Bogus Re-listing of Properties

[Anonymous]

Dear George,

Our MLS does not allow us to cancel a listing and relist it in under 30 days. If the listing expires, it can be relisted 24 hours with the same agent if a new listing contract is signed. If an extension is signed, the listing is merely extended.

If the seller wants to change the overall terms of the listing and perhaps even the commission, there are many times when a fresh, new listing is called for. Not only does appear new on the market, which cleary infuriates you, but it gives the listing agent a chance to actually, physically “re-enter” the data in our MLS and change whatever it was that the seller agreed to change.

If a property is listed 400 times it’s completely irrelevant to a buyer who wants the property. For those occasions when a scoundrel agent cancels and re-lists, it is up to our board of Realtors to police it and they do.

We are in a conundrum of a market with properties often not selling for 180 days or more. A listing can become very market fatigued and often it’s best to let it expire and relist it with the agent of your chosing as a seller.

If you continue to go with your existing agent, and may sellers do, a new contract is required to physically relist the whole thing.

An extension agreement, one page, is all that is required to keep the tired thing going.

With all due respect, a properly relisted home, even with the same agent, is not considered damaging to anyone.

[urbanrealtor]

I think that it should be normal practice for an agent to inform a buyer of any factors that could better advise them with respect to value and strategy.

Sometimes those factors include past listings.

Ergo, I think it important to mention past listings to a client.

Caveat: For many intelligent home buyers, adding information can confuse or muddy reasoning. Its not that the buyers are ill-informed or lack reasoning skills. It is the fact that a comparative lack of experience in this area may cause one to place disproportionately great amount of emphasis on less relevant criteria. It is for this reason, that adding potentially irrelevant data can be a disservice.

Here is an example: I recently had a client who is exceptionally skilled at his one-man retail business. He is very smart and very savvy. However, as a first time buyer, he kept wanting to focus on what the seller was “really after”. This is something that might be suited to his area of expertise but is not helpful when dealing with REO agents handling dozens of files who represent asset managers handling hundreds of files who contract with bank managers handling thousands of files. They want money and good terms. Mostly money. Also, he wanted to negotiate on small terms. It took me a while to realize that it was best to just not mention that the bank requires a specific title company or uses a specific form to disclose lead hazards. It just does not make sense to lose a house at 10% under market because the seller insists on First American instead of Chicago Title.

Similarly, sometimes a buyer can miss the forest (the bargain) for the trees (the previous months of listings). Sometimes agents owe it to their clients to take that into consideration. Agents really need to provide guidance and consultation along with the facts.

I apologize if that is not as black and white as what you might look for. However, I think it relevant to point out that looking out for your clients requires using your brain as well as just telling facts.

[urbanrealtor]

I think that it should be normal practice for an agent to inform a buyer of any factors that could better advise them with respect to value and strategy.

Sometimes those factors include past listings.

Ergo, I think it important to mention past listings to a client.

Caveat: For many intelligent home buyers, adding information can confuse or muddy reasoning. Its not that the buyers are ill-informed or lack reasoning skills. It is the fact that a comparative lack of experience in this area may cause one to place disproportionately great amount of emphasis on less relevant criteria. It is for this reason, that adding potentially irrelevant data can be a disservice.

Here is an example: I recently had a client who is exceptionally skilled at his one-man retail business. He is very smart and very savvy. However, as a first time buyer, he kept wanting to focus on what the seller was “really after”. This is something that might be suited to his area of expertise but is not helpful when dealing with REO agents handling dozens of files who represent asset managers handling hundreds of files who contract with bank managers handling thousands of files. They want money and good terms. Mostly money. Also, he wanted to negotiate on small terms. It took me a while to realize that it was best to just not mention that the bank requires a specific title company or uses a specific form to disclose lead hazards. It just does not make sense to lose a house at 10% under market because the seller insists on First American instead of Chicago Title.

Similarly, sometimes a buyer can miss the forest (the bargain) for the trees (the previous months of listings). Sometimes agents owe it to their clients to take that into consideration. Agents really need to provide guidance and consultation along with the facts.

I apologize if that is not as black and white as what you might look for. However, I think it relevant to point out that looking out for your clients requires using your brain as well as just telling facts.

[urbanrealtor]

I think that it should be normal practice for an agent to inform a buyer of any factors that could better advise them with respect to value and strategy.

Sometimes those factors include past listings.

Ergo, I think it important to mention past listings to a client.

Caveat: For many intelligent home buyers, adding information can confuse or muddy reasoning. Its not that the buyers are ill-informed or lack reasoning skills. It is the fact that a comparative lack of experience in this area may cause one to place disproportionately great amount of emphasis on less relevant criteria. It is for this reason, that adding potentially irrelevant data can be a disservice.

Here is an example: I recently had a client who is exceptionally skilled at his one-man retail business. He is very smart and very savvy. However, as a first time buyer, he kept wanting to focus on what the seller was “really after”. This is something that might be suited to his area of expertise but is not helpful when dealing with REO agents handling dozens of files who represent asset managers handling hundreds of files who contract with bank managers handling thousands of files. They want money and good terms. Mostly money. Also, he wanted to negotiate on small terms. It took me a while to realize that it was best to just not mention that the bank requires a specific title company or uses a specific form to disclose lead hazards. It just does not make sense to lose a house at 10% under market because the seller insists on First American instead of Chicago Title.

Similarly, sometimes a buyer can miss the forest (the bargain) for the trees (the previous months of listings). Sometimes agents owe it to their clients to take that into consideration. Agents really need to provide guidance and consultation along with the facts.

I apologize if that is not as black and white as what you might look for. However, I think it relevant to point out that looking out for your clients requires using your brain as well as just telling facts.

[urbanrealtor]

I think that it should be normal practice for an agent to inform a buyer of any factors that could better advise them with respect to value and strategy.

Sometimes those factors include past listings.

Ergo, I think it important to mention past listings to a client.

Caveat: For many intelligent home buyers, adding information can confuse or muddy reasoning. Its not that the buyers are ill-informed or lack reasoning skills. It is the fact that a comparative lack of experience in this area may cause one to place disproportionately great amount of emphasis on less relevant criteria. It is for this reason, that adding potentially irrelevant data can be a disservice.

Here is an example: I recently had a client who is exceptionally skilled at his one-man retail business. He is very smart and very savvy. However, as a first time buyer, he kept wanting to focus on what the seller was “really after”. This is something that might be suited to his area of expertise but is not helpful when dealing with REO agents handling dozens of files who represent asset managers handling hundreds of files who contract with bank managers handling thousands of files. They want money and good terms. Mostly money. Also, he wanted to negotiate on small terms. It took me a while to realize that it was best to just not mention that the bank requires a specific title company or uses a specific form to disclose lead hazards. It just does not make sense to lose a house at 10% under market because the seller insists on First American instead of Chicago Title.

Similarly, sometimes a buyer can miss the forest (the bargain) for the trees (the previous months of listings). Sometimes agents owe it to their clients to take that into consideration. Agents really need to provide guidance and consultation along with the facts.

I apologize if that is not as black and white as what you might look for. However, I think it relevant to point out that looking out for your clients requires using your brain as well as just telling facts.

[urbanrealtor]

I think that it should be normal practice for an agent to inform a buyer of any factors that could better advise them with respect to value and strategy.

Sometimes those factors include past listings.

Ergo, I think it important to mention past listings to a client.

Caveat: For many intelligent home buyers, adding information can confuse or muddy reasoning. Its not that the buyers are ill-informed or lack reasoning skills. It is the fact that a comparative lack of experience in this area may cause one to place disproportionately great amount of emphasis on less relevant criteria. It is for this reason, that adding potentially irrelevant data can be a disservice.

Here is an example: I recently had a client who is exceptionally skilled at his one-man retail business. He is very smart and very savvy. However, as a first time buyer, he kept wanting to focus on what the seller was “really after”. This is something that might be suited to his area of expertise but is not helpful when dealing with REO agents handling dozens of files who represent asset managers handling hundreds of files who contract with bank managers handling thousands of files. They want money and good terms. Mostly money. Also, he wanted to negotiate on small terms. It took me a while to realize that it was best to just not mention that the bank requires a specific title company or uses a specific form to disclose lead hazards. It just does not make sense to lose a house at 10% under market because the seller insists on First American instead of Chicago Title.

Similarly, sometimes a buyer can miss the forest (the bargain) for the trees (the previous months of listings). Sometimes agents owe it to their clients to take that into consideration. Agents really need to provide guidance and consultation along with the facts.

I apologize if that is not as black and white as what you might look for. However, I think it relevant to point out that looking out for your clients requires using your brain as well as just telling facts.

[Author]

Posts