In our last two posts, we discussed what dual agency and transaction brokerage are and how they create two different options that exist when an agent is involved in both the listing and the selling sides of a transaction. Here, we voice our opinion on which is better.
There is a real difference between agents and brokers on how they view these options, and many people in real estate want to move away from the concept of disclosed dual agency. In some states and markets (not Springfield), dual agency has either been removed as an option or has fallen out of practice.
We continue to believe that there is a benefit to dual agency and that it is preferable to transaction brokerage, primarily for two reasons.
First, while we acknowledge that during negotiations such as price, when the agent becomes a facilitator, it is necessary not to become an active participant for one side or the other, this is neither a bad thing nor, if it were, is this fixed by transaction brokerage. Secondly, the notion that in having a listing agreement or buyer agency agreement with a party and proclaiming oneself as that party’s agent, only to convert that relationship to a non-fiduciary one just runs counter to our philosophy. Real estate is about land, but the real estate business is about people, and we really don’t wish to “convert” our relationship with people to one with paperwork.
If you have more questions about dual agency, or about purchasing your first home, please visit our website at www.springfieldfirsthome.com or call/text us at 417.872.9222.
No comments:
Post a Comment