Duel agency

[Wayne Griggs]

Duel Agency is this something that benefits your seller or is this a conflict of interest. I am interested in hearing your opinions on on this type of agency and if it is legal in the state you are in.

Plus what do you feel are the advantages and disadvantages of this type of agency.

I look forward to hearing your comments.

[IGotRealEstate]

We have dual agency in Minnesota.. In my eyes there is no benefits, besides the benefits the agent gets by his or her hogged paycheck.. How can one represent both parties in their best interest, You can faciliate but not represent.

[glenng]

In Florida dual agency is not permitted in residential real estate. The thinking is how can one brokerage "represent" a buyer and seller when the objectives of each are different.

Has anyone seen a plaintiff's attorney be the defendant's attorney. Except for in maybe divorce cases.

[chachi]

California permits "Dual Agency". Clearly you cannot represent both parties best interests. So, from a broker's standpoint it is a great money maker. From a buyer or seller's stanpoint, it is not in their best interest to not be represented by their own agent/broker. As Jeff pointed out, it is pretty much a clear conflict of interest.

I do believe that agents/brokers really act as a facilitator. They are the buffer that allows a transaction to take place in many instances. This is a service that both buyer and seller need. But, to be sure that both parties are fully represented, they each need their own agent, or none at all.

My 2 cents.

[kkraft]

Dual agency is not legal in Colorado.

It used to be, but now we have defined agents as either Transaction Brokers or Buyer Agents. So if the situation arises where the agent is doing both sides of the transaction the representation is not dual but one side has an agency relationship and the other a "customer" relationship. As a customer the broker acts not on behalf of the customer but the party with whom he is contractually representing.

Whew!

With that said most transactions are typically represented by separate buyer and seller agents. Sometimes a buyer comes along for a listing that doesn't give a hoot about representation and just wants to buy the property. In that instance all parties are informed as to the representation and you go forth and do the transaction.

This totally freaks out EBA's but then they don't list and many believe us double dipping agents are crooks. The reality is, we were hired to sell a property, a buyer wants the property and we just do what we were hired to do. Sell it.

BTW, even though the agent gets the whole commission it is usually very well earned. Twice as much work, twice as much hassle.

[chachi]

That's what I used to say too. I am all for it. BTW, you sure are pedaling fast.

[ResaleBroker]

In Arizona our agency disclosure form reads; "...a broker can legally represent both the Seller and the Buyer in a transaction, but only with the knowledge and informed consent of both the Seller and the Buyer."

As for me, I take it on a case by case basis. Some transactions are simple and some are more complex. I can say that I have turned over more than my fair share of clients to another broker to avoid potential problems.

I've had conversations with several real estate attorneys here in Arizona regarding dual agency. Each of them felt that judges frowned on dual agency, even when disclosed.