[margaretmattson]

Originally Posted by frayedends

What are you talking about? What did I say that was unethical? It's literally in the Realtor code of ethics to represent your buyer if you are a buyer agent. If you want to see a home and your buyer's agent says, here's the comps, this house is overpriced by 50K, how it that unethical.

You are saying, if you are a buyer and you come to me and want to see a house, and I tell you the house is way overpriced, you are going to report me? Well good luck with your home buying. LOL.

You are being paid a possible commission to sell a home FROM THE SELLER. Therefore, A realtor always represents the seller. He or she is the one paying you to sell the home.

Example: you go to a car dealership. A sales rep helps you but you decide to look around. Does he try to convince you that you are now obligated to buy only from him? Does he try to control you through manipulation? No!

A realtor is nothing more than a representative who sells homes. That fact that you believe this is not the case, is unethical.

[frayedends]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

In Florida, an agent cannot represent the buyer and the seller in the sales phase. It is unethical and illegal. In some cases, they can become a transaction agent, but only after a sales contract has been executed.

Yeah, here you are talking about dual agency, right? Same agent, buyer and seller side? In Massachusetts that can be done but it's tricky. First the buyer and seller have to agree to the dual agency. Then the agent can facilitate the transaction, but they can't offer guidance on the negotiations. For instance, when I said a buyer agent can tell you the house is overpriced. A dual agent couldn't do that since they are representing both the buyer and seller.

[frayedends]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

You are being paid a possible commission to sell a home FROM THE SELLER. Therefore, A realtor always represents the seller. He or she is the one paying you to sell the home.

Example: you go to a car dealership. A sales rep helps you but you decide to look around. Does he try to convince you that you are now obligated to buy only from him? Does he try to control you through manipulation? No!

A realtor is nothing more than a representative who sells homes. That fact that you believe this is not the case, is unethical.

I think you missed a big part of my posts or you just don't understand how this works. And again, maybe different in Massachusetts. The commission paid to the buyer agent is disclosed by the Listing agent in MLS. They have what they call a cooperative agreement. This is common practice here. We are talking about 2 different agents, just to be clear. The seller agent knows they are paying the buyer's agent commission. Of course, this is done to get buyers to view the home.

Let me give you an example of how it works in Massachusetts...

A buyer calls an agent and says I'd like to see 64 Tucson trail. The agent says, okay that is not my listing. I would be acting as your agent and representing you. I can set up a showing for tomorrow at 3 PM. They go to the house, the buyer agent opens it with a lock box code. The seller agent may or may not accompany. The buyer agent signs an agency disclosure with the buyer (or a contract if they want). The buyer agent advises the buyer on making an offer, etc and helps throughout the transaction. The MLS Listing shows a Co-Broker Commission. It literally says "Buyers Agent X%". Generally they all know the co-broke commission already for an area. It's fairly standard but not required to be.

Edit to add, your car sales had me confused. But you definitely misunderstand. In your scenario there is no buyers agent.
Let's say I'm a buyers agent for cars (pretend with me for a moment that this exists). I have a deal with all the car dealers in the area that they will pay me half the commission if my buyer purchases a car. So I take my buyer to Mercedes. We talk to the sale agent at Mercedes but leave and go to BMW. We talk to them but decide to go to Village Golf Cars and buy a new Yamaha Quiet Tech Drive 2, EFI with LED lights, hard valance, and blue tooth speakers. My buyer buys the car. The Yamaha sales agent bet $500 and they pay me $250 for bringing in the buyer. It's kind of like a finders fee.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by frayedends

Again, maybe different in Florida? In Massachusetts there can be a buyer's agent contract that states the agent is representing the buyer and it also discloses the commission being paid.

When I mention semantics, I mean how it's paid. If the house is 500K and the commission is 50K (for easy math) you could pay 50K at closing to the listing agent who then gives the buyer's agent 25K. Or you could pay each agent 25K at closing from the proceeds. Or the seller could give the listing agent 25K, the buyer could give the buyer agent 25K and the house could close at 450K. My point, it all comes out in the wash. That's why I say the lawsuit results change nothing but the semantics...

A buyer's agent should not be telling the buyer that it cost them nothing to be represented. There is a cost, and it can be buried in the commission structure. That is why the lawsuit was won. So in the future it won't necessarily save the buyer money (or make the seller more) because the agents will both want to get paid. They just have to disclose it differently.

I don't know about Massachusetts, but in Florida, what you are describing would be illegal. A licensed agent cannot represent the buyer and the seller in the selling phase. After a sales contract is executed, an agent can sometimes act as a transaction agent to facilitate the closing. But, when showing and selling a house, the agent represents the seller only, if the agent intends to collect a commission from the seller per a listing contract.

[margaretmattson]

Originally Posted by frayedends

I think you missed a big part of my posts or you just don't understand how this works. And again, maybe different in Massachusetts. The commission paid to the buyer agent is disclosed by the Listing agent in MLS. They have what they call a cooperative agreement. This is common practice here. We are talking about 2 different agents, just to be clear. The seller agent knows they are paying the buyer's agent commission. Of course, this is done to get buyers to view the home.

Let me give you an example of how it works in Massachusetts...

A buyer calls an agent and says I'd like to see 64 Tucson trail. The agent says, okay that is not my listing. I would be acting as your agent and representing you. I can set up a showing for tomorrow at 3 PM. They go to the house, the buyer agent opens it with a lock box code. The seller agent may or may not accompany. The buyer agent signs an agency disclosure with the buyer (or a contract if they want). The buyer agent advises the buyer on making an offer, etc and helps throughout the transaction. The MLS Listing shows a Co-Broker Commission. It literally says "Buyers Agent X%". Generally they all know the co-broke commission already for an area. It's fairly standard but not required to be.

Yes, it is different in Florida. If it is listed in the contract as allowed by Massachusetts law, there is nothing unethical. Knowing this, I probably will never buy a house in Massachusetts. I am not going to pay someone to do something I can do myself. How hard is it to look at MLS listings to find what you like.

[frayedends]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

Yes, it is different in Florida. If it is listed in the contract as allowed by Massachusetts law, there is nothing unethical. Knowing this, I probably will never buy a house in Massachusetts. I am not going to pay someone to do something I can do myself. How hard is it to look at MLS listings to find what you like.

Yes, just found out Florida does prohibit dual agency (same agent on both sides). It is okay in the scenario in Massachusetts, provided they don't touch the negotiations.

As far as the buyer agent thing, yeah you can do it yourself. If you are educated enough. I always thought I knew plenty. But damn, there are a lot of things that can go sideways. But, at least for now, you are gonna pay the full commission whether you have a buyer's agent or not. The listing may say 5% and if there's no buyer's agent the listing agent gets it all. Some listing agents will work with you on this if there's not buyer's agent and provide a discount.

Question though, are you saying there is no buyer agents in Florida (Separate from the listing agent)?

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

You are being paid a possible commission to sell a home FROM THE SELLER. Therefore, A realtor always represents the seller. He or she is the one paying you to sell the home.

WRONG

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

A realtor is nothing more than a representative who sells homes. .

WRONG

REALTOR® is a Registered Trademark.

No "real estate representative" is a REALTOR®

Not all Real Estate Brokers are REALTOR®

A Real Estate Broker (or a REALTOR® [who by definition is a Broker]) can represent a Seller or a Buyer. In all but 8 states, they can also represent both a Buyer and a Seller at the same time.

Don't let facts get in the way of your typing.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

Yes, it is different in Florida. If it is listed in the contract as allowed by Massachusetts law, there is nothing unethical. Knowing this, I probably will never buy a house in Massachusetts. I am not going to pay someone to do something I can do myself. How hard is it to look at MLS listings to find what you like.

I agree. A licensed real estate agent in Florida could never tell a potential buyer that they are representing them if they are showing a house that has a listing contract where the agent expects to collect money from the seller at the closing. The only way that would be legal would be if the agent told the seller that they represent the buyer and that they will not accept any commission money from the seller at the closing.

[frayedends]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

I agree. A licensed real estate agent in Florida could never tell a potential buyer that they are representing them if they are showing a house that has a listing contract where the agent expects to collect money from the seller at the closing. The only way that would be legal would be if the agent told the seller that they represent the buyer and that they will not accept any commission money from the seller at the closing.

Are you talking about 1 agent serving both buyer and seller. Then you are correct. But there are buyer's agency in Florida. It seems from what I'm finding they are paid the same way as in Massachusetts...

Average Florida Real Estate Commissions
Florida realtor commission is usually 5% to 6% of the home’s selling price. For example, if a home sells for $500,000, a real estate agent might get $25,000 when the sale closes.

Experienced agents will typically collect a full 6% commission, but younger, less experienced agents might receive less than that.

From the link...

"However, real estate agents often don’t get all of this commission. If there are two agents with the buyer and seller, the commission splits. An agent that works for a brokerage will have to pay them for assistance."

Florida Realtor Commission Guide (2023) | PropertyClub

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by frayedends

Are you talking about 1 agent serving both buyer and seller. Then you are correct. But there are buyer's agency in Florida. It seems from what I'm finding they are paid the same way as in Massachusetts...

The Selling Broker - Listing Broker relationship is exactly the same in Florida, as it is in Massachusetts. The only difference, is "dual agency" is not allowed in Florida.

The Seller's Broker sets the Commission Rate and sets the "cooperating broker's" (Buyer's Broker) fee. It doesn't have to be split 50/50. The typical Selling Commission in Florida (as in MA) is 5%. It's very unusual for anyone to pay 6% or 4%, but it happens. It happened in my case (actually, 3%).

The Commission on the resale I bought in The Villages 2 years ago, was a total of 3%. 1.5% to the Listing Broker, 1.5% to the Selling Broker (my Buyer's Broker).

The Brokers involved, were Re/MAX Premier Realty and NextHome Sally Love Realty.

... & before all the crazies jump in and claim that's nonsense, here's a Screen Shot of the actual HUD Settlement Statement.

[margaretmattson]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

WRONG



WRONG

REALTOR® is a Registered Trademark.

No "real estate representative" is a REALTOR®

Not all Real Estate Brokers are REALTOR®

A Real Estate Broker (or a REALTOR® [who by definition is a Broker]) can represent a Seller or a Buyer. In all but 8 states, they can also represent both a Buyer and a Seller at the same time.

Don't let facts get in the way of your typing.

Thank you for the correction. I was just stating it in example scenario. But, you are correct with your terminology.

[dhdallas]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

Note that "The Properties of The Villages" is not a member of the NAR, and none of their agents are Realtors.

That is correct. TV's real estate salespeople don't need to belong to the NAR to cheat and lie to the buyer.

[margaretmattson]

Originally Posted by frayedends

Yes, just found out Florida does prohibit dual agency (same agent on both sides). It is okay in the scenario in Massachusetts, provided they don't touch the negotiations.

As far as the buyer agent thing, yeah you can do it yourself. If you are educated enough. I always thought I knew plenty. But damn, there are a lot of things that can go sideways. But, at least for now, you are gonna pay the full commission whether you have a buyer's agent or not. The listing may say 5% and if there's no buyer's agent the listing agent gets it all. Some listing agents will work with you on this if there's not buyer's agent and provide a discount.

Question though, are you saying there is no buyer agents in Florida (Separate from the listing agent)?

When buying a home, at anytime, you can drop one agent and get another. You have no contract with any of them. In fact, you can have several, if you want. No one can force you to work with them. So, is there an OFFICIAL buyers agent in Florida? I say no. If you say yes, we are just splitting hairs. It depends on one's definition. I have never had a buyer's agent. Just a man who saw $$$$ and kept following me from house to house. He didn't even negotiate terms, I did! Lol. If he wasn't there when I decided to buy, I would have contacted the listing agent. I would rather pay a good home inspector to follow me around. But, that's just me!

[frayedends]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

The Selling Broker - Listing Broker relationship is exactly the same in Florida, as it is in Massachusetts. The only difference, is "dual agency" is not allowed in Florida.

The Seller's Broker sets the Commission Rate and sets the "cooperating broker's" (Buyer's Broker) fee. It doesn't have to be split 50/50. The typical Selling Commission in Florida (as in MA) is 5%. It's very unusual for anyone to pay 6% or 4%, but it happens. It happened in my case (actually, 3%).

The Commission on the resale I bought in The Villages 2 years ago, was a total of 3%. 1.5% to the Listing Broker, 1.5% to the Selling Broker (my Buyer's Broker).

The Brokers involved, were Re/MAX Premier Realty and NextHome Sally Love Realty.

... & before all the crazies jump in and claim that's nonsense, here's a Screen Shot of the actual HUD Settlement Statement.

Thanks Brian, that's exactly how it works here in MA and what I was trying to describe. I may not have been clear that the numbers aren't set and the split can be uneven as you mentioned.

[frayedends]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

When buying a home, at anytime, you can drop one agent and get another. You have no contract with any of them. In fact, you can have several, if you want. No one can force you to work with them. So, is there an OFFICIAL buyers agent in Florida? I say no. If you say yes, we are just splitting hairs. It depends on one's definition. I have never had a buyer's agent. Just a man who saw $$$$ and kept following me from house to house. He didn't even negotiate terms, I did! Lol. If he wasn't there when I decided to buy, I would have contacted the listing agent. I would rather pay a good home inspector to follow me around. But, that's just me!

In Massachusetts there can be a contract with a buyers agent. If not there can just be an agent disclosure that one is acting as a buyers agent. If there is a contract it usually has a date set on it. Even if the buyer walks away from that agent but is under contract that buyer's agent will likely still get that share of the commission. Years ago this exact thing happened to me. I had a buyer's agent (It was my first house and I had no idea about these things). I walked away because I didn't like her. But she showed up at closing and got her money. She did nothing in the way of helping me except send me to the house the first time. But the basic ethics rules is that agent that had the contract has some rights via the board of realtors to that commission.

Even if there is no contract but that agent shows the buyer the house, that agent will get their share of the commission, regardless if the buyer then stops all contact with them. The first question an agent should be asking when they get a call from a buyer is, "Are you working with an agent." There are times buyers don't disclose this and it can cause issues with commissions.

ETA: This lawsuit will likely increase the amount of actual contracts between buyer's agents and buyers. Because it seems the buyers will have to pay their agent directly rather than from the proceeds of the sale. It doesn't really help anything. It becomes more complicated. Here's an example.

For easy math...
House is worth 500K. Old way, it is listed and sells for 500K. At closing the 2 realtors split the 25K commission (5%) that was set on the listing.

New way: Owner lists and sells for 500K. Seller pays their listing agent 12.5K. But the buyer is under contract to pay their agent 12.5K (obviously, this number is whatever they negotiate). But buyers don't always have thousands extra laying around at closing. So they will perhaps write an offer that asks for 12.5K back at closing. Similar to how buyers will ask for closing costs back at closing. In the end the seller took home 475K in both scenarios.

One benefit I could see is in competition among buyer's agents. If the commission is now set at the listing, the buyer can hire any agent. But if there is a contract with the buyer's agent that sets the commission, the buyer's agents can compete with lower commission/pay.