I agree Realtors are selling out helping Zillow and the house buying companies to be successful. Not only do the listing agents decide the commission they take a piece of the buyers agent commissions here in the area I live in Florida. More often then not you see the commission for buyers agents 3%-$395 or 2.5%-$295 and I have seen the listing agent take as much as $495 from the commission
Brian lost weight?
A ‘win’ for the plaintiffs in this situation doesn’t help buyers or sellers – one of the biggest obstacles to homeownership is lack of funds. By asking the buyer to come out of pocket for their side of the transaction you are going to thin the ranks of buyers or have buyers working with sub-standard Realtors because they can’t afford a Realtor who prices and values his or her services accurately. So while it may reduce the % cost of selling a home, if the price is driven down by lack of qualified buyers then no one wins here except for the d-bag lawyers racking up fees.
Good Realtors have founds ways to leverage technology to add value for their clients and earn their commissions. So while tech has made it easier to do SOME things, it has added complexity to the process in other ways and forced people to step up their games
Does anyone think that Zillow or someone else may be behind this lawsuit!!
Only people winning in this situation is the law firm….
With this logic, if this law firm wins this case, it would also set a precedent that lawyer fees should drop as a result of sites like LegalZoom. Are lawyers colluding?
Maybe the realtors will now get a sense of how the appraisers have been affected over the past 10 years
Back when I listed and sold property there were no mandated seller or separate buyer agents. I negotiated a listing as an agent (which my broker had to review and approve) that effectively said in return for a 6% or even periodic 7% commission MY firm would market the property professionally and in a manner in which the approximately other 2,500 agents in my region would learn about the property AND provide inducement to show and sell the property. Done properly it induced them MORE than my competition. I was ALWAYS asked how much does the other side get? I responded usually 1/2 of the total…though in some special instances Id suggest bonuses to the selling side brokerage. There was no doubt that the selling agents were also ”working’ toward the same goal of producing an offer that would be acceptable to the seller. Of COURSE they were and still are indirectly working for the sellers! Regardless of the designation as a ‘buyers’ agent, if the transaction does not take place, then nobody gets paid. Though treated as equals and separate, effectively the buyer side agent has always been a sub contractor of the listing agent…though their ostensible loyalties lay with their own client. Just because attorneys have trouble complying with their own fiduciary obligations, doesn’t mean everyone else does too.
What this lawsuit can achieve is a return to exclusive right listings where no cooperation at all exists. Full 6% only to the listing agent’s office who will also be the seller side OR selectively ‘allow’ their brokers to sell their listings. It has always been the seller side whose HUD1 shows a debit for commission, but similarly it has always been the buyer who pays the total loan amount for the next thirty years from which that commission was taken. The BEST thing the courts can do for consumers is recognize that brokers are licensed for a reason and their jobs and expertise have far more depth than idiotic services like zillow or any of the other short cutting online opportunistic hucksters whose only claim to fame is their ability to expose themselves to millions of people OUTSIDE a specific property’s market.
Or at least an association that protects the interest of the people paying them.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *