Real estate question

[LightRanger]

Sure, why not? If the seller is truely a pain in the ass. Would allow the RE agent to walk away with something for their time if they don't want to deal with the seller anymore. "For x rate we will list, show, etc for x time frame."

In CA, listing agreements between listing brokers and sellers do say that. I don't have the CAR form in front of me but they basically say, "So and so shall have the exclusive right to list and market x property on Sellers's behalf from September 1, 2015-January 1, 2016. So and so shall make all reasonable efforts to market the property and procure a buyer. If a potential buyer was shown the property during the time this agreement is in effect and purchases the property during the time the agreement is in effect, or up to __ days after its expiration, so and so shall receive 5% of the sale price if so and so represents both parties, or 3% of the sale price if so and so only represents Seller." Etc etc etc.

Incidentally the fact that dual-agency is legal (it is in CA, I know it is not in many other places) is idiotic. Sure it may save money a lot of the time, but it introduces a whole host of problems when shit goes south.

[iceman]

I don't know, should they get MORE if the house is on the market for two years and they have to deal with a pain in the ass seller the entire time?

No, you should get dopeslapped for not dropping the place and telling the owner to get lost. Every place will sell at the right price, that's a truth. If it's been two years it's not the right price and the owner sucks for not getting that and you suck for putting up with it.

[Bromontana]

No, you should get dopeslapped for not dropping the place and telling the owner to get lost. Every place will sell at the right price, that's a truth. If it's been two years it's not the right price and the owner sucks for not getting that and you suck for putting up with it.

Yep, the hardest part of selling RE for me was getting unrealistic people with "special" homes to visit earth. Fuck your house/couch, it's a commodity. Biggest $ loser for listing agents is that nonsense.

If youre in a small town or dealing w family friends, then eek

[iceman]

If youre in a small town or dealing w family friends, then eek

Eek is right on. Not a position I'd want to be in.

90% of real estate is getting the owner to the right price. 90% of the rest is marketing. The 1% that's left is "solving problems".

(not in real estate but I've been around the block on it)

[Bromontana]

For buyer brokers it's different than listing-focused agents. I liked the listing model b/c you can scale it and drive your business regardless of your rolodex/connections. For me it was 80% hustle to get clients to sign and list right, then the rest was cake.

[iceman]

Agreed you can't do shit if you don't have the listings.

Not even sure "buyer broker" is a legit thing. I've had a couple agents represent me as a buyer but I met them though listings I was looking at and they seized the day. Talked to us, got an idea what we were looking for, did some research, got back to us, etc. They earned their money.

[Huck_Schmuck]

Vancouver and BC, obviously, are the not the same thing. I know "BC" is doing OK but I am very "city centric."

I've sold real estate in London (UK) and Verbier (Switzerland), prices in Vancouver are basically on par and the market is burning up.

Just to match a $ to a $. In Vancouver a $200,000 home would cost a seller $10,000 to sell. A buyer's agent would expect to earn $4,370 of that.

Where I live $200,000 is going to get you ~700 sq.ft. of shitty '70s wood frame low-rise. Lots available, high risk for Buyers - they are all getting into newer shoe boxes...

[Snow Dog]

In CA, listing agreements between listing brokers and sellers do say that. I don't have the CAR form in front of me but they basically say, "So and so shall have the exclusive right to list and market x property on Sellers's behalf from September 1, 2015-January 1, 2016.

It's similar in BC. Agents make their money selling because they have an exclusive contract. Buyer's don't sign anything and many don't understand the word "relationship". So they use a bunch of agents or walk into an open house and make an offer. And they don't like agents because they don't seem committed. The few times I've been buying I've used one agent and ridden them hard.

[oftpiste]

at least where you live there's anything for $200k!

Vancouver and BC, obviously, are the not the same thing. I know "BC" is doing OK but I am very "city centric."

I've sold real estate in London (UK) and Verbier (Switzerland), prices in Vancouver are basically on par and the market is burning up.

Just to match a $ to a $. In Vancouver a $200,000 home would cost a seller $10,000 to sell. A buyer's agent would expect to earn $4,370 of that.

Where I live $200,000 is going to get you ~700 sq.ft. of shitty '70s wood frame low-rise. Lots available, high risk for Buyers - they are all getting into newer shoe boxes...

[jfost]

You are still wrong, because in many states, no lawyer ever sees any part of the vast majority of residential transactions.

Just sayin'.

ummm, I know. I said that myself, but thanks for illustrating that this is still somehow a hot-button issue.

Just like photography copyrights, and republican talking points, people are really passionate about real estate!

It is kind of funny that Realtors who insist that they provide a needed service that protects their client don't feel that they should utilize a needed service that protects everyone's legal interests.

[Beaver]

The market I'm looking in $200k will get you a shit trailer or a condo, $300k will get you a shit house, $400K starts to have reasonable houses although still lots of shit in that price range. I looked at one reduced to $489k from $549k that was a POS IMHO, big lot was the value but it was "landscaped" like shit, scary stairs off the deck (scabbed knotched stringers that were cut too short so the stairs all sloped) among other issues. There are a few sub $400k houses that are quite nice but they tend to be in shitty 'hoods.

Just as I thought I was going to have some disposable income I'm going to become a brokeass motherfucker.

[el hefe]

^^^ because you are shopping in the most expensive area! Coldstream is great though, especially if you have kids.

[Beaver]

Ya, I know. Fucking standards, I guess I'm not the ski bum who will live happily in a POS shack anymore.

[Huck_Schmuck]

Ya, I know. Fucking standards, I guess I'm not the ski bum who will live happily in a POS shack anymore.

It's inevitable. And can be enjoyable. Do make sure you have a spare room for me, I'm a great house guest ;-)

[bodywhomper]

Ya, I know. Fucking standards, I guess I'm not the ski bum who will live happily in a POS shack anymore.

alternative standard: buy at lower end quality, improve with sweat, pay off mortgage early and/or have lower mortgage payments to improve quality of life in most salient ways.... ?

[RootSkier]

It is kind of funny that Realtors who insist that they provide a needed service that protects their client don't feel that they should utilize a needed service that protects everyone's legal interests.

What does this even mean?

[jfost]

What does this even mean?

Realtors and Lawyers are kissing cousins.

[oftpiste]

Perhaps genetically, but not functionally. I have good pals who are lawyers, but when they're brought in by a seller or buyer in the midst of the transaction the tendency in my experience is that they foul things up pretty good by wanting to rewrite boilerplate and other non-essential busywork.

One time I got a client a million dollar offer on a very oddball property. Their 'real estate lawyer' somehow convinced them that wasn't enough money. Over my advice they refused the offer. It took us another 6 months to sell the place for $700k. Malpractice much?

[Danno]

ummm, I know. I said that myself, but thanks for illustrating that this is still somehow a hot-button issue.

Just like photography copyrights, and republican talking points, people are really passionate about real estate!

It is kind of funny that Realtors who insist that they provide a needed service that protects their client don't feel that they should utilize a needed service that protects everyone's legal interests.

it's kind of funny how you brought it up, and you keep harping on it, yet when someone responds with a pretty low key statement, somehow it's the other guy who's illustrating that it's a hot button issue and displaying that real estate is a passionate subject? Irony much?

FWIW, as a lawyer I see little reason to involve lawyers in most re transactions. They'd just be one more mouth to feed, and wouldn't provide any additional protection in most transactions.

[LightRanger]

I have good pals who are lawyers, but when they're brought in by a seller or buyer in the midst of the transaction the tendency in my experience is that they foul things up pretty good by wanting to rewrite boilerplate and other non-essential busywork.

Yeah, anybody who rewrites state association of realtors forms in anything but the most complex, oddball transaction is an idiot and/or just trying to justify additional fees to somebody who doesn't know any better. The boilerplate in those forms is reviewed by a team of attorneys who advise your state realtors association. Usually dozens of forms that cover 99% of transactions. Attorneys are only necessary on random stuff. Maybe a complex sale-leaseback or something.

FWIW, as a lawyer I see little reason to involve lawyers in most re transactions. They'd just be one more mouth to feed, and wouldn't provide any additional protection in most transactions.

Yep.

[jfost]

it's kind of funny how you brought it up, and you keep harping on it, yet when someone responds with a pretty low key statement, somehow it's the other guy who's illustrating that it's a hot button issue and displaying that real estate is a passionate subject? Irony much?...

Well, for starters, I still think I'm right because...

... The boilerplate in those forms is reviewed by a team of attorneys who advise your state realtors association. ...

You guys always insist that lawyers aren't involved and yet???

ProTip - Lawyers are ALWAYS involved, somewhere. There is probably one under your couch RIGHT NOW!!!

but in a nutshell, yes - you are right, I stirred up this whole thing because I got bored again. I used to do this in PolAss but I have self-exiled from there. Maybe time to do the same here but I am so close to batting 10,000!

[iceman]

It's okay to stir shit up mang.

[Danno]

It's okay to stir shit up mang.

Just choose a more sexy topic than the involvement of lawyers in real estate transactions! That's boring as shit.

[jfost]

Just choose a more sexy topic than the involvement of lawyers in real estate transactions! That's boring as shit.

ya no kidding. I considered for a moment arguing with myself a'la jamespio, but then I fell asleep late last night...

[Danno]

ya no kidding. I considered for a moment arguing with myself a'la jamespio, but then I fell asleep late last night...

That takes a level of smug that has to be tough to muster.