[quote=captcha] . . . The comps are equally available to you and me.
Home inspector will tell me if there is a major issue with the house.
My lender will not underwrite the loan if the paperwork is not in order or if the house does not appraise.
The insurance won’t insure if there is a problem with the house.
I am supposed to do my own research, verify everything, etc (buyer beware, no?)
If I need additional help I can get an attorney to verify the paperwork for few billable hours.
It made sense 15 years ago with dramatically uneven distribution of information. But today it is just an artifact of the past . . .
I know that. That info might have been valuable and differentiating factor years ago, but today everyone with Internet access can learn that while taking a piss.[/quote]
captcha, had you ever thought there might be ethical agents out there with whom you could contract (as you did) for 3-6 months as your exclusive “buyer’s broker” who might try to talk you out of making offers on particular properties you have your eye on because they “knew” material fact(s) about the property which could affect its liveability, use and/or present or future value? Such as: information about the construction, foundation, lot, adjacent lots, residential neighbors, neighboring businesses, environment, subdivision, future general plan, future school district plans, etc. that perhaps couldn’t be detected by a home inspection, wasn’t widely known, of public record, or perhaps WAS public record at one time but has since been “buried” six feet under. A fact no listing agent would ever reveal to anyone assuming they knew it themselves? Perhaps something you couldn’t learn from your i-phone single-handedly while simultaneously taking a p^ss? Caveat emptor . . . what would this info be worth to you??
Yes, some of this stuff could be found out after (1) a preliminary title report has already been generated; (2) you already paid your inspector $450; (3) you already paid an appraisal fee; (4) you already paid your soils engineer $450++ (assuming you were astute enough to have the “seller’s broker” list the outcome of that inspection as a contingency in your offer, lol); (5) you already deposited a $5,000+ earnest money check, which has been sitting in escrow for a month or more; (6) your interest-rate lock will expire in 10 or 20 more days; and (7) you may have already signed off on one or more contingencies, etc. As a potential buyer, what’s your time and $$ worth to you?
You gotta bear in mind that nearly every time you view a listed property, it has been listed before, or the property next to it or across the street or backing into it was listed before, maybe not last year, maybe not in the last ten years, but it WAS LISTED BEFORE or HAD A LISTING APPT. An agent that has been in and out of THAT property and/or its surrounding properties and possibly EVEN LIVES OR HAS WORKED or “farmed” the immediate area for many years knows a lot of “stuff.” Somewhere along the way, they, their broker, the agent in the cubicle next to them (only RE OFFICES had MLS access for a very, very long time), an agent they were co-broking with or partnering with on another listing LEARNED something in some way, shape or form about that property, lot, adjacent property block, subdivision, thoroughfare etc. that would be material to its use or value. In many cases, an agent/broker has physical PROOF of a material defect from a failed escrow file or research file. Hence, using a longtime resident NEIGHBORHOOD AGENT for buyer representation is the best insurance against making a buying mistake. It is the “intellectual property” these local agents possess, plus their contacts and relationships that are most useful to clients, NOT “the comps.” There’s no other way to get it, captcha, unless you yourself are a licensed RE agent working your home turf. Even if you hung your shiny new license tomorrow in the middle of your home turf, you STILL wouldn’t have the knowledge of a longtime agent there. Not even 1/100th.
[quote=captcha]So where is the concrete added value worth 3% of the transaction?[/quote]
captcha, if I understand your post correctly, you purchased your property thru its listing agent. That listing agent had a contract with his/her REAL clients, the sellers, to earn a particular percentage of commission whether they sold the property themselves . . . or thru a co-broke arrangement. Instead of the listing agent and/or his/her broker making 50% (or less) of the contracted commission on the property (as they had expected to do when they listed the property on the MLS offering the co-broke fee), (s)he made 100% of it, thanks to you going straight to them for “representation.” You didn’t recieve any “concrete added value” equal to 3% by using the listing broker as your own “buyer’s broker” (agent). They just put that extra 3% in their own pockets!
I’m gratified you hear you had a nice group of compadre Piggs to (virtually) hold hands with while you were supposedly being “represented” by a seller’s broker ;=) And I hope your new purchase was a good buy, you have no surprise expensive problems that crop up in the near future and you are able to see it appreciate someday. Truly, I do :=)
[quote=captcha]There were a few threads where people who felt they have been screwed complained about it. The consensus was that it’s not worth fighting over. Just look at the famous Bressi Ranch agent who’s now an elected official. An agent has to be very dumb and very greedy to get himself in a position where it makes sense for you to sue if you are not a lawyer.[/quote]
captcha, I can tell you that lawsuits against real estate brokers and named agents are VERY COMMON in CA. Lots of buyers and sellers feel they have been damaged beyond repair by the conduct of agents and brokers (both by their own broker and participating co-broker).
I would agree that being “dumb” and “greedy” could be legitimate reasons why some RE brokers have found themselves in positions of having to defend lawsuits from former clients.
