[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CA renter]

If the taxpayers are responsible for propping up the banks, you’d better believe this is unethical, and it should be illegal. This is defrauding the U.S. government/taxpayers.

If the lenders were personally taking the hit, I wouldn’t care one bit, but if the taxpayers are on the hook, this needs to be fought tooth and nail.

BTW, a lot of these deals go through because the agent lists the house as contingent the moment it hits the MLS. That is BS![/quote]

Dude, we have tangled about this before.
I take my agency relationship very seriously.
The banks have very clear requirements for short sales and I abide by them.
They generally do not want multiple offers in hand.
They want a single package.
So if a seller accepts an offer, they are required to stay with that offer unless the bank denies it.
To do otherwise would be illegal.
To switch buyers after accepting an offer is not allowed.
If I somehow caused a seller to do that, I could lose my license.

The real issue here is that the government should require
A: a speedy short sale review process
and
B: minimum market time and acceptance rules.

That would make short sales function more like regular deals and thus would remove a lot of the hurdles to completing them. They would function more within market fundamentals than they do now (and thus probably be more expensive).

But please remember that a lot of what you are complaining about is just a normal function of markets.

Logical framework:

1: Short sale properties are relatively less desirable than other properties.
2: To make up for this lack of desirability, sellers lower the price.
3: Low prices tend to attract more buyers more quickly.

Real life example:

I took a listing on Saturday.
I recommended a price point that was consistent with similar properties that were short sales in the neighborhood that closed in the last 6 months.
The seller concurred and priced it at $250,000
I received an offer yesterday midday.
If the seller accepts it, we will mark it contingent today.
At that point, we will be committed to the buyer, barring some curve ball.

Please tell me where you see the illegality or dishonesty here.

As with most of your conspiratorial rants, this one too will turn out to be nothing more than ignorant whiny nonsense.

I am a general fan of skepticism (maybe that is a contradiction) but being an uninformed conspiracy nut is just as bad as being a dumb dittohead follower.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=CA renter]

If the taxpayers are responsible for propping up the banks, you’d better believe this is unethical, and it should be illegal. This is defrauding the U.S. government/taxpayers.

If the lenders were personally taking the hit, I wouldn’t care one bit, but if the taxpayers are on the hook, this needs to be fought tooth and nail.

BTW, a lot of these deals go through because the agent lists the house as contingent the moment it hits the MLS. That is BS![/quote]

Dude, we have tangled about this before.
I take my agency relationship very seriously.
The banks have very clear requirements for short sales and I abide by them.
They generally do not want multiple offers in hand.
They want a single package.
So if a seller accepts an offer, they are required to stay with that offer unless the bank denies it.
To do otherwise would be illegal.
To switch buyers after accepting an offer is not allowed.
If I somehow caused a seller to do that, I could lose my license.

The real issue here is that the government should require
A: a speedy short sale review process
and
B: minimum market time and acceptance rules.

That would make short sales function more like regular deals and thus would remove a lot of the hurdles to completing them. They would function more within market fundamentals than they do now (and thus probably be more expensive).

But please remember that a lot of what you are complaining about is just a normal function of markets.

Logical framework:

1: Short sale properties are relatively less desirable than other properties.
2: To make up for this lack of desirability, sellers lower the price.
3: Low prices tend to attract more buyers more quickly.

Real life example:

I took a listing on Saturday.
I recommended a price point that was consistent with similar properties that were short sales in the neighborhood that closed in the last 6 months.
The seller concurred and priced it at $250,000
I received an offer yesterday midday.
If the seller accepts it, we will mark it contingent today.
At that point, we will be committed to the buyer, barring some curve ball.

Please tell me where you see the illegality or dishonesty here.

As with most of your conspiratorial rants, this one too will turn out to be nothing more than ignorant whiny nonsense.

I am a general fan of skepticism (maybe that is a contradiction) but being an uninformed conspiracy nut is just as bad as being a dumb dittohead follower.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=researcher9]n.s.r,

“The agent has to make sure the other agent knows that you’re the guy to close the deal. You as a buyer need to know exactly what you want in a house, your agent needs to understand that, and you need to make up your mind in about 30 minutes upon seeing it.”

=> Your advise is way too much complicated and impratical … a simple way to be just ditch your buyer’s agent and ask the listing agent and seller to “work” directly with you the “Buyer” … that way you wont have the issue of incompetent-buyer’s-agent. Also if you are Savvy enough to make a prudent home-buying decision in just 30 minutes, then it means that you have done your research and Home-Work thoroughly, and quite likly you dont need the Buyer’s Agent.
If you have not done your research and are trying to make one-of-the biggest financial decision of your lifetime in 30 minutes … you are ‘Risking It” big time.[/quote]

I have had, as a hypothesis for some time, that buyers who go unrepresented do not do better and in fact do worse in purchases.

I did a little test asking for volunteers on this blog to give me their addresses so I could test this hypothesis.
My hypothesis was supported.
However (and I was not expecting this), I also found a greater level of satisfaction in buyers who handled it all themselves.
In other words, it is like cars or home improvement.
From the outside, the work is inferior at a relative level.
From the point of view of the do-it-yourself person, there is a greater level of satisfaction.

As a logical level, there is the reality that the buyer is assuming that the agent’s greed (over getting a double commission) will cause him to be helpful to the buyer (and not fuck the buyer over) while at the same time pushing through an otherwise non-optimal offer (and thus fucking over his seller client).

The term logic is used loosely here.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=researcher9]n.s.r,

“The agent has to make sure the other agent knows that you’re the guy to close the deal. You as a buyer need to know exactly what you want in a house, your agent needs to understand that, and you need to make up your mind in about 30 minutes upon seeing it.”

=> Your advise is way too much complicated and impratical … a simple way to be just ditch your buyer’s agent and ask the listing agent and seller to “work” directly with you the “Buyer” … that way you wont have the issue of incompetent-buyer’s-agent. Also if you are Savvy enough to make a prudent home-buying decision in just 30 minutes, then it means that you have done your research and Home-Work thoroughly, and quite likly you dont need the Buyer’s Agent.
If you have not done your research and are trying to make one-of-the biggest financial decision of your lifetime in 30 minutes … you are ‘Risking It” big time.[/quote]

I have had, as a hypothesis for some time, that buyers who go unrepresented do not do better and in fact do worse in purchases.

I did a little test asking for volunteers on this blog to give me their addresses so I could test this hypothesis.
My hypothesis was supported.
However (and I was not expecting this), I also found a greater level of satisfaction in buyers who handled it all themselves.
In other words, it is like cars or home improvement.
From the outside, the work is inferior at a relative level.
From the point of view of the do-it-yourself person, there is a greater level of satisfaction.

As a logical level, there is the reality that the buyer is assuming that the agent’s greed (over getting a double commission) will cause him to be helpful to the buyer (and not fuck the buyer over) while at the same time pushing through an otherwise non-optimal offer (and thus fucking over his seller client).

The term logic is used loosely here.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=researcher9]n.s.r,

“The agent has to make sure the other agent knows that you’re the guy to close the deal. You as a buyer need to know exactly what you want in a house, your agent needs to understand that, and you need to make up your mind in about 30 minutes upon seeing it.”

=> Your advise is way too much complicated and impratical … a simple way to be just ditch your buyer’s agent and ask the listing agent and seller to “work” directly with you the “Buyer” … that way you wont have the issue of incompetent-buyer’s-agent. Also if you are Savvy enough to make a prudent home-buying decision in just 30 minutes, then it means that you have done your research and Home-Work thoroughly, and quite likly you dont need the Buyer’s Agent.
If you have not done your research and are trying to make one-of-the biggest financial decision of your lifetime in 30 minutes … you are ‘Risking It” big time.[/quote]

I have had, as a hypothesis for some time, that buyers who go unrepresented do not do better and in fact do worse in purchases.

I did a little test asking for volunteers on this blog to give me their addresses so I could test this hypothesis.
My hypothesis was supported.
However (and I was not expecting this), I also found a greater level of satisfaction in buyers who handled it all themselves.
In other words, it is like cars or home improvement.
From the outside, the work is inferior at a relative level.
From the point of view of the do-it-yourself person, there is a greater level of satisfaction.

As a logical level, there is the reality that the buyer is assuming that the agent’s greed (over getting a double commission) will cause him to be helpful to the buyer (and not fuck the buyer over) while at the same time pushing through an otherwise non-optimal offer (and thus fucking over his seller client).

The term logic is used loosely here.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=researcher9]n.s.r,

“The agent has to make sure the other agent knows that you’re the guy to close the deal. You as a buyer need to know exactly what you want in a house, your agent needs to understand that, and you need to make up your mind in about 30 minutes upon seeing it.”

=> Your advise is way too much complicated and impratical … a simple way to be just ditch your buyer’s agent and ask the listing agent and seller to “work” directly with you the “Buyer” … that way you wont have the issue of incompetent-buyer’s-agent. Also if you are Savvy enough to make a prudent home-buying decision in just 30 minutes, then it means that you have done your research and Home-Work thoroughly, and quite likly you dont need the Buyer’s Agent.
If you have not done your research and are trying to make one-of-the biggest financial decision of your lifetime in 30 minutes … you are ‘Risking It” big time.[/quote]

I have had, as a hypothesis for some time, that buyers who go unrepresented do not do better and in fact do worse in purchases.

I did a little test asking for volunteers on this blog to give me their addresses so I could test this hypothesis.
My hypothesis was supported.
However (and I was not expecting this), I also found a greater level of satisfaction in buyers who handled it all themselves.
In other words, it is like cars or home improvement.
From the outside, the work is inferior at a relative level.
From the point of view of the do-it-yourself person, there is a greater level of satisfaction.

As a logical level, there is the reality that the buyer is assuming that the agent’s greed (over getting a double commission) will cause him to be helpful to the buyer (and not fuck the buyer over) while at the same time pushing through an otherwise non-optimal offer (and thus fucking over his seller client).

The term logic is used loosely here.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=researcher9]n.s.r,

“The agent has to make sure the other agent knows that you’re the guy to close the deal. You as a buyer need to know exactly what you want in a house, your agent needs to understand that, and you need to make up your mind in about 30 minutes upon seeing it.”

=> Your advise is way too much complicated and impratical … a simple way to be just ditch your buyer’s agent and ask the listing agent and seller to “work” directly with you the “Buyer” … that way you wont have the issue of incompetent-buyer’s-agent. Also if you are Savvy enough to make a prudent home-buying decision in just 30 minutes, then it means that you have done your research and Home-Work thoroughly, and quite likly you dont need the Buyer’s Agent.
If you have not done your research and are trying to make one-of-the biggest financial decision of your lifetime in 30 minutes … you are ‘Risking It” big time.[/quote]

I have had, as a hypothesis for some time, that buyers who go unrepresented do not do better and in fact do worse in purchases.

I did a little test asking for volunteers on this blog to give me their addresses so I could test this hypothesis.
My hypothesis was supported.
However (and I was not expecting this), I also found a greater level of satisfaction in buyers who handled it all themselves.
In other words, it is like cars or home improvement.
From the outside, the work is inferior at a relative level.
From the point of view of the do-it-yourself person, there is a greater level of satisfaction.

As a logical level, there is the reality that the buyer is assuming that the agent’s greed (over getting a double commission) will cause him to be helpful to the buyer (and not fuck the buyer over) while at the same time pushing through an otherwise non-optimal offer (and thus fucking over his seller client).

The term logic is used loosely here.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]
There are the common double ended deals as well which are simply cases of agents being greedy and shielding or holding back offers.

It all kind of sucks. There is nothing preventing you from trying to find someone in distress and work out a deal with them. It is simply alot of time and effort and much harder and time consuming then it sound.

….

As we have discussed over and over the problem is the process. Regardless of whether it is a short sale or an reo, the dual agency problem is always going to be there.

…
It would be nice is there were some simple parameters added to the process. Simplistic ideas such as minimum advertising durations of say x number of days before an offer could be accepted in the case of an REO would be nice. Also in the case of multiple offers, the (pick a number) say 3 highest and best offers could all be submitted to the Asset manager with the realtors recommendation for which one to accept.

For short sales things get a bit more blurry because the damned processing time of the lender makes it harder. However something like the above suggestion for reos would go a long long way towards helping things out. Simply outlawing dual agency would not hurt either. Buyers may whine that they would rather keep the commission then have some agent they didn’t want representing them but there can be ways to work that out.

The MLS is simply an advertising tool. Realtors in fact are not required to use it and they can get a waiver signed by homeowners who do not want the home on the MLS and submit that waiver and the listing doesn’t have to go on the MLS. Saying the MLS is the problem is an ignorant statement.

The problem is that there are fundamental problems in the way short sales and reos MAY be handled. There are enough potential problems there that these types of sales need to have increased transparency and/or regulatory control.

…
[/quote]

Well put.
Amen brother.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]
There are the common double ended deals as well which are simply cases of agents being greedy and shielding or holding back offers.

It all kind of sucks. There is nothing preventing you from trying to find someone in distress and work out a deal with them. It is simply alot of time and effort and much harder and time consuming then it sound.

….

As we have discussed over and over the problem is the process. Regardless of whether it is a short sale or an reo, the dual agency problem is always going to be there.

…
It would be nice is there were some simple parameters added to the process. Simplistic ideas such as minimum advertising durations of say x number of days before an offer could be accepted in the case of an REO would be nice. Also in the case of multiple offers, the (pick a number) say 3 highest and best offers could all be submitted to the Asset manager with the realtors recommendation for which one to accept.

For short sales things get a bit more blurry because the damned processing time of the lender makes it harder. However something like the above suggestion for reos would go a long long way towards helping things out. Simply outlawing dual agency would not hurt either. Buyers may whine that they would rather keep the commission then have some agent they didn’t want representing them but there can be ways to work that out.

The MLS is simply an advertising tool. Realtors in fact are not required to use it and they can get a waiver signed by homeowners who do not want the home on the MLS and submit that waiver and the listing doesn’t have to go on the MLS. Saying the MLS is the problem is an ignorant statement.

The problem is that there are fundamental problems in the way short sales and reos MAY be handled. There are enough potential problems there that these types of sales need to have increased transparency and/or regulatory control.

…
[/quote]

Well put.
Amen brother.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]
There are the common double ended deals as well which are simply cases of agents being greedy and shielding or holding back offers.

It all kind of sucks. There is nothing preventing you from trying to find someone in distress and work out a deal with them. It is simply alot of time and effort and much harder and time consuming then it sound.

….

As we have discussed over and over the problem is the process. Regardless of whether it is a short sale or an reo, the dual agency problem is always going to be there.

…
It would be nice is there were some simple parameters added to the process. Simplistic ideas such as minimum advertising durations of say x number of days before an offer could be accepted in the case of an REO would be nice. Also in the case of multiple offers, the (pick a number) say 3 highest and best offers could all be submitted to the Asset manager with the realtors recommendation for which one to accept.

For short sales things get a bit more blurry because the damned processing time of the lender makes it harder. However something like the above suggestion for reos would go a long long way towards helping things out. Simply outlawing dual agency would not hurt either. Buyers may whine that they would rather keep the commission then have some agent they didn’t want representing them but there can be ways to work that out.

The MLS is simply an advertising tool. Realtors in fact are not required to use it and they can get a waiver signed by homeowners who do not want the home on the MLS and submit that waiver and the listing doesn’t have to go on the MLS. Saying the MLS is the problem is an ignorant statement.

The problem is that there are fundamental problems in the way short sales and reos MAY be handled. There are enough potential problems there that these types of sales need to have increased transparency and/or regulatory control.

…
[/quote]

Well put.
Amen brother.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]
There are the common double ended deals as well which are simply cases of agents being greedy and shielding or holding back offers.

It all kind of sucks. There is nothing preventing you from trying to find someone in distress and work out a deal with them. It is simply alot of time and effort and much harder and time consuming then it sound.

….

As we have discussed over and over the problem is the process. Regardless of whether it is a short sale or an reo, the dual agency problem is always going to be there.

…
It would be nice is there were some simple parameters added to the process. Simplistic ideas such as minimum advertising durations of say x number of days before an offer could be accepted in the case of an REO would be nice. Also in the case of multiple offers, the (pick a number) say 3 highest and best offers could all be submitted to the Asset manager with the realtors recommendation for which one to accept.

For short sales things get a bit more blurry because the damned processing time of the lender makes it harder. However something like the above suggestion for reos would go a long long way towards helping things out. Simply outlawing dual agency would not hurt either. Buyers may whine that they would rather keep the commission then have some agent they didn’t want representing them but there can be ways to work that out.

The MLS is simply an advertising tool. Realtors in fact are not required to use it and they can get a waiver signed by homeowners who do not want the home on the MLS and submit that waiver and the listing doesn’t have to go on the MLS. Saying the MLS is the problem is an ignorant statement.

The problem is that there are fundamental problems in the way short sales and reos MAY be handled. There are enough potential problems there that these types of sales need to have increased transparency and/or regulatory control.

…
[/quote]

Well put.
Amen brother.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=SD Realtor]
There are the common double ended deals as well which are simply cases of agents being greedy and shielding or holding back offers.

It all kind of sucks. There is nothing preventing you from trying to find someone in distress and work out a deal with them. It is simply alot of time and effort and much harder and time consuming then it sound.

….

As we have discussed over and over the problem is the process. Regardless of whether it is a short sale or an reo, the dual agency problem is always going to be there.

…
It would be nice is there were some simple parameters added to the process. Simplistic ideas such as minimum advertising durations of say x number of days before an offer could be accepted in the case of an REO would be nice. Also in the case of multiple offers, the (pick a number) say 3 highest and best offers could all be submitted to the Asset manager with the realtors recommendation for which one to accept.

For short sales things get a bit more blurry because the damned processing time of the lender makes it harder. However something like the above suggestion for reos would go a long long way towards helping things out. Simply outlawing dual agency would not hurt either. Buyers may whine that they would rather keep the commission then have some agent they didn’t want representing them but there can be ways to work that out.

The MLS is simply an advertising tool. Realtors in fact are not required to use it and they can get a waiver signed by homeowners who do not want the home on the MLS and submit that waiver and the listing doesn’t have to go on the MLS. Saying the MLS is the problem is an ignorant statement.

The problem is that there are fundamental problems in the way short sales and reos MAY be handled. There are enough potential problems there that these types of sales need to have increased transparency and/or regulatory control.

…
[/quote]

Well put.
Amen brother.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=paramount]The problem I see here is the MLS itself, which is a sales tool manipulated by realtors and other interested parties.

Maybe what we need is a new MLS type system that is less prone to manipulation and overly self-interested parties.[/quote]

You see lots of problems with lots of things.

The MLS is a lot more honest and fair of an open market tool than ebay or craigslist.

It actually allows full information about what sale prices have done in the past.

That is not something that is generally available to users in more closed or limited databases like Ebay or CL.

In what way do you see it as being manipulated?

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=paramount]The problem I see here is the MLS itself, which is a sales tool manipulated by realtors and other interested parties.

Maybe what we need is a new MLS type system that is less prone to manipulation and overly self-interested parties.[/quote]

You see lots of problems with lots of things.

The MLS is a lot more honest and fair of an open market tool than ebay or craigslist.

It actually allows full information about what sale prices have done in the past.

That is not something that is generally available to users in more closed or limited databases like Ebay or CL.

In what way do you see it as being manipulated?

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=paramount]The problem I see here is the MLS itself, which is a sales tool manipulated by realtors and other interested parties.

Maybe what we need is a new MLS type system that is less prone to manipulation and overly self-interested parties.[/quote]

You see lots of problems with lots of things.

The MLS is a lot more honest and fair of an open market tool than ebay or craigslist.

It actually allows full information about what sale prices have done in the past.

That is not something that is generally available to users in more closed or limited databases like Ebay or CL.

In what way do you see it as being manipulated?

[Author]

Posts