[BostonTom]

You DO NOT need a buyers agent many realtors that are posting on here are in denial. You can go directly to the listing agent and make offer yourself. I would NEVER pay a buyers agent to walk me into a listing agent house make offer and paying them around 12 thousand depending on the price of the house.Also selling your home 2.5 percent to the agent is okay but there are other listing options which could save you substantial amount of money. Real estate agent trying to put their spin on it.The reality of the situation all agents work for themselves no sale no commission. They like that
saying I represent buyers or sellers BS .Soon buyers agents will become like travel agents dinosaurs. The Villages at some point will have to lower there commissions because why pay them 5 percent when MLS agents will start taking 2.5 percent to sell your house. Sellers should offer nothing to buyers agent let the listing agent split there 2.5 percent if they want. Example I bought a pre-owned house from Village sales agent like many people WITHOUT buyers agent and negotiated myself so why pay a MLS buyers agent would you pay somebody to go to a car dealership and help you buy a car. Everything the MLS agents have access to comps ECT can easily be found on Internet the same place they get there information from. But if you want to pay them to do it will cost the buyer or seller approximately 2.5 percent of sale price.

[crash]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

Is this a Florida state law, or is it an MLS rule? I have never agreed to pay any commission to a buyer's agent.

But you did the commission you paid was split between the selling agent and the buyers agent. In a sense they both worked for the seller because that is who was paying them.

[Normal]

What most don’t realize is the law will help real estate and bring down prices. For years real estate was on a roller coaster ride mostly as an upward trend adding to inflation.

The main reasoning was commissions added to pricing like ponzi progression. Without those huge price increases to pay salesmen (AKA Realtors) for every transaction, prices will decline. Wait and see.

Think back to the 60s and 70s when you had life insurance salesmen striking it rich. The whole system eventually folded.

[Bay Kid]

Talk about the government screwing up a business. Here is the perfect example of government interference.

[Normal]

Originally Posted by Bay Kid

Talk about the government screwing up a business. Here is the perfect example of government interference.

I believe a free market is everything, but the escalating of prices because of the inclusion of flat commission fees in pricing was unsustainable. Besides, now more will soon be able to afford housing.

[seecapecod]

Originally Posted by Plinker

On August 17th a new real estate law will go into effect which will no longer allow realtors hired by the home seller to list the commission the seller will pay to the buyers realtor. In short, the seller will negotiate the commission with their realtor and the buyer will negotiate their end of the commission with the buyer’s realtor. Seller and buyer pay their own fees. The savings could be huge.
Instead of the seller paying a 5-6% commission to be split between seller and buyer agent, the seller could negotiate a 2 1/2 - 3% commission with their realtor. On a $500,000 home the seller would pay $25,000 - $30,000 under the old law and “only” $12,500 - $15,000 under the new law. Double this for a $1,000,000 listing, etc.
I spoke with a Village Realtor concerning pre owned homes and was told they are maintaining the 5-6 % commissions.
Will this cause Villagers to choose MLS if selling their home? Will FSBO sellers now be more willing to hire a realtor? How do you think this will play out?

Wouldn’t The Villages “Sales Agents” be exempt from this new law? They are not realtors, not members of the National Association of Realtors. As such they’d set their own commission right?

[EatthMama]

In Florida, realtors are automatically assumed to be “transaction agents”, which means they can represent both sides; seller and buyer. The post that said they can’t is incorrect. I am an MLS realtor so I know of what I speak here.
Buyers will have to sign an agreement before they are ever shown a home by a realtor. The purpose of the new law is to provide transparency as to how each agent is to be paid. The vast majority of sellers’ agents will continue to offer split compensation to pay the buyers’ agent; it just can’t be posted on MLS that way. Buyers’ agents will be more likely to show a home that is offering compensation, so it’s in the sellers’ best interest to agree to the 5-6% on the initial agreement. Close to 80% of homes sold in The Villages are sold not by the listing agent but through the buyers’ agent, so it makes sense to make it attractive on the compensation to attract other agents who will show the home.
The reality is that nothing happens until the buyer brings the money for closing. It’s just a question as to whether the buyers’ agent commission is listed on the final balance sheet on the buyers’ or sellers’ side.
Of course you can choose to try to sell your home yourself. But there is quite a lot of work, knowledge and negotiation skills that realtors bring to the table. We definitely earn whatever percentage we negotiate.

[Laker14]

the Villages Realtors (or whatever they are or call themselves) have never split commissions with buyers' agents. Never.
When you buy a home through The Villages Realty if you want representation looking out for your interests, you have always had to hire and pay that out yourself, separate from the home purchase.

[vintageogauge]

Originally Posted by Laker14

the Villages Realtors (or whatever they are or call themselves) have never split commissions with buyers' agents. Never.
When you buy a home through The Villages Realty if you want representation looking out for your interests, you have always had to hire and pay that out yourself, separate from the home purchase.

But they sure sell a lot more re-sales than the MLS agents do.

[seecapecod]

Originally Posted by CoachKandSportsguy

Here in MA, we don't have title companies, we have lawyers and titles.
which is why I gave my MA scenario, and have spoken with lawyers about the sale.

The seller's agent lists and markets the house.
The buyer and selling lawyers execute the deal.
The buyer provides the funding checks, the lawyers handle the money to go where the agreement states. .

Which is why I am watching to see how to structure the sale with the listing agent and how to handle any MA buyer's agents. . just not sure how it will change the process quite yet, but it will change it.

We will be in the same boat with you! Have a home in TV and on the Cape- getting ready to sell one in Western MA in the next year-

[seecapecod]

Originally Posted by Plinker

Yes. Prior to the FTC ruling, a seller agreed to a percentage of the sales price of the home due their agent (brokerage) upon closing. What many people don’t realize is that the seller’s agent had a side deal with the buyer agent, if a buyer was working with a realtor. The seller doesn’t see this arrangement on the documents they sign for representation. However, the MLS has a form that only the realtors have access to which discloses what the selling agent will pay the buyer’s agent if they bring a buyer and close the deal. We, as sellers, never see this.
Example: 5% commission on $600,000 home. Seller’s agent/brokerage receives $30,000 from seller at closing. The deal the seller’s agent made with the buyers agent may be 50% (could be less) of the $30,000 commission that the SELLER paid. So, yes, the seller paid both commissions. They just don’t realize it. This ruling is designed to prevent this such that each party pays their own agent’s fees.
If the buyer doesn’t engage the services of a realtor then the seller’s agent pockets the full fee. So, instead of agreeing to 5-6% you can now offer 2 1/2 - 3% to the listing agent and let the buyer decide if they want representation.
A previous post was spot-on. A buyer may ask a seller to pay their buyer fees but the seller can decline which may decrease the pool of offers.

The individual States have language that must be disclosed- in this case a “Co-Broke” arrangement (both sides splitting the 5-6% commission) is disclosed to all parties in the offer in MA. What may stand for FL is not necessarily the case in other States.

[Snakster66]

It's not a law. Please re-watch the old Schoolhouse Rock video.

It is a change in the "Participation Rule" of the National Association of Realtors. This was changed as the result of a class action lawsuit by some home sellers in the midwest that felt the system was rigged in that sellers were required under the old rule to pay at least something to buyers agents in order to be listed in the MLS. They argued that 'big real estate' leveraged that rule to artificially inflate prices. Now, the revised rule states that seller is not REQUIRED to compensate buyer's agent if they don't want to (to list in MLS). As such, a new form for buyer's agents has been developed so that they get paid one way or another for assisting buyers (buyer's who choose to use an agent to help them find a house). This payment will be either directly from the buyer for an agreed upon amount or percentage or from the seller if the seller CHOOSES to include buyers compensation. Or it could be a combination of the two depending on what the seller is offering.

The government was not a party in the lawsuit. The government has passed no laws regarding this. This is an industry thing.

I am not a realtor...just someone who can read.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by EatthMama

In Florida, realtors are automatically assumed to be “transaction agents”, which means they can represent both sides; seller and buyer. The post that said they can’t is incorrect. I am an MLS realtor so I know of what I speak here.
Buyers will have to sign an agreement before they are ever shown a home by a realtor. The purpose of the new law is to provide transparency as to how each agent is to be paid. The vast majority of sellers’ agents will continue to offer split compensation to pay the buyers’ agent; it just can’t be posted on MLS that way. Buyers’ agents will be more likely to show a home that is offering compensation, so it’s in the sellers’ best interest to agree to the 5-6% on the initial agreement. Close to 80% of homes sold in The Villages are sold not by the listing agent but through the buyers’ agent, so it makes sense to make it attractive on the compensation to attract other agents who will show the home.
The reality is that nothing happens until the buyer brings the money for closing. It’s just a question as to whether the buyers’ agent commission is listed on the final balance sheet on the buyers’ or sellers’ side.
Of course you can choose to try to sell your home yourself. But there is quite a lot of work, knowledge and negotiation skills that realtors bring to the table. We definitely earn whatever percentage we negotiate.

I don't agree. Here is the Florida law on transaction agents:

FLORIDA LAW ALLOWS REAL ESTATE LICENSEES WHO REPRESENT A BUYER OR SELLER AS A SINGLE AGENT TO CHANGE FROM A SINGLE AGENT RELATIONSHIP TO A TRANSACTION BROKERAGE RELATIONSHIP IN ORDER FOR THE LICENSEE TO ASSIST BOTH PARTIES IN A REAL ESTATE TRANSACTION BY PROVIDING A LIMITED FORM OF REPRESENTATION TO BOTH THE BUYER AND THE SELLER. THIS CHANGE IN RELATIONSHIP CANNOT OCCUR WITHOUT YOUR PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT.

It clearly states that the agent needs written consent to change to a transaction broker. There is no automatic assumption. As a seller, I would not provide the consent. What am I missing?

[NorineBerlinski]

I am astounded at how many of us in our 50,60s and 70s Are unaware at the process of buying a house…
I am a landlord in Michigan and I am NOT a realtor. I have sold at least 10 homes myself by paying $250 and listing it in the MLS through a broker. The process is not difficult. It is easy and we can all do it on our own.
1. In the past, we paid 6% commission. The contract you signed when you listed your home actually stated 3% went to the sellers broker and 3% went to the buyers broker. Some people on this thread seem to think the sellers broker paid the buyers broker. This is not the case and never was the case. YOU paid the buyers realtor!
2. It was always unfair that the seller had to pay the buyers broker 3% and that is why the law has changed. There is actually a website you can complete some forms online and get that 3% back, or some of it through this class action lawsuit. I have completed this form to see if I qualify to get some of the commission I have paid to buyers agents. just google real estate class action lawsuit and it should pop up.
3. The new law that goes into effect on or around August 17 says that when completing the MLS forms you can no longer state the commission you are paying the buyers agent. Therefore, most sellers are going to pay 0%. Buyers will be responsible for paying their own realtor to show them homes! It should’ve always been this way!
4. Someone posted above that it was so difficult to list a home yourself. Here is the truth: you list a house for $250 through a broker you don’t have to pay 6% commission which equates to $30,000 on a $500,000 house. This is quite a savings for the seller. You Or the buyer choose a title company, most of them charge around the same amount of money. They will give you a for sale by owner packet with all the forms necessary to complete. Basically, it’s just the purchase agreement and sellers disclosure. That’s it for the seller! Easy, right? I realize you have to negotiate with the buyer for the sale price of your home. Aren’t you already familiar with negotiating by this time in your life? You’ve negotiated the sale of homes before, you’ve negotiated sales of cars and things on Facebook marketplace. It’s not any more difficult than that. The buyer gets their own financing and schedules their own inspections.
4. Marketing your home yourself: Just getting it into the MLS is enough. If you want, you could put a sign on the front lawn. You can buy them at Home Depot. If you want to do an open house, you can advertise that in the MLS. I have done them. They are easy.
You put a lockbox on the front door. They are $30 at Home Depot.
You download an app where buyers Realtor’ schedule showings.
The title company takes care of all the closing paperwork. You do not need to hire a lawyer.

Let’s not get bullied into paying the buyers realtor 3% again. That is the buyers responsibility to pay their own realtor for showing them homes.

Be prepared! I just spoke to a realtor in Michigan yesterday. She told me she plans on working as a buyers agent and calling the seller and telling them if they won’t pay her 3% commission she’ll refuse to show the house to her buyer! I told her if that’s the case, I would tell her just to move on… she told me I would be limiting the amount of buyers willing to see my house to a small pool. Wrong wrong wrong. Don’t be bullied people! Don’t cave, it is not the sellers responsibility to pay the buyers realtor, and it never has been. Things have been set right through this class action lawsuit. It took more than 50 years for this to happen. Don’t lose your nerve, if a buyer likes your house, they will view the inside and pay their own realtor.
Buyers may ask for “concessions“ when they make an offer to purchase. They may ask for a set dollar amount or 2 or 3% - don’t pay this, it’s the buyers responsibility to pay their own realtor!!

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by EatthMama

In Florida, realtors are automatically assumed to be “transaction agents”, which means they can represent both sides; seller and buyer. The post that said they can’t is incorrect.

Of course you can choose to try to sell your home yourself. But there is quite a lot of work, knowledge and negotiation skills that realtors bring to the table. We definitely earn whatever percentage we negotiate.

Both of which above facts, appear to be lost of the majority of posters on TOTV.

Selling your own home, without a broker, is a fool's errand. That may change in the future to some extent, but not significantly.

As you correctly point out, the vast majority of real estate transactions if Florida, both parties are "represented" by "transactional agents", who have no fiduciary responsibility to either party (only to themselves). Folks seem to have a hard time getting this relationship straight in their head, but as you point out, it is fact.

Personally, I think Florida law has always put the consumer at a disadvantage, but that's just the way it was structured.

I also think you're right, when you suggest not much is likely to change anytime soon. The FTC ruling is a muddled bunch of bs in my opinion and the NAR should be embarrassed for not doing a better job at representing their membership through the years. Once "dual agency" entered the market place, it all turned to crap and this is payback.