I'm going to be selling my current home by owner. My question is do you think I would have a better chance of a good deal by hiring a buyer's agent in searching and negotiating on the next home or just allowing the listing agent to collect double commission? I'm currently thinking that if a listing agent is getting the commission on both ends by showing me the house, that they are more likely to advise their seller to take a lower price if their commission is higher. What do you guys think? Any other reasons for getting services of a buyer's agent? I feel like I can pretty much find the houses and features I'm interested in on-line. Not trying to debate the pros and cons of selling a house by yourself, just curious which scenario might lead to a better negotiation on the new house.

Thanks

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by eng08

Member since Jan 2013

5997 posts

Posted on 3/24/15 at 8:43 pm to shotput3000

Having the same agent on both ends was nearly a disaster for me and I do not recommend it. I will NEVER do it again.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by nolatiger711

Metairie, LA

Member since Oct 2009

767 posts

Posted on 3/24/15 at 8:51 pm to shotput3000

Take it from a realtor. It is hard to properly fight well for clients on both sides of the deal. You can be fair and ethical, but hard to fight because you owe the other party your best as well. The listing agent will just pocket the full commission instead of reducing. They rarely use reducing commission as a tactic to help sell a home. Get a buyer's agent and have someone that is able to fight for you and get you out using the proper tactics if things turn south.

If you want me to get you started on selling by owner, then ask. If not, just be careful of the liabilities you open yourself up to. There is a reason realtors often have $1 million E&O insurance.

ETA: Just wanted to say when problems come up it is good to have realtors on your side know what to do to make the purchase go through. Just had to teach a seller's agent how to restructure a deal because the seller and buyer wanted the same thing, but they couldn't do it without it being considered a kickback. If it was just the seller's agent, then the sale would have hit an impasse with the lender and fallen through despite the parties all wanting the same thing.

This post was edited on 3/24/15 at 8:57 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by ItNeverRains

37069

Member since Oct 2007

25389 posts

Posted on 3/25/15 at 6:08 am to shotput3000

I'm going to refer you to another agent, give them 1% to represent you, and let you and my seller split the other 2%. If you don't want representation, I'm going to take full commission since the potential headache coming my way is worth every penny, not to mention the liability.

I'd rather work with a professional, no offense. You miss one timeline and my seller gets a backup for 5k more in the meantime, we've got a nice little mess on our hands.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by NoSaint

Member since Jun 2011

11266 posts

Posted on 3/25/15 at 8:01 am to eng08

quote:
I will NEVER do it again.

mine went relatively smooth, but would generally agree. i think any trouble i had was with a bad/lazy agent but its entirely possible they didnt want to bring things to the table because of conflicted interests.

that said, i made them, and got most of "the crazy things that shouldnt be asked for" that i wanted to ask for.

Page 1