[quote=sdduuuude]Also consider this – if the agent doesn’t want to deal with an FSBO, but you have direct access to the buyers. Tell the buyers to tell the agent to either deal with you or step aside and do a direct seller-to-owner deal. Then you get the escrow agent to manage everything and neither buyer nor seller is represented. I have done this before and the process is remarkably smooth when there are not two agents involved who are trying to manage not only their clients’ needs, but are also trying to limit their own liability. A surprising amount of the paperwork involved is there to protect the agents.[/quote]
Very true. I’ve done a number of deals with and without agents, and it was always smoother without an agent. That’s not to say that agents aren’t necessary. They are absolutely essential when buying or selling in an unfamiliar market or when you don’t have enough time to deal with buyers/sellers yourself. It’s just that by inserting people with different interests into the middle of a transaction, things can get lost in translation, and the deal often becomes adversarial.
You’re also right about the paperwork. It feels like 80-90% of it is for the agent’s/broker’s protection — there is a lot more paperwork when dealing with agents. Case in point: a land sale we made in another state done without an agent. Total number of pages involved in the transaction: 1 1/2. One was the warranty deed, and the other was a half sheet of paper asking for my social security number. That was it. The money was wired into my account the next day. I kept waiting for lightening to strike or something. It was strange to be involved in a transaction that required so little paperwork.
Treehugger has no obligation to this agent. If the agent/broker doesn’t want to cooperate, then the buyer can work directly with the seller or seek other representation. I’m not even sure why treehugger would want to talk to the broker. It’s the buyer’s issue to deal with, not treehugger’s.
