[urbanrealtor]

I don’t have comments other to say I really like this thread.

AFF, I knew you were a mad bomber.

[urbanrealtor]

I don’t have comments other to say I really like this thread.

AFF, I knew you were a mad bomber.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=jmpman]I see no difference between a lending institution and an individual when it comes to the realtor’s ethical obligation.[/quote]

Correct.
The difference is who the client is.
While we have different duties, our fiduciary relationship is somewhat similar to that between a lawyer and their client. If I have an explicit relationship with a bank, then I will represent their interests vexatiously. This is part of the reason, I don’t like to “double end” deals. Representing both sides splits loyalties. Extra money is no compensation for having clients who think you are cheating them.

Similarly, the bank has to give approval but is very much not my client. They don’t pay me and they can’t fire me. Generally, larger offers are irrelevant if the seller has already accepted one. I will always disclose that to the seller but the seller makes the final call on sending them to the lender. The lender usually has a number they want to see on the contract and they will insist before accepting the short sale. I have even mentioned higher offers and had the bank’s rep say that he was not interested in offers that had not yet been approved by the investment committee. I think for them, as long as they get the ends they want, the uncertainty of a new offer is more costly than a known, approved quantity. I think this is due to the volume of these happening every day.

Again this is my opinion based on lots of experience.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=jmpman]I see no difference between a lending institution and an individual when it comes to the realtor’s ethical obligation.[/quote]

Correct.
The difference is who the client is.
While we have different duties, our fiduciary relationship is somewhat similar to that between a lawyer and their client. If I have an explicit relationship with a bank, then I will represent their interests vexatiously. This is part of the reason, I don’t like to “double end” deals. Representing both sides splits loyalties. Extra money is no compensation for having clients who think you are cheating them.

Similarly, the bank has to give approval but is very much not my client. They don’t pay me and they can’t fire me. Generally, larger offers are irrelevant if the seller has already accepted one. I will always disclose that to the seller but the seller makes the final call on sending them to the lender. The lender usually has a number they want to see on the contract and they will insist before accepting the short sale. I have even mentioned higher offers and had the bank’s rep say that he was not interested in offers that had not yet been approved by the investment committee. I think for them, as long as they get the ends they want, the uncertainty of a new offer is more costly than a known, approved quantity. I think this is due to the volume of these happening every day.

Again this is my opinion based on lots of experience.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=jmpman]I see no difference between a lending institution and an individual when it comes to the realtor’s ethical obligation.[/quote]

Correct.
The difference is who the client is.
While we have different duties, our fiduciary relationship is somewhat similar to that between a lawyer and their client. If I have an explicit relationship with a bank, then I will represent their interests vexatiously. This is part of the reason, I don’t like to “double end” deals. Representing both sides splits loyalties. Extra money is no compensation for having clients who think you are cheating them.

Similarly, the bank has to give approval but is very much not my client. They don’t pay me and they can’t fire me. Generally, larger offers are irrelevant if the seller has already accepted one. I will always disclose that to the seller but the seller makes the final call on sending them to the lender. The lender usually has a number they want to see on the contract and they will insist before accepting the short sale. I have even mentioned higher offers and had the bank’s rep say that he was not interested in offers that had not yet been approved by the investment committee. I think for them, as long as they get the ends they want, the uncertainty of a new offer is more costly than a known, approved quantity. I think this is due to the volume of these happening every day.

Again this is my opinion based on lots of experience.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=jmpman]I see no difference between a lending institution and an individual when it comes to the realtor’s ethical obligation.[/quote]

Correct.
The difference is who the client is.
While we have different duties, our fiduciary relationship is somewhat similar to that between a lawyer and their client. If I have an explicit relationship with a bank, then I will represent their interests vexatiously. This is part of the reason, I don’t like to “double end” deals. Representing both sides splits loyalties. Extra money is no compensation for having clients who think you are cheating them.

Similarly, the bank has to give approval but is very much not my client. They don’t pay me and they can’t fire me. Generally, larger offers are irrelevant if the seller has already accepted one. I will always disclose that to the seller but the seller makes the final call on sending them to the lender. The lender usually has a number they want to see on the contract and they will insist before accepting the short sale. I have even mentioned higher offers and had the bank’s rep say that he was not interested in offers that had not yet been approved by the investment committee. I think for them, as long as they get the ends they want, the uncertainty of a new offer is more costly than a known, approved quantity. I think this is due to the volume of these happening every day.

Again this is my opinion based on lots of experience.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=jmpman]I see no difference between a lending institution and an individual when it comes to the realtor’s ethical obligation.[/quote]

Correct.
The difference is who the client is.
While we have different duties, our fiduciary relationship is somewhat similar to that between a lawyer and their client. If I have an explicit relationship with a bank, then I will represent their interests vexatiously. This is part of the reason, I don’t like to “double end” deals. Representing both sides splits loyalties. Extra money is no compensation for having clients who think you are cheating them.

Similarly, the bank has to give approval but is very much not my client. They don’t pay me and they can’t fire me. Generally, larger offers are irrelevant if the seller has already accepted one. I will always disclose that to the seller but the seller makes the final call on sending them to the lender. The lender usually has a number they want to see on the contract and they will insist before accepting the short sale. I have even mentioned higher offers and had the bank’s rep say that he was not interested in offers that had not yet been approved by the investment committee. I think for them, as long as they get the ends they want, the uncertainty of a new offer is more costly than a known, approved quantity. I think this is due to the volume of these happening every day.

Again this is my opinion based on lots of experience.

[urbanrealtor]

Wow Ca renter.
You use a lot of exclamation points.

You have a point in your frustration.
Your post is very similar to an email I sent to rich and to Kelly Bennett a year or so ago.

Unfortunately, the people making most of the decisions don’t listen to either of us.

The argument that this is theft or fraud is kind of silly though. The people involved are all in the know and the only people getting involuntarily screwed over are the taxpayers. Honestly, the frustration I have with shorts is what led me to start posting here.

If you have a better idea I suggest you share it with people who, unlike me, actually make a difference.

I will support you and even help you.

[urbanrealtor]

Wow Ca renter.
You use a lot of exclamation points.

You have a point in your frustration.
Your post is very similar to an email I sent to rich and to Kelly Bennett a year or so ago.

Unfortunately, the people making most of the decisions don’t listen to either of us.

The argument that this is theft or fraud is kind of silly though. The people involved are all in the know and the only people getting involuntarily screwed over are the taxpayers. Honestly, the frustration I have with shorts is what led me to start posting here.

If you have a better idea I suggest you share it with people who, unlike me, actually make a difference.

I will support you and even help you.

[urbanrealtor]

Wow Ca renter.
You use a lot of exclamation points.

You have a point in your frustration.
Your post is very similar to an email I sent to rich and to Kelly Bennett a year or so ago.

Unfortunately, the people making most of the decisions don’t listen to either of us.

The argument that this is theft or fraud is kind of silly though. The people involved are all in the know and the only people getting involuntarily screwed over are the taxpayers. Honestly, the frustration I have with shorts is what led me to start posting here.

If you have a better idea I suggest you share it with people who, unlike me, actually make a difference.

I will support you and even help you.

[urbanrealtor]

Wow Ca renter.
You use a lot of exclamation points.

You have a point in your frustration.
Your post is very similar to an email I sent to rich and to Kelly Bennett a year or so ago.

Unfortunately, the people making most of the decisions don’t listen to either of us.

The argument that this is theft or fraud is kind of silly though. The people involved are all in the know and the only people getting involuntarily screwed over are the taxpayers. Honestly, the frustration I have with shorts is what led me to start posting here.

If you have a better idea I suggest you share it with people who, unlike me, actually make a difference.

I will support you and even help you.

[urbanrealtor]

Wow Ca renter.
You use a lot of exclamation points.

You have a point in your frustration.
Your post is very similar to an email I sent to rich and to Kelly Bennett a year or so ago.

Unfortunately, the people making most of the decisions don’t listen to either of us.

The argument that this is theft or fraud is kind of silly though. The people involved are all in the know and the only people getting involuntarily screwed over are the taxpayers. Honestly, the frustration I have with shorts is what led me to start posting here.

If you have a better idea I suggest you share it with people who, unlike me, actually make a difference.

I will support you and even help you.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=sdduuuude]This thread is a waste of disk space.[/quote]

I am a waste of disk space.

I think of myself as the human equivalent of an AOL “coaster”.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=sdduuuude]This thread is a waste of disk space.[/quote]

I am a waste of disk space.

I think of myself as the human equivalent of an AOL “coaster”.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=sdduuuude]This thread is a waste of disk space.[/quote]

I am a waste of disk space.

I think of myself as the human equivalent of an AOL “coaster”.

[Author]

Posts