3 ms·

There were few things more frustrating to me when we were buying our house, which we were currently living in, from our landlords, for a price we all agreed to

There were few things more frustrating to me when we were buying our house, which we were currently living in, from our landlords, for a price we all agreed to over the phone, that we HAD to employ two realtors who, despite doing little more than paperwork which I could have done myself, took 6% of the sale price. It's a grift.

eddythompson80 3y ago
> that we HAD to employ two realtors who [..] Why did you have to do that? is it your state/city law? because I know that's not a general requirement. You can always sell/buy directly.
- etchalon 3y ago
  We had to because the sellers insisted on using an agent themselves, because their realtor convinced them they had to, and then that agent then insisted that we use a realtor too. And that's before I bring up how everyone, from the titling company, to the attorney, to the inspector, also insisted we "needed" a realtor, with multiple potential vendors refusing to talk to me without one. It felt, at the time, like a racket, with everyone in on the grift.
  - eddythompson80 3y ago
    I see. Honestly it feels more like your seller’s choice to go with a realtor. Then it’s the typical realtor preference to deal with another realtor. It’s like how a judge would hate to deal with a self representing defendant. It’s just a lot more hassle for them and they don’t wanna hold anyone’s hand throughout the process. Unless there are cities or counties with weird laws I’m not familiar with, you can always direct sell/buy. Due to where my place is, I get almost a monthly or bimonthly letter from a couple of well known developers in the area that usually highlight “no banks, no realtors” an they are looking to pay cash and handle all paper work themselves. It seems that the grift in your case was every body’s else’s convenience but yours, and that convenience costed 6%
    - etchalon 3y ago
      I was literally going to just take the courses and become a licensed realtor in Texas myself (it would have been cheaper than the 3%) but the grift goes deeper as you can't get become a licensed realtor in Texas without being sponsored by/working for a Broker. Grifts all the way down.
V99 3y ago
Nothing says you HAVE to pay 6%. In at least most places you can submit the paperwork to your county/state recorder & transfer money between each other completely outside of "the system" for a few dollars. And/or hire your own title agent to facilitate and hold the money. There's also nothing that says you have to pay each agent exactly 3%. Commissions are negotiable on both sides like anything else. Especially in this sort of situation where they're no shopping/showing and you're paying them just to perform the transaction. 2-2.5% each is routine in some markets and price points. I built our last couple houses on empty lots, found the lot on my own, and my agent was happy to shuffle some paper for a couple hours for 1% (several thousand dollars) and give me the other 2% at closing. …and for the people who end up looking at dozens of houses before deciding, negotiating, losing an offer, rinse repeating, 3%/$hours_spent_on_you could be a pretty low hourly rate for them.
- etchalon 3y ago
  Nothing says you have to, but boy howdy, would the realtors prefer you do. We had negotiated ours down to 1.5%, which I thought was fair, but that was continent on the sellers realtor also accepting a 1.5% fee. The sellers realtor would not accept 1.5%, nor would the sellers reduce the price by 1.5%. Since someone was going to get that 1.5%, I insisted the commissions be matched to be fair to our agent, and the sellers agreed to pay from their proceeds – after a somewhat heated back and forth. It was dumb.
SkyPuncher 3y ago
Why did you have to? ---- We bought our current house without an agent. Happens that the seller was an agent, but we worked with them directly.

eddythompson80 3y ago

> that we HAD to employ two realtors who [..] Why did you have to do that? is it your state/city law? because I know that's not a general requirement. You can always sell/buy directly.

etchalon 3y ago
We had to because the sellers insisted on using an agent themselves, because their realtor convinced them they had to, and then that agent then insisted that we use a realtor too. And that's before I bring up how everyone, from the titling company, to the attorney, to the inspector, also insisted we "needed" a realtor, with multiple potential vendors refusing to talk to me without one. It felt, at the time, like a racket, with everyone in on the grift.
- eddythompson80 3y ago
  I see. Honestly it feels more like your seller’s choice to go with a realtor. Then it’s the typical realtor preference to deal with another realtor. It’s like how a judge would hate to deal with a self representing defendant. It’s just a lot more hassle for them and they don’t wanna hold anyone’s hand throughout the process. Unless there are cities or counties with weird laws I’m not familiar with, you can always direct sell/buy. Due to where my place is, I get almost a monthly or bimonthly letter from a couple of well known developers in the area that usually highlight “no banks, no realtors” an they are looking to pay cash and handle all paper work themselves. It seems that the grift in your case was every body’s else’s convenience but yours, and that convenience costed 6%
  - etchalon 3y ago
    I was literally going to just take the courses and become a licensed realtor in Texas myself (it would have been cheaper than the 3%) but the grift goes deeper as you can't get become a licensed realtor in Texas without being sponsored by/working for a Broker. Grifts all the way down.

V99 3y ago

Nothing says you HAVE to pay 6%. In at least most places you can submit the paperwork to your county/state recorder & transfer money between each other completely outside of "the system" for a few dollars. And/or hire your own title agent to facilitate and hold the money. There's also nothing that says you have to pay each agent exactly 3%. Commissions are negotiable on both sides like anything else. Especially in this sort of situation where they're no shopping/showing and you're paying them just to perform the transaction. 2-2.5% each is routine in some markets and price points. I built our last couple houses on empty lots, found the lot on my own, and my agent was happy to shuffle some paper for a couple hours for 1% (several thousand dollars) and give me the other 2% at closing. …and for the people who end up looking at dozens of houses before deciding, negotiating, losing an offer, rinse repeating, 3%/$hours_spent_on_you could be a pretty low hourly rate for them.

etchalon 3y ago
Nothing says you have to, but boy howdy, would the realtors prefer you do. We had negotiated ours down to 1.5%, which I thought was fair, but that was continent on the sellers realtor also accepting a 1.5% fee. The sellers realtor would not accept 1.5%, nor would the sellers reduce the price by 1.5%. Since someone was going to get that 1.5%, I insisted the commissions be matched to be fair to our agent, and the sellers agreed to pay from their proceeds – after a somewhat heated back and forth. It was dumb.

SkyPuncher 3y ago

Why did you have to? ---- We bought our current house without an agent. Happens that the seller was an agent, but we worked with them directly.