There's a growing awareness
of the Buyer Agency idea among real estate offices and agents and the
public they serve, but -- if I can be forgiven for once again riding a favourite
hobby horse -- there are some aspects of it that certainly give me cause
for concern.
One of them, of course, is the question of whether a Buyer Agency Agreement is necessary. Its use is certainly recommended by the Canadian and Ontario Real Estate Associations, but, as I argued in my January newsletter, I have decided reservations about the fairness of it. Indeed, if I allow my cynical side to get the better of me, I can suspect that far too many offices and agents have latched onto the document simply as a means of ensuring a commission when a potential buyer shows up. I have no worries about
the implications of a Listing Agreement. Things immediately happen
when it's signed. Lawn signs get put up. Ads are placed.
Previews by the listing agent's colleagues are usually arranged. Open
Houses are frequently held. Thus, whether a quick sale ensues or not, there's
undoubted effort and activity aimed at generating an offer. Moreover,
the property's availability is widely circulated through the local MLS system
-- which means that something can eventually occur even if the listing agent
sits back, takes it easy, and, in effect, does next to nothing after the Listing
Agreeement has been signed.
In contrast, however, there's no guarantee that signing a Buyer Agency Agreement will lead to anything. There's only the agent's word for it. He or she is just one person and there's no one else going to take an active interest in finding a suitable property. There's nothing in the way of an MLS broadcast that a particular type of property is being sought. At most, you'll see an occasional ad in which an agent mentions he/she has a buyer looking for something -- but the cynic in me surfaces again and I cannot help thinking that the real purpose is to generate another listing rather than fulfilling the promise to someone who's signed a Buyer Agency Agreement! I do, of course, agree
with the need to make an agent's role clear when someone is looking for a
house. The growing emphasis on consumer protection justifies the idea
that buyers should know whether or not their best interests -- as opposed
to the vendor's -- are going to being served. Nevertheless, I'm far
from convinced that people should be tied down to an agent who has yet to
give any evidence of his/her intention, knowledge, ability, and ongoing
effort to find a property for the buyer.
One of the real keys to success in the real estate business is trust, and I'll argue strenuously that it has to be earned before an agent has a right to an assured commission. A different way of
looking at things * Why are the people selling? Seeing the whole picture
Understandably, the listing agent and the vendor aren't likely to volunteer information that may reduce the chance of a sale, and admittedly a prudent buyer may have the sense to obtain it. However, a Buyer Agent who's doing a thoroughgoing job will not just make sure of this. Quite apart from looking for suitable and properly priced houses, he or she will also bring a perspective to the task that's less focused on selling something and more on determining whether it ought to be bought. Or, to paraphrase an old ad slogan, the objective will be to ensure that more than the price is right. In many regards, Canadian real estate companies are better regulated and observe higher standards than is sometimes the case in the USA. Both sellers and buyers run much less risk of being badly treated and then finding the courts unwilling or unable to correct the wrongs that have occurred. However, when it comes to Buyer Agency, the National Association of Realtors is much further ahead in both its definitions and practices. The expectations are more completely spelled out. The public is better informed about how the industry is supposed to behave (even though there's less chance of misconduct being redressed!). And it isn't unusual for companies to have agents who specialize in serving only sellers or buyers but never both. There's also an Accredited Buyer Representative designation that has no equivalent in Canada. It involves a detailed study of the critical differences between what a listing agent and what a buyer agent must do and requires evidence of sales that demonstrate the application of them. Not the least, there's a well recognized association of Exclusive Buyer Agencies that work only for purchasers and leave the listing side of the business to other companies -- something that isn't, as far as I can tell, being given a moment's thought in Canadian real estate circles. In any case, despite the
best intentions of those agents who favour the use of a Buyer Agency Agreement,
you can be quite sure that it doesn't contain a single a word about all this!
Duncan Pollock, Real Estate Broker, 427 Gate Street, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, Canada L0S 1J0 Tel: 905-468-3154 Fax: 905-468-3812 Cellular: 905-704-9037 email: duncanpollock@sympatico.ca Note: E-mail addressed changed as above on Nov 3 2007 website: http://www.duncanpollock.com |
This is an online copy of my August 2004 newsletter -- and you can find a list of the other ones I've sent out by clicking here. If you aren't already included in my mailing list, you are most welcome to add your name to it so you can receive a similar "Shot Across the Bow" each month. There's nothing hard sell involved, I can assure you. Rather, the idea is to share my thoughts with you about how I believe buyers can be better served by the real estate industry. Thank you. |
Join my mailing list |
|---|