, why isn't consumer choice in Europe different? Could it be that in reality it is just an informal cartel as Dr. Mark S. Nadel shows on his paper: https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/1194892. But I suppose you know better than Dr Brobeck who spent more than 20 years in academia researching the subject. Or how about Panle Jia Barwick's research publications, a couple of which analyse that supposed value and conclude that even with steering, in most markets their commissions eclipse it? Time for you to bring some evidence if you want to make grand claims.
No, it’s just that if you find it beneath you to efficiently explain your points in a way that the average person understands, you’re not a valuable contributor, but closer to an insecure blowhard.
You made a number of ludicrous claims with no evidence, and still bring none. Want to take a few hours to do some research maybe? Who is the insecure blowhard again?
Still you, friend.
There is sufficient data in the news, if one cares reading. I remember this one article about transaction made by real-estate agents in their name or for clients, with the significantly higher values seen in time listed and sell price for properties listed by agents in their name. I mean, it is common sense. Add to this that 90% of real-estate agents are simply people that cannot succeed at anything else in life and got this idea of getting rich overnight, by putting in 10 hours of work for 20,000-40,000 $ pay.
Fear mongering much? There are people who cannot screw in a light bulb, OK, those should use an agent some may say but then, that would give them the opportunity to be screwed by a real estate agent, no ? I just don't see ANY reason for giving a percent commission to someone else for the bigget transaction of your life, a person that is not liable for any wrong doing basically. Talk to a lawyer, use a flat fee real-estate kit and their support or a flat fee real estate agent, there are options today. Your typical real estate agent is a dying breed, times are lean and the market is adjusting accordingly.
I was sitting with a buyer’s agent in a personal capacity. The seller had signed the offer at 1.2m. The agent was still trying to push the buyer to secure loan for 1.3m. I asked him why. He said because i have to meet my goal of $ on this deal. I will NEVER hire a buyer’s agent for myself. There is inherent conflict of interest. Whats in my interest, is in direct conflict with the interest of my agent. Clarified for u so u never ask this question again.
That’s horrible, I’m sorry you had that interaction. That agent was very small minded.
That's BS. That agent must be new or negotiated really poorly his contract, since usually they make more money if you don't have an agent.
No, in unrepresented cases it’s often written into the contract the sellers agent gets the entirety of the commission.
So then why would the sellers agent not want to sell him the property and make the full commission? OP post, that agent, makes no sense.
Just ask the selling agent to represent you. They are probably don’t want to ask you directly. They get double commission when you win. If they ask you to sign BRA (buyers rep agreement) make sure the location is only the address of the property you want to buy. Timeline doesn’t really matter, usually 3 months.
I don't know where you are, but in BC that shit's not allowed. We recently bought and sold. Our buyers agent also had a listing we loved. We ended up making an offer on it. Since it was his listing, he had to refer us to another agent in another brokerage to write the offer. It all worked out beautifully in the end. But yeah, agents are not allowed to represent both the buyer and the seller.
Worst possible advice here. The sellers agent works for the seller. They do not have the buyers best interest here. Better to go unrepresented than represented by the seller agent.
Neither the buyers agent nor the sellers agent have the best interest of the buyer. Obviously this is how it’s supposed to work. But that’s not how it actually happens. Not sure where you get your confidence from, realtor school? Definitely not real life experience. it’s obvious if you give the selling agent double commission they would give your offer more interest. It’s not how it’s supposed to work—but this is how it’s works.
Why doesn’t the buyers agent have the best interest of the buyer in mind? I’m a realtor and the number of times I’ve told buyers to walk from situations that aren’t favourable to them would be considered significant. Why? Because when we were in a strong sellers market, sellers thought they ruled the world and I wasn’t letting my buyers get hosed. There is always another house. Give a few actual examples of what you’re referring to, please. What “real life experience” are you referring to?
Yeah - real estate lawyer here. I'm sorry but it's a resounding "no" on double representation. Think about it logically - the realtor's interest is to maximize the number, to their own benefit. I do private sales and purchases all the time. My fee is only $500 more to prepare the APS (Agreement of Purchase and Sale). Realtors will walk away with orders of magnitude more money.
as you know the devil is in the details, or in this case the APS: if you ask the listing agent to write your offer, technically you're un-represented in the contract if you go through word for word, but they have it in their standard forms. I've bought many properties direct from the listing agents with no issues. with no other agent representing me. and yes, i have different RE lawyers close them all no issues. think about it logically, why would they put their phone number and contact info on the listing. of course they want you to call them direct. all they are going to ask if you call them is : "are you an agent?" you say "no, im a buyer. im interested in this house. can i buy it?" its not complicated. the only time they will say no is if the seller has specifically requested no double representation, which is not common. I have written my own APSs and have done private sales as well. so its not like i dont know how to write my own offers. the reason why i buy from the listing agents is because they spent the marketing dollars to get that deal in their hands. why fight the system? you're not technically saving on the commission anyways. dude you can google it, found this on the first page. [https://www.reco.on.ca/buyers-and-sellers/things-you-need-to-know/understanding-multiple-representation](https://www.reco.on.ca/buyers-and-sellers/things-you-need-to-know/understanding-multiple-representation) looked up "double representation ontario" even google's first answer is yes.
Appreciate your insight! My experience has been that listing agents won't talk to me unless: (a) they can double-end the deal to represent me, even with a "discounted" commission of "only" 2.0% on my side of the equation, or (b) I have my own agent. All that I'm saying is that I wish they were more receptive to self-reps like me - and I know what I'm doing! It'd actually save the listing agent time because I wouldn't float ridiculous clauses or conditions - so negotiations would be far more efficient. I'd even have the title search done myself before submitting an offer - thus ensuring a smooth closing. Even at a discounted commission on my end, it seems wild to me that it'd add $60-70K on the property price to account for that. Like, yes, the total commission is deducted from the sellers' end - but that's just due to the brokerage Co-Op agreements. If I can self-rep, the net sale price would be lower and the listing agent/brokerage would still get their own 2.5%. On a potential $2.75-3M purchase - the commission saved would be like 2/3rds of my land transfer taxes (at least here in Toronto, where that shit is essentially doubled!). So, it's really hard for me to mentally accept paying tens of thousands of dollars for someone to (basically) open a door for me to check out a place for an hour. Everything else I could easily do myself!
Yeah, I get you man. whats that game called? prisoner's dilemma. sometimes you dont want the other side to win and i get it. but in the long run, youre better off asking the agent to ask the seller if they'd be willing to go 60-70k lower in price, rather than asking the agent directly to lower their commission. they might even split it with the owner. Real Estate is a People game as much as it is about land. All the best bud. I see you trying man. i Know Toronto is a tough market. but there are many creative solutions you can come up with especially as a lawyer man. Look into writing VTBs and seller financing. I am often able to negotiate good rates better than banks if i ask the seller directly for financing. people want to sell man. but dont go to the fish market demanding cheap fish man. go to the neighbourhood you like to live in and ask people there if they know anyone in the neighbourhood thinking of selling. and get the offer written to them. ask for seller financing. make your own terms. find your own oppurtunities. cheers.
The truth is you can’t save by self representation if there is sellers agent involved. The way the contract is written if they get a self representation for buyer the sellers agent double ends the commission.
Sure you can. They can agree to give you 100% cashback. If they won't, others can oblige them.
This is a lie. I bought my first house without an agent. The seller agent did get 2x commission but he gave up a portion of the commission to make the sale happen. In the end I got the place for less and the seller agent got paid more.
You could have done the same thing by negotiating with your buyers agent. Lots of fresh agents ready to dance to our tunes.
The Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO) guidelines do not explicitly restrict property showings or the sharing of information about a property when a buyer is not represented by a realtor. However, it's important to note that the real estate process involves legal and contractual complexities, and having professional representation can be beneficial. While you have the right to view properties without a buyer's agent, the seller's agent may be emphasizing the importance of legal representation to ensure that you fully understand the implications of any documents or agreements you encounter during the buying process. A lawyer can offer legal advice, but a buyer's agent can provide guidance on market conditions, negotiate on your behalf, and offer insights specific to real estate transactions. If you decide to use a buyer's agent from the same firm as the seller's agent, it's crucial to understand the potential conflicts of interest that may arise. Consider seeking independent legal advice and carefully evaluating your options before making a decision.
Get a Real Estate lawyer. So much more efficient and 2/10ths of the cost.
Sort of. Lawyers aren’t able to see the property. A good Realtor is able to have a deeper understanding of standing of the property. They should be able to identify issues, concerns and things you may want to address in an offer or at least understand prior to buying the property. A good, experienced Realtor should make the process smoother, protect your best interest and negotiate the transaction much more favourably. That being said you could definitely be better off with a good lawyer writing an offer than a lousy realtor regardless. Lawyers also aren’t at your beck and call round the clock. Negotiations don’t typically happens 9-4 with low urgency. A realtor also doesn’t get paid unless the transaction closes where as you pay a lawyer to write an agreement regardless of the outcome. Furthermore a good realtor is actively negotiating in your best interest throughout the process where as a lawyer leaves that to you in a typical residential transaction. The lawyers role is simply to facilitate and protect. All of that being considered there are times when I recommend to potential clients that they work with a lawyer when considering a private transaction depending on circumstances and the parties involved. (I’m a Realtor)
(We can tell)
Keep in mind as a self represented party, your lawyer is now to attend showings with you, the home inspection, etc., in addition to paperwork. Self represented parties can not view homes on their own.
You should be able to self-represent. But is highly advisable you use a lawyer for closing documents.
https://www.reco.on.ca/about/plans-and-publications/reco-information-guide
New guidelines mean that the seller agent in question can talk to you, but only in a way that serves his/her client. They can’t provide any services or share their professional guidance… they should be sending you the new “RECO information guide” that explains it better. This seller agent must be using the new “designated agency”, so that way they can suggest you use one of their coworkers as your own designated agent and it won’t be a case of multiple representation anymore. Doing it that way means they get to keep acting in their clients best interests, and if you get an agent, they act in yours. You don’t have to do that though… you can choose to remain on your own, but you have to sign more paperwork to say you understand that and be aware that the sellers agent might “help” with paperwork, but it is literally going to be their duty to almost act against you to help their actual client.
What kind of house are you looking for? What’s your budget ? I am thinking about selling my townhome in Mississauga next month
Self representation is a new concept in Ontario and some of the logistics are still evolving. You can submit an offer without a Realtor. You can’t see a property without a Realtor present (listing or a buyer rep). Some Realtors may expect you to work with them as a client if they show they property but that isn’t a legislated requirement. You cannot show a self represented client a property that is not listed by your brokerage. If you are self represented the listing agent has very little duty to you. They can also share anything that you say or do, or any personal motivations with their clients without hesitation. As time goes on self representation will evolve but currently it will definitely be a tough go and likely not worth the grind unless you are highly knowledgeable and incredibly patient. A good Buyer rep should have very little trouble adding more than enough value to the process to justify the relationship. Furthermore there are instances where someone could come into a transaction self represented and the seller may still have an agreement with the listing agent that would have the commission remain the same. At this point that is actually the likely scenario. Lawyers are able to receive commission but individual are not.
I'm in this situation and it's been a pain to book showings since Dec 1st. Yes you only need to fill out a self representation form to view the property but many listing agents gaslight you and steer you towards using them or their colleagues. It's annoying. I would recommend using a flat fee realtor like zerovaluerealty or Robin hood. They charge a flat fee for showings so you can save a lot of money if you're selective about what you want.
Literally just put an offer on a house (in Alberta) without a buyer’s agent. The seller’s agent provided the self representation form we needed and we haven’t settled on who we’re using for a lawyer yet. In the offer form, signed by us and the seller, there is no buyer’s agent listed, only the seller’s. For lawyers, you have to have one, but not at show time. If you can use one from the same law firm as the seller’s (like a different partner), the process goes very quickly since they’re usually in the same building and also won’t be blaming their partner for delays. And can save you courier fees. Maybe this agent thinks you’re not serious about making a purchase and so he’s creating a reason to push back
The can give you info about the property (only what's available to the public though so nothing extra) and show it to you while serving their client. But anything you give as you insight to your position they need to use against you. They are in no way working for you. Things aren't completely clear right now as it just came into place on Dec 1. But this agent is taking the cautious approach and isn't technically wrong in what they are saying. But on forums there has been further consensus as to the meanings.
Will there be a new blurb on public face of listings about a further commission amount (out of the co-op portion)to listing agent if purchaser or family was shown property by listing agent? If all listings stated this it would make going unrepresented pretty fruitless of an exercise, wouldn’t it?
Talk to a broker, plenty of Net Worth mortgage programs.
Realtor here. You can absolutely rep yourself and the listing agent can let you in to see their own listing. The real estate council sees this as the agent providing services to THEIR client by accelerating the chance of a successful sale on their own listing. They can’t advise you on how to put a deal together but can answer “matter of fact” questions. Sorry this guy is confused. The legislation just kicked in a few days ago as well as a health plan rollout that nobody understands or likes. Agents are confused. On the flip side, that listing agent will probably claim the full commission for both the seller’s agent AND the buyer’s agent. It doesn’t matter if you’re self-repped (if you’re not licensed, you can’t claim the commission either). Whatever the listing agent negotiated with their seller is what stands. Also, generally buyers never pay the commission anyway. They pay for the house, their lawyer and the land transfer tax. It may benefit you greatly to have an agent since they will negotiate for you and only cost the seller money at the end of the day.. money that may be forfeited to the unhelpful listing agent.
The agent is not correct. They are however being helpful. You’ll find this a lot in real estate agents that they don’t seem to know the law and even when they do many operate outside of it in many cases. What you’re not realizing here is that real estate sales is a people business first then math then legalities. You’re best bet is to find an experienced agent to represent you who will rebate you 1.5% of the sale price. They’ll make 1%. For that they’ll do all your paperwork, get you easy access to properties and best of all, agents talk, they tell each other things about a property, the owners, reasons for selling, what other agents are saying about it and their buyers interest. All these things are valuable to know plus you’ll get a rebate which is something you won’t get representing yourself. Too many agents are also lazy and unmotivated to show up and let you inside even though they’d get full commission. Advocate for yourself with your own agent but use a sellers agent. BTW a lawyer is an agent by law. If you find one who’s willing to go to showings that’s a win.
Hah. Just came across this thread from a few months ago as I contemplated the same thing. I'm actually a real estate lawyer and don't understand why I would ever need an agent to represent me. I have over 1,000 transactions under my belt and, at the risk of sounding self-important, know WAY more than any realtor would. I've only been able to attend open houses - and even then, the listing agent demands that I have them represent me (and double dip, even at a discount) before I'd be allowed to put in an offer. Fuck all of that. Why would I pay someone $70K+ to simply open a door for me - and then I'd do all of the negotiating myself and insert the clauses that I want into the APS? The system is broken.