Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Eric Mieles on January 29, 2012 at 8:04am

So lets take a look at a couple of things. I have a huge problem and so should your clients (Or should I say the real listing agents clients) with you constantly promoting the benefits to the buyers side of the transaction.

You keep saying “Your Fiduciary Duty (and mine) in a short sale is to put the seller in the best financial position”

I’m not sure where you saw that as the definition of “Fiduciary Duty” or how you came up with it but let me remind you of the real Fiduciary Duty you have to your clients and I quote “One of the most fundamental fiduciary duties an agent owes to the principal. The duty obligates a real estate broker to act at all times, solely in the best interests of the principal, excluding all other interests, including that of the broker.” Or how about this “One court has summarized an agents fiduciary responsibility broadly: The agent cannot compete with the principal on matters connected with the agency, nor can the agent take part in any transaction in which the agent has an INTEREST adverse to the principal, nor undertake any other agency responsibilitites adverse to the interests of the principal.” And this “A fiduciary duty^[1] is the highest standard of care at either equity or law. A fiduciary is expected to be extremely LOYAL to the person to whom he owes the duty (the "principal"): he must not put his personal interests before the duty, and must not profit from his position as a fiduciary, unless the principal consents.

So maybe your client should take a second and ask who’s side are you on when promoting such “great discounts” to buyers because of your unbeilievable service. Furthermore I as well as any other profssional competent experienced buyers agent would feel very confident that he could negotiate a discount far more than your 3% in exchange for his client to pay YOU a fee to get access to the SELLERS home. That ability to get a discount in todays market from a seller is called good ole fashion NGEOTIATING and it’s something many have forgotten about.

Lets look at an example. Seller lists for $100k. Buyers see property, buyers likes and his broker writes up an offer. Before he does though he calls the listing agent and says “Great house, thanks for allowing my buyers to see...blah blah....The buyers like it HOWEVER I wanted to speak with you a little to share some things I found. The buyers brought to my attention that although they like the house they did see the large REO availabe for $88k and they saw a couple more short sales in the other community that have a better communte to there job. They also are aware (And the buyers broker says to the listing agent “there very smart buyers and they do there homework...internet..lol...he chuckels) that there is the threat of shadow inventory that who knows if there will be further depression once that unloads.

Now the house has been on the market for 37 days, sellers are 28 months delinquent and have had viewing but no offer. Or the other scenario is they had an offer right away yet it fell through or buyer bailed. So (Back to the story) the buyers broker says based on comps and I know you know this but I reminded them that this house can be anywhere between $90k and $105k. They would like to write up an offer at $90,000 flat, 45 days close, no consessions, 5 day inspection period and they are conventional buyers with two different pre approvals letters and cash reserves to show. Further more I have advised them (Because im so respectful of the hard work you do on short sales and value your time) that I will have them sign and submit an addendum locking them into the deal for a minimum of 90 days while you negotiate. Escrow will be taken at contract execution and if they shall walk prior the seller retains 50% of escrow for damages.

I really look forward to working with you on this and hope you convey the strength of my buyers to the many loose cannons walking around putting offers in now a days (He chuckles again).

Now “Most” listing agents will say “All I can say is send it over and Ill review it with my clients”. The best would put up a little resistance and shed light on the fact that it’s a great home and there confident it will sell. However we all know there are those few. So the contract comes in and lets just say for the most part its signed, sent to the bank, negotiated and ends up getting approved at $$93,500.

So buyer got $6500 discount rather than the $3,000 you pitch so confidently. All without paying $3,000 to you and your team.

A couple more things, you state “and I allow a buyer to lower their offer by at least 3% to compensate. And again

 “Why would you not have your buyer assist?  Especially if we allowed them to receive a discounted offer price or a closing cost credi”t and again

“99% of buyers agree because they see the value, and above all, I allow a lower offer to be submitted.  Partly to compensate them for my fee, and partly to create negotiation room.  The effect though, is a real chance for the buyer to receive a greater discount.  There is value to the buyer.

Lol I don’t mean to be rude at all but WHO ARE YOU TO ALLOW ANYONE ANYTHING IN THE TRANSACTION??? You have to admit when you read it back like this you can clearly see how close you come to your ethics and loyalty to the seller.

Now I agree partner that we all must work harder on getting better buyers to stay in the deal and  do a great job of screening out good buyers from not so good ones. That’s why you should have a discovery process in place to find out more about the buyer as well as putting in place addendums and protocols that will protect your SELLERS best interest in the transaction.

Let’s remember you yourself portrayed a scenario where you could be held liable see here “That buyer would end up falling out and then we wasted our sellers time taking the property off the market, possibly forcing a foreclosure because we recommended a bad buyer.  Is there liability in this?  Can a seller sue an agent for bad advice because we told them to take an offer and the buyer wasn't qualified and they ended up in foreclosure?  Absolutely!

So do you not believe there is a liability in passing on a fee that may turn a buyer off, you recommend a seller turn the offer down even though its an amazing offer and the seller gets further in debt with HOA, lien holders and/or goes into foreclosure??

In ending I’ll address the rest of your statements:

“Why shouldn't the buyer be responsible?” Because it’s the seller and/or the listing agent who hired you not the buyer.

 

“I coordinate closings...on average I spend over 30 hours per transaction, sometimes much, much more.  All of these things and more is why I earn, and deserve compensation.” You sure do and I commend your hard work and dedication however figure out a way to get paid by not dipping into the buyers pocket who has no responsibility to pay you or find a new niche!!!

“Both Fannie and Freddie specifically authorize third party fees charged to buyers.” Who cares! So are you saying you only charge buyers for Fannie/Freddie deals?? We probably know the answer!!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Smitty on January 29, 2012 at 8:42am

RONFLMBO - up top Thom...scroll to the top of the page.  ;) 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bryant Tutas on January 29, 2012 at 9:07am

And Eric, You stated: '"Why shouldn't the buyer be responsible?” Because it’s the seller and/or the listing agent who hired you not the buyer.""

If you are using this as the standard then why would a seller EVER agree to contribute to a buyers closings costs?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Smitty on January 29, 2012 at 9:11am

Eric,

I see your points.  Some of them I agree with and some I just don't even understand.  You're example of $100,000 and then $90,000 doesn't even make sense.  If they want to pay $90,000 total for the house, Joseph has them write an offer for $87,300.  They are NOT paying more for the house.  You said they would write an offer for $90,000 but then used the $100,000 and minused the 3% fee. 

I'm not sure exactly where you were going with fiduciary responsibility either.  Any agent who gets a commission on a sale could be accused of violating that responsibility, however, no one should work for free right?  Isn't making an financial gain on a short sale working adversely to the principle.  Any agent that negotiates can easily talk their seller into taking a short payoff where the deficiency wasn't released and it's likely the homeowner doesn't know better...all in the name of preserving their commission.  I see a lot of fingerpointing and all we agents have to do is look in the mirror.  Our industry is full of self serving interests.  The only short sale fraud conviction that I'm aware of is where the two real estate agents involved in Connecticut looked out for their own interests over the clients, trying to make a quick $$$ and mind you, I WORK with short sale flippers too.

Keep in mind Eric, Joseph has already stated each seller he works with has a lawyer involved that represents them as well.  If the lawyer signs off on the transaction, has Joseph served his own interests, the sellers, ??

You're talking in hypothetical situations so I can only answer hypothetically.  Is there a liability in passing on a fee that may turn a buyer off?  Maybe, but there is liability EVERYWHERE in short sales.  The BUYER had the OPTION the minute they saw the listing to either A) go see the house knowing a fee was going to be charged to them or B) Not see the house because of the fee.  - So how are you to know the $90,000 offer was a AWESOME offer???  Maybe the $90,000 was an FHA buyer?? Why did they need 45 days to close?  I'd take a CASH offer of $80,000 all day long so long as the deficiency was released and Eric, let's be honest, NO ONE knows what the bank is going to do.  I had two offers on a property last year.  One was for $320,000 financed...I submitted and I had a $300,000 cash backup.  BOA rejected the $320,000 and so I submitted the $300,000 offer and  guess what?!?!  ACCEPTED.  Who knows what the bank is going to do, but if it were my house and I sat knee deep in debt, I'd take the STRONGEST offer.  I think that is what Joseph is referencing when he talks about fiduciary responsibility.  Which offer leads us to the closing the fastest?  Which offer is STRONGEST?  Which buyer won't walk?  Which offer will get accepted...not sure we can answer any of these, but I get what he is saying regarding FHA buyers.  Let's face it.  They are NOT the strongest buyer in this market. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bryant Tutas on January 29, 2012 at 9:00am

Personally I see no issue with the buyer paying for the negotiator if they agree to do so. Heck I just had a buyer pay a $10,000 cash contribution on behalf of my seller.

Who pays what and how much they pay is really just a negotiation between the buyer and the seller.

 And how the listing is handled is between the listing broker and the seller. And the seller can certainly hire anyone they want to to handle their negotiations as long as that person isn't breaking the state's licensing laws.

My experience is that there is a buyer for every house no matter what restrictions we may place on the transaction.

The buyer needing to pay the 3rd party negotiator is something that affects the value of the property. As long all parties understand that and agree to the price then what difference does it make who pays for what?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joseph Alfe on January 29, 2012 at 9:53am

Bryant and Smitty are the voice of reason here, so long as everything is properly disclosed, what's the problem?  Now, I have heard of other processors trying to spring fees on the buyer or seller at the end, and this is plain wrong.  Eric, I wonder what your true motivation is? Is it agent ego, and you're upset to admit that someone other than a broker or agent dare negotiate a short sale?  I can make a valid case of just the opposite.  It really doesn't matter though, the bottom line is the sellers well being.  In a short sale, the definition of Fiduciary Duty changes. I believe, and so do most attorneys, that the duty is simply to have the best possible financial outcome for the seller.  Since I have a contract with the seller, my SOLE duty is to the seller.  Period.  NOT to the agent, or anyone else.  However, I believe that in order to accomplish my goal for the seller, I truly believe that I must help the buyer obtain their goal:  That is to close the deal, buy the property.  If that means helping them get a great deal, then so be it.  I stand by my pronunciation that "I help my seller by helping your buyer buy."

When I close a deal, invariably, both the buyer and seller are happy.  I closed one on Friday.  On the HUD, my fee was $9,800.  The buyer paid it and were happy.  Why?  because their original offer was $360,000, and I got $340,000 approved. .  The sellers had two loans. I arranged for the buyer to contribute almost 2K to buy out a deficiency. So, even with my fee and the contribution, the buyer saved over 8K.  The seller?  They enjoyed a full debt release on both loans. The agents?  They got their 6%.  The attorney?  They got their $2,500.  Everyone was happy.  I stand by my work, because at the end of the day, we did our job and protected our seller.

www.ssprocessors.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thom Colby CA Brkr 888-391-5245 on January 29, 2012 at 10:38am

 

Here's an interesting article prepared by the Attorney for several Associations of Realtors in Southern CA and distributed to the membership.  Although this is specific to California, many of the issues likely apply similarly in other States.  It's a little long - but well-worth the read:

 

SHORT SALE NEGOTIATORS

Fiduciary Duties / Contractual Relationships / MLS Issues

In the current real estate market, a significant number of transactions are short sales. The enactment of federal legislation (HAFA) to streamline and provide rules for short sales is expected to further increase the number of attempted short sale closings. The increase in short sale transactions has caused changes in how buyers, sellers, real estate brokers, agents and lenders conduct business. The traditional ways of handling a transaction do not always fit in a short sale, nor, in many instances, do traditional rules. New business models are being created, and opportunities for fraud schemes and ambiguities are abundant. Many agents are using the services of short sale negotiators. Real estate professionals are faced with multiple and complicated legal and ethical issues and new rules and regulations that have been enacted to address these changes.

 

Short Sale Defined

A short sale is a transaction where title transfers and the sale price is insufficient to pay the total of all liens and costs of sale, and where the seller does not bring sufficient liquid assets to the closing to cure all deficiencies. Before foreclosure by the lender or lienholder that holds the trust deed on a residential property (referred to in this article as the “Lender”), the Lender agrees to allow the homeowner to “sell short” -- sell the property for less than the outstanding amount owed on the mortgage loans -- and release the property from the trust deed the lender holds. The lender benefits by removing the non-performing loan asset from its financial books, avoiding the costs and time delays of foreclosure, and incurring the holding costs associated with owning the property after foreclosure (such as taxes, maintenance, insurance, eviction, and listing and selling). The homeowner benefits by avoiding the foreclosure action which severely damages a credit rating and ability to obtain financing for a replacement residence in a shorter time frame. However, an undesirable factor for the homeowner is that the “shortage” may be treated as “debt forgiveness” by the lender and in some circumstances may be taxable as “phantom income.” There are both federal and state laws that govern tax issues. In some circumstances where the lender has recourse, the lender may even have a potential claim for damages for the “deficiency” (shortfall).

 

Use of Short Sale Negotiators

Completing a successful short sale often requires time-consuming negotiations with the lender or lender’s representative. Many agents or offices are inexperienced, unskilled, or just too busy to efficiency and effectively conduct such negotiations. They prefer to utilize the services of a third-party negotiator who often has an established relationship with a person in the lender’s loss mitigation department. Use of such a third-party negotiator, particularly one who is not “in-house,” may raise a multitude of legal and ethical issues, including questions relating to fiduciary and ethical duties, license requirements, contractual relationships, compensation, disclosure, confidentiality, compliance with MLS Rules and civil and criminal law, insurance coverage and liability. Some brokerages bring the negotiators in-house and under the umbrella of the supervision of the broker and the company’s insurance coverage.

 

 

DRE License Required for Negotiators

Real estate licensees who take short sale listings must ensure that the third party conducting the negotiations is properly licensed. The DRE has made it clear that a real estate broker or salesperson license is mandatory to represent the parties to a short sale, unless negotiations are conducted by an attorney or the party.  If the negotiator is a licensee, then he or she must have a supervising broker. Careful consideration must be given to whom the fiduciary duty is owed.  Is the negotiator an agent of the seller, a dual agent, or an employee/agent of the listing broker, the cooperating broker or both?

 

If the transaction involves a loan secured directly or collaterally by liens on real property,

California Business and Professions Code section 10131(a) and (d) requires a person to be licensed who negotiates as a representative of another for the purchase, sale or exchange of real property, or who, for or in expectation of compensation, acts in a representative capacity for another to negotiate loans or perform services for borrowers or lenders. (Narrow exceptions exist for attorneys acting in the course and scope of their law practice and a person or entity acting solely on his or its own behalf).   A license is required regardless of the title used by the negotiator. For example, none of the following are exempt from the license requirement: debt negotiator, debt resolution expert, loss mitigation practitioner, foreclosure rescue negotiator, short sale processor, short sale facilitator, short sale coordinator, or short sale expeditor. Persons who engage in short sale negotiations without a DRE license are in violation of California law and could be fined and/or imprisoned under section 10139 of the Business and Professions Code. Persons who knowingly hire them may also be in serious difficulty.

 

Obligations of Listing and Selling Brokers and Agents

Seller’s Written Agreement and Disclosure

 

The listing broker/agent must have the seller’s written agreement for the negotiator to provide services. This is required for several reasons:

(1) The listing broker/agent must disclose to the seller that the negotiator’s services will be used.

(2) The negotiator must have authority from the seller (borrower) to communicate on the seller’s behalf with Lender.

(3) The agreement of the seller is required regarding compensation to be paid to the negotiator.

(4) Use of the negotiator must be disclosed to the buyer’s agent.

 

These requirements may be met by completing the appropriate C.A.R. Form – Short Sale Addendum and providing the buyer’s agent a copy of the form. In addition, it is this author’s opinion that an agency disclosure form may often be required. If the licensed negotiator is acting on behalf of the seller (and/or buyer) in a principal/agency capacity, an Agency Disclosure form is mandatory.

 

Relationships between Listing Broker or Agent and Negotiator and/or Outside Broker

The listing agent generally has an independent contractor relationship with the listing broker. The negotiator may be an employee, an affiliated independent contractor, or an outside vendor of either the listing broker or the listing agent. If the negotiator is not an affiliated licensee of the listing broker, he must himself be a broker or be affiliated with another “outside” broker. The listing broker/agent should have a clear written agreement establishing the relationship with the negotiator.  If the negotiator is affiliated with an outside broker, there should be a written agreement between the listing broker and the outside broker confirming that the outside broker will meet the fiduciary and legal duties to supervise the negotiator’s activities, not delegate tasks requiring a license to unlicensed persons, and provide insurance coverage for worker’s compensation and liability coverage for negligence or unintentional misrepresentations by the negotiator to the lender, buyer, seller or others. The agreement between the brokers should also establish their rights regarding commission splits and method for compensating the negotiator for his services.  Providing for mediation or arbitration and attorney fees in the brokers’ agreement is also advisable.  Additional issues arise if the lender requires or designates a negotiator or if the listing broker/agent is also the buyer’s agent (dual agency) and uses a negotiator who is an employee or independent contractor of the lender. In a dual agency transaction, the agent has a fiduciary duty to the seller to negotiate the best terms for the seller, not obtain the highest price for the Lender.

 

All appropriate disclosures regarding affiliate business relationships and referrals must be made to comply with the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”).

 

Compensation to Negotiator

The negotiator must comply with all DRE regulations and California law for advance fees. Disclosure of all fees, including short sale negotiator compensation, must be made on the HUD 1 Statement. Payment to the negotiator must be made through escrow. Conditions for valid payment to a short sale negotiator include the following:

• Seller consent (written),
• Agency Disclosure,
• DRE license affiliated with licensed broker,
• Performance of licensed activities,
• Entitlement to compensation as an agreed commission split, a flat fee, or hourly rate as an independent contractor or employee of the listing agent, listing broker, or outside broker. Will the fees still be due if the transaction fails to close or if the lender fails to grant approval?

 

Listing Broker/Agent Liability

Claims for breach of fiduciary duty, failure to disclose, or failure to supervise may be brought by a seller or buyer.  DRE discipline and criminal and/or civil liability may attach even if the listing broker/agent is unaware that the negotiator is engaged in mortgage fraud.

 

MLS Listing Re Short Sale Negotiator Fees

Short sales present a special problem with conditional compensation being offered to a cooperating broker. The listing agent may not be entirely sure what the commission will be until the terms of a short sale are approved by the lender. The Multiple Listing Service (MLS) has adopted NAR-approved language giving participants in the MLS the ability to disclose or may require disclosure to other participants that there is a potential for a short sale. If the property is being listed as a short sale, that should be disclosed in the private agent remarks section.  A listing that requires the buyer’s agent to pay a portion of the negotiator’s fee may be a prohibited contingent offer of compensation. To avoid an MLS Rule violation, rather than requiring the cooperating broker to pay a stated amount of the negotiator’s fee, the listing agent may lower the percentage of the commission offered to the cooperating broker, subject to discussion with the seller and full written disclosure.  The purpose of the MLS is to exchange information regarding available properties for sale or lease and to establish legal relationships with other participants by making blanket unilateral offers of compensation. The MLS Rules govern the behavior of the participants.

 

However, it must be abundantly clear that the Rules do not alter California law, including the DRE regulations, Statutory Law, and Case Law.  MLS Rule 7.12 sets forth the criteria for an offer of compensation as being a specific dollar or percentage amount. The Rule states, “… The amount of compensation … may not contain any provision that varies the amount of compensation offered based on conditions precedent or subsequent or on any performance, activity or event.” Rule 7.16 limits the manner by which compensation may be altered.

 

There are a number of rules relating to the rights of brokers who present offers that may also impact this issue and will be a topic of the next report. In the next report, we will discuss these issues and the Code of Ethics, particularly Articles 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 12, and 16, as they apply to this subject matter. See for example MLS Rules 7.16, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6 and 9.7.  As with all real estate communications, all statements in the MLS must be accurate and truthful. (For example, see Rule 12.10)

 

IMPORTANT POINTS TO REMEMBER:

• A real estate licensee’s fiduciary duty is to his client and CANNOT be signed away.
• A listing agent’s duties cannot be delegated to an unlicensed third party.
• A dual agency disclosure does not eliminate the listing agent’s duty to the seller which may conflict with getting the best price for the investor.
• A real estate licensee who is collecting an advance fee for performing the short sale MUST follow the federal law, DRE guidelines and California law for advance or other fees.
• Not getting the best offer for the seller may expose the seller to a higher potential deficiency judgment and a greater tax liability.  (Note: since this was written, Deficiency has been eliminated on all mortgage liens in CA when a short sale approval has been issued by the short sale lender(s) SB458, SB931)

 

The authors of this newsletter are Attorneys with THE GIARDINELLI LAW GROUP, APC

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joseph Alfe on January 29, 2012 at 11:59am

Thom, thank you for your response.  Let me begin that I agree with most of what California is trying to do, which can be boiled down to:

1. The negotiator must be licensed

2. Fiduciary Duty is to the seller

3. Everything must be disclosed.

So, let's take each point then.

1. I agree anyone doing short sales must have a license, and this includes agents.  A separate license.  An RE license does not give you the skills needed.  I am pushing for such a law in my home state f IL.

2. Fiduciary Duty is to the seller. Let's be clear here, I am one of the very, very few independent negotiators to have a written contract with the seller.  The seller hires me, not the agent. My written contract clearly lists who I am, what I do, what to expect, the fact that I do not charge my fee to the seller, the way I charge my fee, etc. There is also a cancellation form so that if they desire, the seller may terminate my service with no further obligation.

3. Everything is disclosed.  A separate fee agreement is presented to buyer at the time of the offer.  They are free to refuse, but unless the seller requests something different, their offer is rejected.  The seller rejects the offer, so zero argument can be made that something is amiss.  The sellers trust in my ability to assist them to success, and my track record speaks for itself. All fees are disclosed on RESPA at closing, therefore, disclosure is made to all parties, including both lenders.

In the CA info you posted, it mentioned the agent signing away their duty to an unlicensed third party.  This is not the case with me, as I have explained.

Once again, I will offer that Fannie and Freddie both specifically allow third party short sale negotiator fees to be charged to a buyer.  Because these GSE's own probably 75% of the loans, this acceptance of my way of compensation is now to be considered "Reasonable and customary."  You may not like it, but it's the way it is.

Let me flip this around on you Thom.  What would you say if a seller advised you that they had hired me to negotiate their short sale? Remember, your listing agreement does not give you party to their short sale, only marketing of the property.  So, what would you be able to do or say?  The answer, is nothing. Nothing at all.

www.ssprocessors.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thom Colby CA Brkr 888-391-5245 on January 29, 2012 at 12:27pm

Joseph -

 

My post was NOT in response to anything you posted - It was just for the purpose of sharing information I had with everyone.  Quite frankly, I could care less how you run your business. You are in IL, I'm in CA, and we'll never cross paths.

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joseph Alfe on January 30, 2012 at 9:31am

I know, Thom, and it's not personal.  I will defend my business model because there certainly are alot of third party negotiators who do not operate like I do, so I need to make that clear.

www.ssprocessors.com

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Anna Chroscicki on January 30, 2012 at 9:30am

My experience is that ( and I hope I do not step on anybody's toes here) that first of all -I spend as much time following up with Title/ Escrow Company to find out what is going on, as I would following up with bank while negotiation short sale. Usually the do not know much more than I do . And when it comes to negotiationg- they just don't. Example : I have short sale that I handled to Attorney's office for negotiations. Price of property - $44,000 ( that is not usual in my market - it is fixer upper cash deal, I actually have agents and buyers sending me e-mails asking to keep them in mind if deal falls apart). After months of nothing ( and I know it was nothing, because I followed up), they ( negotiator from attorney's office)comes back to me with " Bank said that they will not allow more than 10% of the purchase price going toward closing costs ,so you and the other agent have to cut commission 2 points below regular rate ( I write it this way, because I actually do not know if I can mention numbers- ooo man, I need some classes- completely forgot). I ask this person....."Do you actually see that this is $44,000 home? I want to help my sellers, but after probably "eating" transaction fee, I will end up with.....well- you do the math. What bank considers as closing costs in this transaction? I have no problem asking buyer to pay for some" And this is HAFA short sale, so I am really thinking that she is not even including $3000 relocation money in this-This person's answer ? " Well, we all have to give up something ". So I asked to see HUD. That was last Thursday. Still did not see it.  My feeling is : Commission is cut, relocation money is cut ( or not there) but Title Fees stay. This is last time that I sent my short sale to Attorney's office for negotiation ( free negotiation). I dealt before with companies that my seller hired and paid for it ( usually when they were trying to do modification and it did not work out and those were pretty good,        

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Eric Mieles on January 30, 2012 at 10:02am

Just because you'll defend your business model does not make it a right business model. Look I understand you trying to get compensated for the work you do. I understand some of the other negotiatiors that operate like yourself and I understand that short sales are tough and require a lot of work.

 However what I don't understand is how when a buyer, young beautiful couple, just married, money saved, dreams of home ownership start searching on the internet and find the home of there dreams, call an agent and he has to break the news to them that they can't even SEE the home because so guy attached a fee to it so sorry.....On to the next!!

That's where I'm a little confused on how this issue gets support from some of the members. Let's please not forget guys we need these buyers. Have you guys not noticed that the buying experience for short sales in our country is horrendous and the word has traveled that buyers don't even want to buy them.

Here we are, together as a community trying to promote education and advancement for our niche yet we have gatekeepers who want, need, "Deserve" compensation to open the gates of homeownership on specific homes.

 

The argument of "Well what about the buyer paying closing costs or jr liens or whatever" Well that's cost asscoiated with the transaction IF the buyer is willing to pay and absord those costs in order to buy. The difference is at least they got that far and were able to go through the process, and have a shot at buying it. With the other option they can't even see the home or put an offer in, a real legitimate offer because "The Gatekeeper" has attached a fee.

Please let's just remeber the only real purpose this fee is serving is to compensate someone who had to figure out a way to make the business model of negotiations work for him.

I respect great agents, I respect great professionals, I am always trying to learn and get better at what it is I do and in no way want to be disrespectful in my views with anyone. I just have to humbly disagree with you guys on this one.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page