Again, I think that's an overly optimistic view and really the status quo won't change for who is involved because of espeically first time buyers not knowing how to navigate the process. Since as I understand it under this new agreement buyers will have to enter into an agreement with their agent, the main change I see is that the commission will be negotiated up front which will be different. Though it remains to be seen if that will actually go into effect.MemphisAg1 said:Lol, if buyers have to start forking over $15k to $30k for the purchase of a $500k to $1M house because it's now unbundled and it's theirs to pay directly instead of being wrapped into the seller's agent's fees, I suspect you'll see many take a vested interest in bypassing buyer's agents where they don't think the value proposition justifies it. Won't happen overnight, but I'd be shocked if we don't see a change over time.jabberwalkie09 said:I think that it's pretty optimistic that the outcome is where buyers do their own work and bypass a buyer's agent. Gauging what we see daily in public activities, I suspect that having a buyers agent will continue to be the norm.MemphisAg1 said:That's probably wishful thinking for someone who wants it to stay the way like it's always been. If the result of this legal action is that the buyer's agent fee is still bundled with the seller's agent fee (typical 5% to 6%), then I agree with you that not much will change.Houston Lee said:As has been pointed out multiple times, they can certainly call the listing agent. But, listing agents are not buyers agents and they will not be opening up the home for every unrepresented "buyer" that comes along. Its a complete waste of time for the seller and the listing agent to vacate a home for every random person that calls without doing some pre-screening. That is what a buyers agent is supposed to do.agracer said:as has been pointed out multiple times, they can call the listing agent to see the home.Houston Lee said:Nope. Not Wrong.Logos Stick said:Houston Lee said:Its in the NAR Settlement that everyone is so happy about. The NAR settlement really benefits the seller. But, what the sellers don't seem to understand is now they have truly limited the buyers ability to tour and buy a house and in turn will have actually shrunk the pool of potential buyers for their own home.Logos Stick said:Houston Lee said:
NEWS FLASH: If you are a Buyer this is what is coming:
SIDE NOTE: Just to be clear. When a showing of a property is booked, the Seller is supposed to leave the home for the showing. Sellers are not going to keep doing this for unverified "curiosity seeker" buyers that may or may not be pre-approved for a mortgage loan.
1- Buyers can't tour a property unless they first sign a Buyers Agent Representation Agreement. This agreement will detail how much the buyer or the seller will have to pay for the Buyers Agent commission.
2-Or the buyer can wait for the listing agent to host an Open House
3-If you are an unrepresented buyer a listing agent is probably not going to waste their time kicking their seller out of their home and showing you their listing in a private showing because you will come across as a curiosity seeker or a buyer that may not be pre-approved for a loan.
This
"Buyers can't tour a property unless they first sign a Buyers Agent Representation Agreement. This agreement will detail how much the buyer or the seller will have to pay for the Buyers Agent commission"
is not going to fly!
No, that is not what is in the NAR agreement based on your own posts in here.
I wish I could get through to you, but alas, its impossible,. With all due respect, you are wrong.
Here is the wording from NAR about the settlement from an email I received from NAR President Kevin Sears:
MLS participants acting for buyers would be required to enter into written agreements with their buyers before touring a home.
So, buyers have to sign or the agent can't show them. Plain and simple.
Unless there is an open house going on, if you call and you don't have representation or at least a pre-approval for a loan for the sales price of the listing, you are not seeing the home. And you will need to send a copy of your pre-approval to the listing agent before they agree to kick the seller out of their home so you can see it.
But if it becomes unbundled, where the seller's agent gets their 2.5% to 3% from the seller and the buyer has to negotiate their fee and pay directly to a buyer's agent, I see an outcome where buyers do their own work and bypass a buyer's agent. In most cases you don't really need one; it's been this way since internet listings became available 25 years ago. Buyers typically used them for convenience because they weren't paying the fee; the seller was. If the fees become unbundled, seller's agents will do whatever screening is required; it's not that difficult.
I bought rural property four years ago and dealt directly with the seller's agent. No buyer's agent involved. Easy peasy.
https://www.latimes.com/business/real-estate/story/2024-03-19/realtor-rules-just-changed-dramatically-heres-what-buyers-and-sellers-can-expect