Getting RE License for Myself

[SD Realtor]

“How open do you think most agents will be with an offer that rebates the buyer’s commission back to the seller?”

You lost me here. Why would the buyers commission be rebated back to the seller? There is no rebate because there is no commission paid.

Lets reset the case okay? Lets say you are a buyer and you are not represented. You wanna buy the home. Submit an offer, make it say 2.5%-3% below asking price. Simple as that isn’t it? You are representing yourself so there is no commission to discuss.

“Can the offer specify that since the commission is agreed upon by the seller and their agent before the buyer ever enters the picture?”

The commission agreed upon by the seller and his listing agent is applicable to compensate other brokers only. If you are not a broker or an agent under the employ of a broker there is nothing that applies to you, an unrepresented buyer. Again, keep it simple and ask 2.5-3% below asking price. Commission cannot be mentioned in the contract

“Would the seller’s agent be likely to discourage the seller from taking such an offer, since a buyer without an agent is likely to be seen as a negative by the seller’s agent, and if you’re rebating the commission to the seller, what’s in it for the agent?”

Okay part 1, every broker differs. Would a broker be wary of working with a buyer who is not represented? Yes. Why? Because that broker incurs additional liability. If you the buyer screw up the broker may be held liable because you were not a real estate professional and though your screw up is of no fault to the other broker, he/she may be still held liable for YOUR mistake. Again the reticence has nothing to do with anything else. Please please please try to understand this, as an unrepresented buyer you get no commission. The selller pays no commission to you. The seller ONLY pays the listing agent the commission for listing the home. It is not like the seller pays the listing agent the commission to list the home AND the commission for the cooperating broker, and then gets the coop commission rebated back.

Now as a side note. Many people think they save money by going to an open house and working directly with the listing agent. In some cases this may be true, in some cases maybe not. In cases like this the listing agent becomes a dual agent. He represents both the seller as a listing agent and he represents you the buyer. He will receive his full commission to list the home and he will also receive the coop commission as well. Now he may have an agreement in place with the seller that if he does both sides, the coop commission will be reduced somewhat. Then again, he may not have it reduced at all.

“If the seller’s agent is not receptive to rebating the buyers commission back to the seller, isn’t the buyer then better off going with someone like redfin that will at least rebate some of the commission to the buyer?”

See explanation above. I don’t think this is an applicable question.

Cannot answer the questions about getting forms as I don’t have any idea.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=XBoxBoy]Rustico & SD Realtor,

I had no idea my questions would get so far into the nitty gritty of commissions. But wondering if we can follow up on the case where the person buying represents themselves and is not an agent, and does not work with a broker. Assume in this case that the buyer has found the property through websites, etc and is prepared to do a good bit of the leg work. (ie arrange for inspections, deal with escrow, etc)
[/quote]
First to Yoda, sorry if I seemed a bit contrary. I do that but I did not mean to get rude. Regarding alternative service models, I do see their value. I used to be a branch manager for a very productive HelpUSell office and I do acknowledge the value of keeping the service provided appropriate to demand. As far as the assistant, if they are licensed, then they are permitted to do transactions. Lots of the big-name teams classify their licensees as assistants even though they do much of the work. Now back to XBox…
[quote=XBoxBoy]
How open do you think most agents will be with an offer that rebates the buyer’s commission back to the seller? Can the offer specify that since the commission is agreed upon by the seller and their agent before the buyer ever enters the picture? Would the seller’s agent be likely to discourage the seller from taking such an offer, since a buyer without an agent is likely to be seen as a negative by the seller’s agent, and if you’re rebating the commission to the seller, what’s in it for the agent?
[/quote]
To some extent I think a listing agent could argue that it is not the buyer’s prerogative to interfere in the contract between seller and their agent. It would require that the listing agent approve it (not just the seller as with a usual offer). That being said, I have seen this kind of offer written first hand. While I think that you have a point that some or much of the leg work would be born by the buyer, the issue is that unrepresented non-realtors are widely considered to be more likely to do things that are considered “out of bounds” (lying about something material, being obstinate on an unimportant issue, changing a document after it has been signed, arguing about the fault line on a zone disclosure). As an agent I have seen several examples. This potential referee role is why most listing agents would prefer to treat this situation as a double-end where they represent both sides in the transaction (and get both comission sides). They feel that with only one professional, they are likely going to have to work much harder to keep things on the rails. This is what I have seen agents presented with this situation describe. Bottomline: The incentive structure of most real estate is against this type of arrangement and there is nothing beneficial in it for the listing agent. I may be naive or idealistic but I think most truly ethical agents would present such an offer and try to describe the relative merits dispassionately to their seller. Some who are not ethical would just shred it.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
If the seller’s agent is not receptive to rebating the buyers commission back to the seller, isn’t the buyer then better off going with someone like redfin that will at least rebate some of the commission to the buyer?
[/quote]
At an economic level, yes. If the work can be done just as effectively with more money back, this is a no-brainer. That qualifying “if” is the big variable. Lots of people who do not practice but have either an active license, an inactive license, or perhaps just info gleaned on the web or in a class, think they have the skills to handle a transaction. Some are correct and some are not. Lots of people get screwed or screw other people doing this.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
As a second topic, if a buyer is making an offer without an agent, what’s the best place to get the necessary forms? In particular I’m thinking about the purchase contract, and disclosure forms. When I sold my house in 2004 I had to fill out pages of disclosures, and I’d like to be able to hand similar forms to the seller. I know some disclosures are required by law. I looked on the San Diego Association of Realtors site, but it looks like they won’t sell you forms unless you have a license.
[/quote]
The forms can be gotten from the listing agent.
That would be the most cost effective route. While the whole thrust of this thread is avoiding cost, I would consider it advisable to at the least hire a TC. They could advise you which forms are relevant. Though you could even avoid this. If you are opposite an agent from a big name brand brokerage (eg: a C21, ReMax, Pru Cal, or McMillin) then the agent broker or office manager will likely insist that the right forms get used.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
Thanks for all your comments,

XBoxBoy[/quote]

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=XBoxBoy]Rustico & SD Realtor,

I had no idea my questions would get so far into the nitty gritty of commissions. But wondering if we can follow up on the case where the person buying represents themselves and is not an agent, and does not work with a broker. Assume in this case that the buyer has found the property through websites, etc and is prepared to do a good bit of the leg work. (ie arrange for inspections, deal with escrow, etc)
[/quote]
First to Yoda, sorry if I seemed a bit contrary. I do that but I did not mean to get rude. Regarding alternative service models, I do see their value. I used to be a branch manager for a very productive HelpUSell office and I do acknowledge the value of keeping the service provided appropriate to demand. As far as the assistant, if they are licensed, then they are permitted to do transactions. Lots of the big-name teams classify their licensees as assistants even though they do much of the work. Now back to XBox…
[quote=XBoxBoy]
How open do you think most agents will be with an offer that rebates the buyer’s commission back to the seller? Can the offer specify that since the commission is agreed upon by the seller and their agent before the buyer ever enters the picture? Would the seller’s agent be likely to discourage the seller from taking such an offer, since a buyer without an agent is likely to be seen as a negative by the seller’s agent, and if you’re rebating the commission to the seller, what’s in it for the agent?
[/quote]
To some extent I think a listing agent could argue that it is not the buyer’s prerogative to interfere in the contract between seller and their agent. It would require that the listing agent approve it (not just the seller as with a usual offer). That being said, I have seen this kind of offer written first hand. While I think that you have a point that some or much of the leg work would be born by the buyer, the issue is that unrepresented non-realtors are widely considered to be more likely to do things that are considered “out of bounds” (lying about something material, being obstinate on an unimportant issue, changing a document after it has been signed, arguing about the fault line on a zone disclosure). As an agent I have seen several examples. This potential referee role is why most listing agents would prefer to treat this situation as a double-end where they represent both sides in the transaction (and get both comission sides). They feel that with only one professional, they are likely going to have to work much harder to keep things on the rails. This is what I have seen agents presented with this situation describe. Bottomline: The incentive structure of most real estate is against this type of arrangement and there is nothing beneficial in it for the listing agent. I may be naive or idealistic but I think most truly ethical agents would present such an offer and try to describe the relative merits dispassionately to their seller. Some who are not ethical would just shred it.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
If the seller’s agent is not receptive to rebating the buyers commission back to the seller, isn’t the buyer then better off going with someone like redfin that will at least rebate some of the commission to the buyer?
[/quote]
At an economic level, yes. If the work can be done just as effectively with more money back, this is a no-brainer. That qualifying “if” is the big variable. Lots of people who do not practice but have either an active license, an inactive license, or perhaps just info gleaned on the web or in a class, think they have the skills to handle a transaction. Some are correct and some are not. Lots of people get screwed or screw other people doing this.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
As a second topic, if a buyer is making an offer without an agent, what’s the best place to get the necessary forms? In particular I’m thinking about the purchase contract, and disclosure forms. When I sold my house in 2004 I had to fill out pages of disclosures, and I’d like to be able to hand similar forms to the seller. I know some disclosures are required by law. I looked on the San Diego Association of Realtors site, but it looks like they won’t sell you forms unless you have a license.
[/quote]
The forms can be gotten from the listing agent.
That would be the most cost effective route. While the whole thrust of this thread is avoiding cost, I would consider it advisable to at the least hire a TC. They could advise you which forms are relevant. Though you could even avoid this. If you are opposite an agent from a big name brand brokerage (eg: a C21, ReMax, Pru Cal, or McMillin) then the agent broker or office manager will likely insist that the right forms get used.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
Thanks for all your comments,

XBoxBoy[/quote]

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=XBoxBoy]Rustico & SD Realtor,

I had no idea my questions would get so far into the nitty gritty of commissions. But wondering if we can follow up on the case where the person buying represents themselves and is not an agent, and does not work with a broker. Assume in this case that the buyer has found the property through websites, etc and is prepared to do a good bit of the leg work. (ie arrange for inspections, deal with escrow, etc)
[/quote]
First to Yoda, sorry if I seemed a bit contrary. I do that but I did not mean to get rude. Regarding alternative service models, I do see their value. I used to be a branch manager for a very productive HelpUSell office and I do acknowledge the value of keeping the service provided appropriate to demand. As far as the assistant, if they are licensed, then they are permitted to do transactions. Lots of the big-name teams classify their licensees as assistants even though they do much of the work. Now back to XBox…
[quote=XBoxBoy]
How open do you think most agents will be with an offer that rebates the buyer’s commission back to the seller? Can the offer specify that since the commission is agreed upon by the seller and their agent before the buyer ever enters the picture? Would the seller’s agent be likely to discourage the seller from taking such an offer, since a buyer without an agent is likely to be seen as a negative by the seller’s agent, and if you’re rebating the commission to the seller, what’s in it for the agent?
[/quote]
To some extent I think a listing agent could argue that it is not the buyer’s prerogative to interfere in the contract between seller and their agent. It would require that the listing agent approve it (not just the seller as with a usual offer). That being said, I have seen this kind of offer written first hand. While I think that you have a point that some or much of the leg work would be born by the buyer, the issue is that unrepresented non-realtors are widely considered to be more likely to do things that are considered “out of bounds” (lying about something material, being obstinate on an unimportant issue, changing a document after it has been signed, arguing about the fault line on a zone disclosure). As an agent I have seen several examples. This potential referee role is why most listing agents would prefer to treat this situation as a double-end where they represent both sides in the transaction (and get both comission sides). They feel that with only one professional, they are likely going to have to work much harder to keep things on the rails. This is what I have seen agents presented with this situation describe. Bottomline: The incentive structure of most real estate is against this type of arrangement and there is nothing beneficial in it for the listing agent. I may be naive or idealistic but I think most truly ethical agents would present such an offer and try to describe the relative merits dispassionately to their seller. Some who are not ethical would just shred it.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
If the seller’s agent is not receptive to rebating the buyers commission back to the seller, isn’t the buyer then better off going with someone like redfin that will at least rebate some of the commission to the buyer?
[/quote]
At an economic level, yes. If the work can be done just as effectively with more money back, this is a no-brainer. That qualifying “if” is the big variable. Lots of people who do not practice but have either an active license, an inactive license, or perhaps just info gleaned on the web or in a class, think they have the skills to handle a transaction. Some are correct and some are not. Lots of people get screwed or screw other people doing this.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
As a second topic, if a buyer is making an offer without an agent, what’s the best place to get the necessary forms? In particular I’m thinking about the purchase contract, and disclosure forms. When I sold my house in 2004 I had to fill out pages of disclosures, and I’d like to be able to hand similar forms to the seller. I know some disclosures are required by law. I looked on the San Diego Association of Realtors site, but it looks like they won’t sell you forms unless you have a license.
[/quote]
The forms can be gotten from the listing agent.
That would be the most cost effective route. While the whole thrust of this thread is avoiding cost, I would consider it advisable to at the least hire a TC. They could advise you which forms are relevant. Though you could even avoid this. If you are opposite an agent from a big name brand brokerage (eg: a C21, ReMax, Pru Cal, or McMillin) then the agent broker or office manager will likely insist that the right forms get used.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
Thanks for all your comments,

XBoxBoy[/quote]

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=XBoxBoy]Rustico & SD Realtor,

I had no idea my questions would get so far into the nitty gritty of commissions. But wondering if we can follow up on the case where the person buying represents themselves and is not an agent, and does not work with a broker. Assume in this case that the buyer has found the property through websites, etc and is prepared to do a good bit of the leg work. (ie arrange for inspections, deal with escrow, etc)
[/quote]
First to Yoda, sorry if I seemed a bit contrary. I do that but I did not mean to get rude. Regarding alternative service models, I do see their value. I used to be a branch manager for a very productive HelpUSell office and I do acknowledge the value of keeping the service provided appropriate to demand. As far as the assistant, if they are licensed, then they are permitted to do transactions. Lots of the big-name teams classify their licensees as assistants even though they do much of the work. Now back to XBox…
[quote=XBoxBoy]
How open do you think most agents will be with an offer that rebates the buyer’s commission back to the seller? Can the offer specify that since the commission is agreed upon by the seller and their agent before the buyer ever enters the picture? Would the seller’s agent be likely to discourage the seller from taking such an offer, since a buyer without an agent is likely to be seen as a negative by the seller’s agent, and if you’re rebating the commission to the seller, what’s in it for the agent?
[/quote]
To some extent I think a listing agent could argue that it is not the buyer’s prerogative to interfere in the contract between seller and their agent. It would require that the listing agent approve it (not just the seller as with a usual offer). That being said, I have seen this kind of offer written first hand. While I think that you have a point that some or much of the leg work would be born by the buyer, the issue is that unrepresented non-realtors are widely considered to be more likely to do things that are considered “out of bounds” (lying about something material, being obstinate on an unimportant issue, changing a document after it has been signed, arguing about the fault line on a zone disclosure). As an agent I have seen several examples. This potential referee role is why most listing agents would prefer to treat this situation as a double-end where they represent both sides in the transaction (and get both comission sides). They feel that with only one professional, they are likely going to have to work much harder to keep things on the rails. This is what I have seen agents presented with this situation describe. Bottomline: The incentive structure of most real estate is against this type of arrangement and there is nothing beneficial in it for the listing agent. I may be naive or idealistic but I think most truly ethical agents would present such an offer and try to describe the relative merits dispassionately to their seller. Some who are not ethical would just shred it.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
If the seller’s agent is not receptive to rebating the buyers commission back to the seller, isn’t the buyer then better off going with someone like redfin that will at least rebate some of the commission to the buyer?
[/quote]
At an economic level, yes. If the work can be done just as effectively with more money back, this is a no-brainer. That qualifying “if” is the big variable. Lots of people who do not practice but have either an active license, an inactive license, or perhaps just info gleaned on the web or in a class, think they have the skills to handle a transaction. Some are correct and some are not. Lots of people get screwed or screw other people doing this.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
As a second topic, if a buyer is making an offer without an agent, what’s the best place to get the necessary forms? In particular I’m thinking about the purchase contract, and disclosure forms. When I sold my house in 2004 I had to fill out pages of disclosures, and I’d like to be able to hand similar forms to the seller. I know some disclosures are required by law. I looked on the San Diego Association of Realtors site, but it looks like they won’t sell you forms unless you have a license.
[/quote]
The forms can be gotten from the listing agent.
That would be the most cost effective route. While the whole thrust of this thread is avoiding cost, I would consider it advisable to at the least hire a TC. They could advise you which forms are relevant. Though you could even avoid this. If you are opposite an agent from a big name brand brokerage (eg: a C21, ReMax, Pru Cal, or McMillin) then the agent broker or office manager will likely insist that the right forms get used.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
Thanks for all your comments,

XBoxBoy[/quote]

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=XBoxBoy]Rustico & SD Realtor,

I had no idea my questions would get so far into the nitty gritty of commissions. But wondering if we can follow up on the case where the person buying represents themselves and is not an agent, and does not work with a broker. Assume in this case that the buyer has found the property through websites, etc and is prepared to do a good bit of the leg work. (ie arrange for inspections, deal with escrow, etc)
[/quote]
First to Yoda, sorry if I seemed a bit contrary. I do that but I did not mean to get rude. Regarding alternative service models, I do see their value. I used to be a branch manager for a very productive HelpUSell office and I do acknowledge the value of keeping the service provided appropriate to demand. As far as the assistant, if they are licensed, then they are permitted to do transactions. Lots of the big-name teams classify their licensees as assistants even though they do much of the work. Now back to XBox…
[quote=XBoxBoy]
How open do you think most agents will be with an offer that rebates the buyer’s commission back to the seller? Can the offer specify that since the commission is agreed upon by the seller and their agent before the buyer ever enters the picture? Would the seller’s agent be likely to discourage the seller from taking such an offer, since a buyer without an agent is likely to be seen as a negative by the seller’s agent, and if you’re rebating the commission to the seller, what’s in it for the agent?
[/quote]
To some extent I think a listing agent could argue that it is not the buyer’s prerogative to interfere in the contract between seller and their agent. It would require that the listing agent approve it (not just the seller as with a usual offer). That being said, I have seen this kind of offer written first hand. While I think that you have a point that some or much of the leg work would be born by the buyer, the issue is that unrepresented non-realtors are widely considered to be more likely to do things that are considered “out of bounds” (lying about something material, being obstinate on an unimportant issue, changing a document after it has been signed, arguing about the fault line on a zone disclosure). As an agent I have seen several examples. This potential referee role is why most listing agents would prefer to treat this situation as a double-end where they represent both sides in the transaction (and get both comission sides). They feel that with only one professional, they are likely going to have to work much harder to keep things on the rails. This is what I have seen agents presented with this situation describe. Bottomline: The incentive structure of most real estate is against this type of arrangement and there is nothing beneficial in it for the listing agent. I may be naive or idealistic but I think most truly ethical agents would present such an offer and try to describe the relative merits dispassionately to their seller. Some who are not ethical would just shred it.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
If the seller’s agent is not receptive to rebating the buyers commission back to the seller, isn’t the buyer then better off going with someone like redfin that will at least rebate some of the commission to the buyer?
[/quote]
At an economic level, yes. If the work can be done just as effectively with more money back, this is a no-brainer. That qualifying “if” is the big variable. Lots of people who do not practice but have either an active license, an inactive license, or perhaps just info gleaned on the web or in a class, think they have the skills to handle a transaction. Some are correct and some are not. Lots of people get screwed or screw other people doing this.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
As a second topic, if a buyer is making an offer without an agent, what’s the best place to get the necessary forms? In particular I’m thinking about the purchase contract, and disclosure forms. When I sold my house in 2004 I had to fill out pages of disclosures, and I’d like to be able to hand similar forms to the seller. I know some disclosures are required by law. I looked on the San Diego Association of Realtors site, but it looks like they won’t sell you forms unless you have a license.
[/quote]
The forms can be gotten from the listing agent.
That would be the most cost effective route. While the whole thrust of this thread is avoiding cost, I would consider it advisable to at the least hire a TC. They could advise you which forms are relevant. Though you could even avoid this. If you are opposite an agent from a big name brand brokerage (eg: a C21, ReMax, Pru Cal, or McMillin) then the agent broker or office manager will likely insist that the right forms get used.
[quote=XBoxBoy]
Thanks for all your comments,

XBoxBoy[/quote]

[urbanrealtor]

My post was composed simultaneously with SD’s.

I may have reiterated some points
Apologies.

[urbanrealtor]

My post was composed simultaneously with SD’s.

I may have reiterated some points
Apologies.

[urbanrealtor]

My post was composed simultaneously with SD’s.

I may have reiterated some points
Apologies.

[urbanrealtor]

My post was composed simultaneously with SD’s.

I may have reiterated some points
Apologies.

[urbanrealtor]

My post was composed simultaneously with SD’s.

I may have reiterated some points
Apologies.

[SD Realtor]

“As far as the assistant, if they are licensed, then they are permitted to do transactions. Lots of the big-name teams classify their licensees as assistants even though they do much of the work.”

Just to clarify on something UR, if you are an assistant and pay the lower fees as an assistant, it does not matter if you are licensed or not, you will have access to the MLS but you will not be able to have your names on any transactions, buy or sell, on the MLS. SDAR is highly compelled to enforce the pricing policy as it is defined. That is, if you are a licensee and you intend to perform transactions for that broker, you are supposed to pay your full MLS dues. Generally assistants are classified and defined as people who assist brokers with more “office work” rather then transactions. While this may include running comps and performing support work for transactions the “INTENT” of the lower pricing structure is defined to be for true assistants. Yes an assistant may have a license but why would a licensee want to go through the trouble of being licensed to do transactions by getting licensed yet only be an assistant.

[SD Realtor]

“As far as the assistant, if they are licensed, then they are permitted to do transactions. Lots of the big-name teams classify their licensees as assistants even though they do much of the work.”

Just to clarify on something UR, if you are an assistant and pay the lower fees as an assistant, it does not matter if you are licensed or not, you will have access to the MLS but you will not be able to have your names on any transactions, buy or sell, on the MLS. SDAR is highly compelled to enforce the pricing policy as it is defined. That is, if you are a licensee and you intend to perform transactions for that broker, you are supposed to pay your full MLS dues. Generally assistants are classified and defined as people who assist brokers with more “office work” rather then transactions. While this may include running comps and performing support work for transactions the “INTENT” of the lower pricing structure is defined to be for true assistants. Yes an assistant may have a license but why would a licensee want to go through the trouble of being licensed to do transactions by getting licensed yet only be an assistant.

[SD Realtor]

“As far as the assistant, if they are licensed, then they are permitted to do transactions. Lots of the big-name teams classify their licensees as assistants even though they do much of the work.”

Just to clarify on something UR, if you are an assistant and pay the lower fees as an assistant, it does not matter if you are licensed or not, you will have access to the MLS but you will not be able to have your names on any transactions, buy or sell, on the MLS. SDAR is highly compelled to enforce the pricing policy as it is defined. That is, if you are a licensee and you intend to perform transactions for that broker, you are supposed to pay your full MLS dues. Generally assistants are classified and defined as people who assist brokers with more “office work” rather then transactions. While this may include running comps and performing support work for transactions the “INTENT” of the lower pricing structure is defined to be for true assistants. Yes an assistant may have a license but why would a licensee want to go through the trouble of being licensed to do transactions by getting licensed yet only be an assistant.

[SD Realtor]

“As far as the assistant, if they are licensed, then they are permitted to do transactions. Lots of the big-name teams classify their licensees as assistants even though they do much of the work.”

Just to clarify on something UR, if you are an assistant and pay the lower fees as an assistant, it does not matter if you are licensed or not, you will have access to the MLS but you will not be able to have your names on any transactions, buy or sell, on the MLS. SDAR is highly compelled to enforce the pricing policy as it is defined. That is, if you are a licensee and you intend to perform transactions for that broker, you are supposed to pay your full MLS dues. Generally assistants are classified and defined as people who assist brokers with more “office work” rather then transactions. While this may include running comps and performing support work for transactions the “INTENT” of the lower pricing structure is defined to be for true assistants. Yes an assistant may have a license but why would a licensee want to go through the trouble of being licensed to do transactions by getting licensed yet only be an assistant.

[Author]

Posts