client control

[sdrealtor]

JP etal,
Client control does not pertain to what or whether they should buy but rather their performance according to the terms of the legal agreement they have signed once a legal agreement has been reached.

[sdrealtor]

svelte
the things you are talking about arent client control. You may have damaged your situation unknowingly even though you felt it was your right to do so and it is in fact your right to do that. Client control is making sure your client follows the laws and acts in good faith in accordance with legal documents they are bound to. Talking to seller’s, buyers agents, neighbors and others is fine. Acting unethically and in bad faith is not. Client control is real and important just not the way you are thinking about it.

[sdrealtor]

svelte
the things you are talking about arent client control. You may have damaged your situation unknowingly even though you felt it was your right to do so and it is in fact your right to do that. Client control is making sure your client follows the laws and acts in good faith in accordance with legal documents they are bound to. Talking to seller’s, buyers agents, neighbors and others is fine. Acting unethically and in bad faith is not. Client control is real and important just not the way you are thinking about it.

[sdrealtor]

svelte
the things you are talking about arent client control. You may have damaged your situation unknowingly even though you felt it was your right to do so and it is in fact your right to do that. Client control is making sure your client follows the laws and acts in good faith in accordance with legal documents they are bound to. Talking to seller’s, buyers agents, neighbors and others is fine. Acting unethically and in bad faith is not. Client control is real and important just not the way you are thinking about it.

[sdrealtor]

svelte
the things you are talking about arent client control. You may have damaged your situation unknowingly even though you felt it was your right to do so and it is in fact your right to do that. Client control is making sure your client follows the laws and acts in good faith in accordance with legal documents they are bound to. Talking to seller’s, buyers agents, neighbors and others is fine. Acting unethically and in bad faith is not. Client control is real and important just not the way you are thinking about it.

[sdrealtor]

svelte
the things you are talking about arent client control. You may have damaged your situation unknowingly even though you felt it was your right to do so and it is in fact your right to do that. Client control is making sure your client follows the laws and acts in good faith in accordance with legal documents they are bound to. Talking to seller’s, buyers agents, neighbors and others is fine. Acting unethically and in bad faith is not. Client control is real and important just not the way you are thinking about it.

[CA renter]

[quote=svelte]Ooooooo, my agents have all hated me to the bone!

I talk to the seller at will, I talk to the buyer’s agent at will, I talk to the neighbors at will, I’ll talk to anyone I darn well please. *I’m* buying the house! *I’m* hiring the agent!

I got warned virtually daily by my agent, but it did no good. I’m gonna do what I’m gonna do.

The sale eventually closed, and they got their cash, and have even called me to see if I am interested in buying again. So I guess money solves everything. lol

Client control is only possible if the client lets it be possible. But personally, I like the type of control that Prince sings about.[/quote]

Amen, svelte.

Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).

OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.

[CA renter]

[quote=svelte]Ooooooo, my agents have all hated me to the bone!

I talk to the seller at will, I talk to the buyer’s agent at will, I talk to the neighbors at will, I’ll talk to anyone I darn well please. *I’m* buying the house! *I’m* hiring the agent!

I got warned virtually daily by my agent, but it did no good. I’m gonna do what I’m gonna do.

The sale eventually closed, and they got their cash, and have even called me to see if I am interested in buying again. So I guess money solves everything. lol

Client control is only possible if the client lets it be possible. But personally, I like the type of control that Prince sings about.[/quote]

Amen, svelte.

Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).

OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.

[CA renter]

[quote=svelte]Ooooooo, my agents have all hated me to the bone!

I talk to the seller at will, I talk to the buyer’s agent at will, I talk to the neighbors at will, I’ll talk to anyone I darn well please. *I’m* buying the house! *I’m* hiring the agent!

I got warned virtually daily by my agent, but it did no good. I’m gonna do what I’m gonna do.

The sale eventually closed, and they got their cash, and have even called me to see if I am interested in buying again. So I guess money solves everything. lol

Client control is only possible if the client lets it be possible. But personally, I like the type of control that Prince sings about.[/quote]

Amen, svelte.

Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).

OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.

[CA renter]

[quote=svelte]Ooooooo, my agents have all hated me to the bone!

I talk to the seller at will, I talk to the buyer’s agent at will, I talk to the neighbors at will, I’ll talk to anyone I darn well please. *I’m* buying the house! *I’m* hiring the agent!

I got warned virtually daily by my agent, but it did no good. I’m gonna do what I’m gonna do.

The sale eventually closed, and they got their cash, and have even called me to see if I am interested in buying again. So I guess money solves everything. lol

Client control is only possible if the client lets it be possible. But personally, I like the type of control that Prince sings about.[/quote]

Amen, svelte.

Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).

OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.

[CA renter]

[quote=svelte]Ooooooo, my agents have all hated me to the bone!

I talk to the seller at will, I talk to the buyer’s agent at will, I talk to the neighbors at will, I’ll talk to anyone I darn well please. *I’m* buying the house! *I’m* hiring the agent!

I got warned virtually daily by my agent, but it did no good. I’m gonna do what I’m gonna do.

The sale eventually closed, and they got their cash, and have even called me to see if I am interested in buying again. So I guess money solves everything. lol

Client control is only possible if the client lets it be possible. But personally, I like the type of control that Prince sings about.[/quote]

Amen, svelte.

Too many agents think they’re the ones who should control the transaction. Not in my book. The party bringing the money to the table is the one whose interests need to be protected. If more buyers had the cojones to stand up for what’s right and not play along with all the agents’ and sellers’ games, perhaps we wouldn’t have had a housing bubble (or at least it wouldn’t have been so bad).

OTOH, I really do feel badly for agents who show clients 40 houses, then have the buyer go with another agent. For this reason, there should be “menu pricing” where a buyer can pay for individual services (like unlocking/showing a house, writing up a contract, ordering reports, etc.) as opposed to the agent being paid by commission only. What’s funny is that most agents will fight this tooth and nail, but then complain about the “unreasonable” buyers.

[jpinpb]

[quote=sdrealtor]JP etal,
Client control does not pertain to what or whether they should buy but rather their performance according to the terms of the legal agreement they have signed once a legal agreement has been reached.[/quote]
Then there would be nothing “illegal” about pulling out of a contract if it doesn’t appraise. But when it still doesn’t sell and reduced and a lower offer submitted and not considered, that has me wondering.

sdr – I understand how you define client control. So perhaps I misunderstood the OP’s meaning.

[jpinpb]

[quote=sdrealtor]JP etal,
Client control does not pertain to what or whether they should buy but rather their performance according to the terms of the legal agreement they have signed once a legal agreement has been reached.[/quote]
Then there would be nothing “illegal” about pulling out of a contract if it doesn’t appraise. But when it still doesn’t sell and reduced and a lower offer submitted and not considered, that has me wondering.

sdr – I understand how you define client control. So perhaps I misunderstood the OP’s meaning.

[jpinpb]

[quote=sdrealtor]JP etal,
Client control does not pertain to what or whether they should buy but rather their performance according to the terms of the legal agreement they have signed once a legal agreement has been reached.[/quote]
Then there would be nothing “illegal” about pulling out of a contract if it doesn’t appraise. But when it still doesn’t sell and reduced and a lower offer submitted and not considered, that has me wondering.

sdr – I understand how you define client control. So perhaps I misunderstood the OP’s meaning.

[jpinpb]

[quote=sdrealtor]JP etal,
Client control does not pertain to what or whether they should buy but rather their performance according to the terms of the legal agreement they have signed once a legal agreement has been reached.[/quote]
Then there would be nothing “illegal” about pulling out of a contract if it doesn’t appraise. But when it still doesn’t sell and reduced and a lower offer submitted and not considered, that has me wondering.

sdr – I understand how you define client control. So perhaps I misunderstood the OP’s meaning.

[Author]

Posts