How to Buy w/out a Realtor?

[matt-waiting]

captcha hit the nail on the head.

If I can negotiate a 2% rebate from the seller’s agent, look at a home inspection report, do my own comps, negotiate my own loan, and talk to an attorney for an hour, I don’t see the downside.

I also find it troubling that when asked to justify the value of a buyer’s agent, all I get in return is vague threats of “the risks are too great.” Seems like a scare tactic to me.

On the other hand, maybe captcha and I are wrong and there are dozens of examples of a buyer getting screwed because he went with the seller’s agent. If we are, I would think there would be lots of stories of how a buyer’s agent saved the buyer money (that they would have lost if they weren’t there. Sorry, I would have asked to have the furnace fixed.)

[bearishgurl]

[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.

[bearishgurl]

[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.

[bearishgurl]

[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.

[bearishgurl]

[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.

[bearishgurl]

[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.

[sdrealtor]

captcha
Those are some valid examples and for everyone you have I have 3 that go the other way. A bad agent on either side can damage. The goal is not to get any buyers agent it is to get a very good one.

BTW, I rarely respond to calls that come directly from buyers on my listings and usually tell them to go find their own agent. My job is to represent the seller on my listings. When I get a call from an unrepresented buyer, I know nothing about them. My experience has been that they are some lunatic that will grind me for the other side of the commission anyway, that they will be a royal pain in the ass ant that they will usually show no loyalty and will rarely close escrow.

When I represent a buyer, I spend hours and days communicating with them to know what their needs are. We spend many hours looking at properties and I get a good idea of whom I am dealing with. I would rather work with a buyer represented by another good agent who has been through the same vetting process than some lunatic who finds the listing on sdlookup that i know will ultimately be a waste of mine and more importantly potentially damage my client.

Over more transactions that I can count, I think that I may have had both sides of a transaction only once maybe twice. The only one I can remember wa when the brother of a tenant bought a property for his disabled brother so he wouldnt be relocated after it got sold. It was a short sale and the bank countered higher than it was worth, I told the buyer that but he still bought it because the PITI+HOA was $300 lower than the rent they were paying.

BTW, aimloan.com is not the end all be all lender. teh only reason I know of them is because several folks on this site have mentioned them. I know many that are just as good if not better with more personal service.

[sdrealtor]

captcha
Those are some valid examples and for everyone you have I have 3 that go the other way. A bad agent on either side can damage. The goal is not to get any buyers agent it is to get a very good one.

BTW, I rarely respond to calls that come directly from buyers on my listings and usually tell them to go find their own agent. My job is to represent the seller on my listings. When I get a call from an unrepresented buyer, I know nothing about them. My experience has been that they are some lunatic that will grind me for the other side of the commission anyway, that they will be a royal pain in the ass ant that they will usually show no loyalty and will rarely close escrow.

When I represent a buyer, I spend hours and days communicating with them to know what their needs are. We spend many hours looking at properties and I get a good idea of whom I am dealing with. I would rather work with a buyer represented by another good agent who has been through the same vetting process than some lunatic who finds the listing on sdlookup that i know will ultimately be a waste of mine and more importantly potentially damage my client.

Over more transactions that I can count, I think that I may have had both sides of a transaction only once maybe twice. The only one I can remember wa when the brother of a tenant bought a property for his disabled brother so he wouldnt be relocated after it got sold. It was a short sale and the bank countered higher than it was worth, I told the buyer that but he still bought it because the PITI+HOA was $300 lower than the rent they were paying.

BTW, aimloan.com is not the end all be all lender. teh only reason I know of them is because several folks on this site have mentioned them. I know many that are just as good if not better with more personal service.

[sdrealtor]

captcha
Those are some valid examples and for everyone you have I have 3 that go the other way. A bad agent on either side can damage. The goal is not to get any buyers agent it is to get a very good one.

BTW, I rarely respond to calls that come directly from buyers on my listings and usually tell them to go find their own agent. My job is to represent the seller on my listings. When I get a call from an unrepresented buyer, I know nothing about them. My experience has been that they are some lunatic that will grind me for the other side of the commission anyway, that they will be a royal pain in the ass ant that they will usually show no loyalty and will rarely close escrow.

When I represent a buyer, I spend hours and days communicating with them to know what their needs are. We spend many hours looking at properties and I get a good idea of whom I am dealing with. I would rather work with a buyer represented by another good agent who has been through the same vetting process than some lunatic who finds the listing on sdlookup that i know will ultimately be a waste of mine and more importantly potentially damage my client.

Over more transactions that I can count, I think that I may have had both sides of a transaction only once maybe twice. The only one I can remember wa when the brother of a tenant bought a property for his disabled brother so he wouldnt be relocated after it got sold. It was a short sale and the bank countered higher than it was worth, I told the buyer that but he still bought it because the PITI+HOA was $300 lower than the rent they were paying.

BTW, aimloan.com is not the end all be all lender. teh only reason I know of them is because several folks on this site have mentioned them. I know many that are just as good if not better with more personal service.

[sdrealtor]

captcha
Those are some valid examples and for everyone you have I have 3 that go the other way. A bad agent on either side can damage. The goal is not to get any buyers agent it is to get a very good one.

BTW, I rarely respond to calls that come directly from buyers on my listings and usually tell them to go find their own agent. My job is to represent the seller on my listings. When I get a call from an unrepresented buyer, I know nothing about them. My experience has been that they are some lunatic that will grind me for the other side of the commission anyway, that they will be a royal pain in the ass ant that they will usually show no loyalty and will rarely close escrow.

When I represent a buyer, I spend hours and days communicating with them to know what their needs are. We spend many hours looking at properties and I get a good idea of whom I am dealing with. I would rather work with a buyer represented by another good agent who has been through the same vetting process than some lunatic who finds the listing on sdlookup that i know will ultimately be a waste of mine and more importantly potentially damage my client.

Over more transactions that I can count, I think that I may have had both sides of a transaction only once maybe twice. The only one I can remember wa when the brother of a tenant bought a property for his disabled brother so he wouldnt be relocated after it got sold. It was a short sale and the bank countered higher than it was worth, I told the buyer that but he still bought it because the PITI+HOA was $300 lower than the rent they were paying.

BTW, aimloan.com is not the end all be all lender. teh only reason I know of them is because several folks on this site have mentioned them. I know many that are just as good if not better with more personal service.

[sdrealtor]

captcha
Those are some valid examples and for everyone you have I have 3 that go the other way. A bad agent on either side can damage. The goal is not to get any buyers agent it is to get a very good one.

BTW, I rarely respond to calls that come directly from buyers on my listings and usually tell them to go find their own agent. My job is to represent the seller on my listings. When I get a call from an unrepresented buyer, I know nothing about them. My experience has been that they are some lunatic that will grind me for the other side of the commission anyway, that they will be a royal pain in the ass ant that they will usually show no loyalty and will rarely close escrow.

When I represent a buyer, I spend hours and days communicating with them to know what their needs are. We spend many hours looking at properties and I get a good idea of whom I am dealing with. I would rather work with a buyer represented by another good agent who has been through the same vetting process than some lunatic who finds the listing on sdlookup that i know will ultimately be a waste of mine and more importantly potentially damage my client.

Over more transactions that I can count, I think that I may have had both sides of a transaction only once maybe twice. The only one I can remember wa when the brother of a tenant bought a property for his disabled brother so he wouldnt be relocated after it got sold. It was a short sale and the bank countered higher than it was worth, I told the buyer that but he still bought it because the PITI+HOA was $300 lower than the rent they were paying.

BTW, aimloan.com is not the end all be all lender. teh only reason I know of them is because several folks on this site have mentioned them. I know many that are just as good if not better with more personal service.

[drboom]

[quote=bearishgurl]
As a licensee going on three decades with nearly that amount of concurrent legal experience as well (much of it in the field of land use), I can tell you that there is NO substitute for contracting with a buyers agent who knows like the back of their hand the area you are seeking to purchase in, to help you locate and negotiate the purchase of an acceptable property. Better yet, they should possess a photographic memory of intersections of and major thoroughfares in their market area and be familiar with the nuances of all its subdivisions, no matter what their age. It’s also helpful if they are familiar with the original houseplans as they were built, longtime small businesses in the area and their owners, locations of the premium lots, exact school attendance boundaries, what lies over the ground, what lies under the ground (easements), which complexes were/are in litigation and what the outcome of it was, etc. . . and this is only inventory knowledge. If you are using an agent without inventory and market knowledge of the particular area you want to purchase in, you are doing yourself a HUGE disservice, as there are MANY agents who have lived and/or worked in that particular area all of their lives.
[/quote]

All their lives? Good luck in San Diego: nearly everyone is a transplant. People start calling themselves natives around here as soon as they can manage to credibly pull off a “dude” or two in daily conversation.

Those few of us who really are natives know far more about the area than any agent.

[drboom]

[quote=bearishgurl]
As a licensee going on three decades with nearly that amount of concurrent legal experience as well (much of it in the field of land use), I can tell you that there is NO substitute for contracting with a buyers agent who knows like the back of their hand the area you are seeking to purchase in, to help you locate and negotiate the purchase of an acceptable property. Better yet, they should possess a photographic memory of intersections of and major thoroughfares in their market area and be familiar with the nuances of all its subdivisions, no matter what their age. It’s also helpful if they are familiar with the original houseplans as they were built, longtime small businesses in the area and their owners, locations of the premium lots, exact school attendance boundaries, what lies over the ground, what lies under the ground (easements), which complexes were/are in litigation and what the outcome of it was, etc. . . and this is only inventory knowledge. If you are using an agent without inventory and market knowledge of the particular area you want to purchase in, you are doing yourself a HUGE disservice, as there are MANY agents who have lived and/or worked in that particular area all of their lives.
[/quote]

All their lives? Good luck in San Diego: nearly everyone is a transplant. People start calling themselves natives around here as soon as they can manage to credibly pull off a “dude” or two in daily conversation.

Those few of us who really are natives know far more about the area than any agent.

[drboom]

[quote=bearishgurl]
As a licensee going on three decades with nearly that amount of concurrent legal experience as well (much of it in the field of land use), I can tell you that there is NO substitute for contracting with a buyers agent who knows like the back of their hand the area you are seeking to purchase in, to help you locate and negotiate the purchase of an acceptable property. Better yet, they should possess a photographic memory of intersections of and major thoroughfares in their market area and be familiar with the nuances of all its subdivisions, no matter what their age. It’s also helpful if they are familiar with the original houseplans as they were built, longtime small businesses in the area and their owners, locations of the premium lots, exact school attendance boundaries, what lies over the ground, what lies under the ground (easements), which complexes were/are in litigation and what the outcome of it was, etc. . . and this is only inventory knowledge. If you are using an agent without inventory and market knowledge of the particular area you want to purchase in, you are doing yourself a HUGE disservice, as there are MANY agents who have lived and/or worked in that particular area all of their lives.
[/quote]

All their lives? Good luck in San Diego: nearly everyone is a transplant. People start calling themselves natives around here as soon as they can manage to credibly pull off a “dude” or two in daily conversation.

Those few of us who really are natives know far more about the area than any agent.

[drboom]

[quote=bearishgurl]
As a licensee going on three decades with nearly that amount of concurrent legal experience as well (much of it in the field of land use), I can tell you that there is NO substitute for contracting with a buyers agent who knows like the back of their hand the area you are seeking to purchase in, to help you locate and negotiate the purchase of an acceptable property. Better yet, they should possess a photographic memory of intersections of and major thoroughfares in their market area and be familiar with the nuances of all its subdivisions, no matter what their age. It’s also helpful if they are familiar with the original houseplans as they were built, longtime small businesses in the area and their owners, locations of the premium lots, exact school attendance boundaries, what lies over the ground, what lies under the ground (easements), which complexes were/are in litigation and what the outcome of it was, etc. . . and this is only inventory knowledge. If you are using an agent without inventory and market knowledge of the particular area you want to purchase in, you are doing yourself a HUGE disservice, as there are MANY agents who have lived and/or worked in that particular area all of their lives.
[/quote]

All their lives? Good luck in San Diego: nearly everyone is a transplant. People start calling themselves natives around here as soon as they can manage to credibly pull off a “dude” or two in daily conversation.

Those few of us who really are natives know far more about the area than any agent.

[Author]

Posts