Quote:
|
Originally Posted by x54.4blue
I am involved with the commercial market not single family residential.
I think the post regarding buyers agent is for purchasing a new home. In the NYC metro area most people don't use a buyers agent. I would think that the concept is that your agent would co/broke with the selling/listing broker. The buyers agent then kicks back some of his fee (which might not be legal).
The concept of a buyers might be a good idea if he is truly independent and well informed. He would gather listing and sales data for the type of home you are looking to purchase and help you negotiate offers/purchases.
The only question in my mind is where do you stand with your existing home; you might be better off going to contact with that house before you sign contract on a new one.
|
Here in California, it is legal to give back part of your commission to the Buyer or Seller, as it falls within the guidelines of RESPA, where by giving part of their commission, the agent is helping reduce the Buyer's or Seller's out of pocket expenses.
While this may not be true with all agents that give part of their commission back, but something to think about is if an agent is willing to give up part of their commission, how strong do you think they will be in negotiating the best price for you? I have a client that was willing to pay $700K for a property and I was able to get them that property for $690K. They're saving $10K as opposed to getting $3500 based on a 2.5% commission before any split with my company. They would probably get less after the split. Do you think an agent giving up 20% of their commission would have negotiated as best as they could to get them the best price possible? It's bad to say, but the higher the price, the more we make, especially if we're giving up 20%. And if a listing agent gives back any part of their commission, it's only for the listing side and not the whole commission charged.