Cohousing-L Mailing List: Re: Communication between prospective buyers and community members?

[Edwin Simmers (edwinsimmers]

Excellent summary, Sophie Rubin.

If you’d like to learn more about the future of real estate commissions, check 
out the article at this link:

<https://www.bankrate.com/real-estate/real-estate-commissions-lawsuit-impact/>

If the link doesn’t work for you, go to bankrate.com <http://bankrate.com/> and 
search for:

The future of real estate commissions

Ed Simmers
Bellingham Cohousing


> Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 09:16:49 -0700
> From: Sophie Rubin <yophiest [at] gmail.com <mailto:yophiest [at] gmail.com>>
> To: cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org <mailto:cohousing-l [at] cohousing.org>
> Subject: Re: [C-L]_ Communication between prospective buyers and
>       community members?
> 
> I am not an attorney nor a real estate agent but I have been looking into
> this, I did just sell a house in ca, am looking at buying new property
> currently, and am training for my broker?s license in California.
> 
> It is not illegal or ?against the rules?  for prospective community members
> to talk with current community members. Agents say it is all the time,
> though, because it is in the best interest of agents to protect their
> commission by limiting communication between buyer and seller. The number
> of contracts that actually SAY you can?t? Probably close to 0.
> 
> I would say you should go so far as to threaten to fire any agent that
> suggests you can?t communicate, because it?s blocking principal parties in
> the transaction from doing their own due diligence. I would also ask the
> agent exactly *what* they think is ?not allowed? - who doesn?t allow it and
> why?
> 
> Note that there IS a new, federal law in place as of Aug 17 regarding real
> estate transactions. The law itself is about disclosure requirements for
> *commissions*, particularly the buyer?s agent commission.
> 
> The way real estate agents are spinning it is to say that it is ?illegal
> for them to show a property without a signed contract.? That?s so they can
> cover their butts by saying ?we agreed on a commission in advance - it was
> negotiated/disclosed in writing and not hidden so we followed the law.?
> 
> In practice I find this is complicating things even worse than before (at
> least for the time being). Now agents have additional cover to say ?well we
> know the other party signed a contract and we don?t know what the other
> party?s contract says - it could prohibit it? or some other such bullshit.
> AND you should expect that no one will be viewing units from the general
> public without a signed buyer?s agent contract.
> 
> PSA FOR COMMUNITIES: IF you hire a seller?s agent, make sure that they are
> willing and able to show units to unrepresented potential buyers!! Going to
> see a unit is hard, now, unless there is an open house, because seller?s
> agents will say they can?t dual represent so they can?t show due to a
> conflict of interest and buyer?s agents will say they can?t show you a unit
> until you?ve signed a contract and agreed to a commission!!
> 
> And one final speculation: agents could be concerned with running afoul of
> fair housing law. I think there is a fear that if sellers can talk to
> prospective buyers and the buyers belong to a protected class, that if the
> buyers are then not chosen after providing an offer, they could use
> discussions with the sellers or the community as the basis for a lawsuit
> claiming discrimination.
> 
> In summation: agents are extremely focused on two things: (1) closing the
> sale as quickly and easily as possible and (2) covering their asses. Both
> of these goals are more easily met when there is less communication between
> parties. So of course they will say it if they can get away with it!!
>