12 ms·

We got, unfortunately, MULTIPLE realtors through redfin; some on our own request, some when they simply would disappear from the company/stop answering our emai

We got, unfortunately, MULTIPLE realtors through redfin; some on our own request, some when they simply would disappear from the company/stop answering our emails. There was neither quality nor consistency, and we had marginal ability to impact that choice on our own, whereas with a personal realtor we went with someone highly recommended from work peers. I absolutely agree the individual realtor impacts the experience, that's pretty much the crux of my whole issue :) My conclusion was that Redfin doesn't offer as much control/guarantee to ensure this, and in a hot market, this matters quite a bit. (To be fair, I'd say the same thing about my experience with mortgage lenders, BoA did an abysmal job and very nearly left me in the lurch, whereas a smaller local lender picked up the slack and pulled our asses out of the fire. Perhaps my overarching statement should be to wonder if we (businesses) suck at scaling customer support? (I'm pretty much saying "well duh" to myself as I write this statement, frankly))

zaroth 9y ago
I've never used a buyer's agent and always written into my offers that the 3% buyers agent fee is to go back to the seller (and of course adjust the top-line offer accordingly). I've never tried to buy in SF, but this strategy has always worked for me and saved a lot of money over the years. Frankly I can't understand the purpose of a buyers agent in this era, and taking 3% off the cost of a house is very substantial. When the closing statement (HUD-1) is finally prepared, usually I can see that the seller's agent took some of the buyer's agent fee, e.g. they will end up with 4% instead of 3% in the end and the rest goes back to the seller. Since these offers usually mean more money for the seller'a agent they go to the top of the pile. It's also important to disclose that you've purchased houses before, that you have funds, and that you are ready to close immediately. You don't need a buyers agent to tell you this.
- everybodyknows 9y ago
  Another data point confirming your 1% as in line with seller's agent additional effort in handling buyer-side paperwork, communication et al. I just sold through a discount broker, independent and therefore free to set his own rates. His fee for buyers without their own agents: 1%. This was in Mountain View, California.
- sshanky 9y ago
  This, exactly. If you're comfortable enough with the property you're buying and know what to look for, the selling agent has a decent reputation (i.e. he has something to lose if he tries to cheat you), and have been through the process before, you can easily approach the selling agent without an agent of your own. An experienced agent will understand what's going on and know that this leaves another 3% to work with. I'll probably never use a buyer's agent again in my home market, though I would probably use one in an unfamiliar city.
- te 9y ago
  So you reduce the top-line offer by 3%? Or, if your written offer specifies 3% back to you, how does the seller's agent manage to take 4% in contradiction to the offer? Not sure what jurisdiction you're operating in, but I wasn't aware that offers could dictate chagnes to the terms of a pre-existing listing agreement between the seller and their agent. Would love more details on how to effect something like this.
  - zaroth 9y ago
    Yes, reduce the top-line offer by 3%, or slightly less than 3% -- so everyone is actually coming out ahead. You're absolutely right, I can't dictate the agreement between the seller and their agent. But when I put in writing, "hereby relinquish any and all claim to the 3% buyer's agent fee ($XX,XXX)" it gets the point across. Then it's between the seller and their agent, usually the agent will get a small bump (from 3% to 4%) and the seller keeps the rest. It's important to try to convince the seller at the same time, that the sale will be easier without the buyer's agent, not harder. Also important to refuse to sign any kind of "dual agency" agreement with the seller's agent.
  - jrs235 9y ago
    >but I wasn't aware that offers could dictate changes to the terms of a pre-existing listing agreement between the seller and their agent. Exactly. Sounds like this borders on interference. The seller can't sign such an offer without breaking a previous contract. It may have worked for him because the broker was amendable to changing their agreement but by not having representation the person above may still have overpaid by 2%. What if the pricing strategy was to price 5% over what the seller really wanted knowing people would negotiate down. Additionally the previous the buyer doesn't know what the co-broke fee, if any, is being offered to an agent that procures a buyer.
    - vostok 9y ago
      > It may have worked for him because the broker was amendable to changing their agreement but by not having representation the person above may still have overpaid by 2%. Or you might have representation and still overpay by 2%. It's kind of how investing in a mutual fund with a 3% load doesn't guarantee that you'll beat the market.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

zaroth 9y ago

I've never used a buyer's agent and always written into my offers that the 3% buyers agent fee is to go back to the seller (and of course adjust the top-line offer accordingly). I've never tried to buy in SF, but this strategy has always worked for me and saved a lot of money over the years. Frankly I can't understand the purpose of a buyers agent in this era, and taking 3% off the cost of a house is very substantial. When the closing statement (HUD-1) is finally prepared, usually I can see that the seller's agent took some of the buyer's agent fee, e.g. they will end up with 4% instead of 3% in the end and the rest goes back to the seller. Since these offers usually mean more money for the seller'a agent they go to the top of the pile. It's also important to disclose that you've purchased houses before, that you have funds, and that you are ready to close immediately. You don't need a buyers agent to tell you this.

everybodyknows 9y ago
Another data point confirming your 1% as in line with seller's agent additional effort in handling buyer-side paperwork, communication et al. I just sold through a discount broker, independent and therefore free to set his own rates. His fee for buyers without their own agents: 1%. This was in Mountain View, California.
sshanky 9y ago
This, exactly. If you're comfortable enough with the property you're buying and know what to look for, the selling agent has a decent reputation (i.e. he has something to lose if he tries to cheat you), and have been through the process before, you can easily approach the selling agent without an agent of your own. An experienced agent will understand what's going on and know that this leaves another 3% to work with. I'll probably never use a buyer's agent again in my home market, though I would probably use one in an unfamiliar city.
te 9y ago
So you reduce the top-line offer by 3%? Or, if your written offer specifies 3% back to you, how does the seller's agent manage to take 4% in contradiction to the offer? Not sure what jurisdiction you're operating in, but I wasn't aware that offers could dictate chagnes to the terms of a pre-existing listing agreement between the seller and their agent. Would love more details on how to effect something like this.
- zaroth 9y ago
  Yes, reduce the top-line offer by 3%, or slightly less than 3% -- so everyone is actually coming out ahead. You're absolutely right, I can't dictate the agreement between the seller and their agent. But when I put in writing, "hereby relinquish any and all claim to the 3% buyer's agent fee ($XX,XXX)" it gets the point across. Then it's between the seller and their agent, usually the agent will get a small bump (from 3% to 4%) and the seller keeps the rest. It's important to try to convince the seller at the same time, that the sale will be easier without the buyer's agent, not harder. Also important to refuse to sign any kind of "dual agency" agreement with the seller's agent.
- jrs235 9y ago
  >but I wasn't aware that offers could dictate changes to the terms of a pre-existing listing agreement between the seller and their agent. Exactly. Sounds like this borders on interference. The seller can't sign such an offer without breaking a previous contract. It may have worked for him because the broker was amendable to changing their agreement but by not having representation the person above may still have overpaid by 2%. What if the pricing strategy was to price 5% over what the seller really wanted knowing people would negotiate down. Additionally the previous the buyer doesn't know what the co-broke fee, if any, is being offered to an agent that procures a buyer.
  - vostok 9y ago
    > It may have worked for him because the broker was amendable to changing their agreement but by not having representation the person above may still have overpaid by 2%. Or you might have representation and still overpay by 2%. It's kind of how investing in a mutual fund with a 3% load doesn't guarantee that you'll beat the market.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]