Best way to tell an agent you don't want to sell anymore?

[Aceyducey]

Acey, building relationships with REAs lends itself to chronyism, doesn't it? i.e. you are trying to gain an advantage over the rest of the market by having the agent treat you with partiality, while other buyers are given second billing- the property industry's version of insider trading.

REAs want to sell properties. Vendors want to sell properties at the best possible price.

If REAs offer the properties first to buyers who they know are willing and able to buy this can negate the need for marketing campaigns & the time required to sell to new people.

What's wrong with that?

It's not the same as insider trading as you do NOT have confidential information that is not released publicly, you're simply on the first list to get the information - basically the same way analyst meetings work in the market.

And the vendor doesn't have to accept the price offered!

Frankly if you walk in the door of the REA for the first time just after the REA has signed up a place that meets your requirements & you're clearly willing to put down a holding deposit on the spot I can guarantee that the agent will happily tell you about the property before the For Sale sign is up, it's in the paper or online.

If your issue is that you're not the first to see the properties you need to build that relationship with REAs.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[superted]

My current PPoR was held for me as I knew the agent. The market didnt get a shot at it because I had 3 days headstart to make a decision on it before it was released to market.

There was no sign on the property, the people also lived a long way away and were desperate to sell at a certain price.

Fair definately not .....as a business deal and to get my then dream property I was stoked.

I was definately glad i had a developed a "relationship" with the agent. and your right the vendor didnt have to accept that certain price I offered , even though they probably wouldve got more.

 

[Lplate]

Hi all,

[snip]

OK, my problem/dilemma is how to say to the agent we now no longer want to accept the offer after telling her we would. And, if the buyer was to increase the offer, my friend would increase his as well.

At the end of the day, my friend's offer is the best of the two options by a country mile, instead of getting the loan after settlement in 6 weeks, we can pretty much get it in a week or so plus more in the hand. The only way the other buyer would get us to think twice is if they made a ridiculously higher offer, which I doubt.

Can anybody offer some advice on what to say to the agent, please????

[snip]

Thanks,
Exy

Exy
Hi.
What goes around comes around (or whatever).

I'm not trying to be self-righteous but if you lose your own ethics what hope is there for you?

I'd play it straight down the line and refer the friend to the REA. That way you are at arms length. If only because the friend could drop out too. Maybe the friend finds another place in the interim and applies your current thinking.........or his/her cat dies or whatever and that upsets the deal......As a friend, should you release him/her from the contract?!

Being at arms length might turn out smart for later too. What if something goes wrong with the property and the friend gets upset with you?
Lplate

 

[qaz]

I agree with keeping things at arms length. The less emotions come into the business the decision the better decision (and therefore outcome) you will make/get.

 

[superted]

Will always be people taking the higher ground. There are also people that may be genuine people that may do an "unethical" thing either intentionally or unintentionally.

But the big difference is the REA has a licence that requires them to be ethical, whereas the general public really has there own principles they choose to live by.

The "ethics" in dealing with the contract and the business transaction are completely different to blatant lying. I hope people can see the difference.

 

[Aceyducey]

But the big difference is the REA has a licence that requires them to be ethical, whereas the general public really has there own principles they choose to live by.

So, police have a license which requires them to behave ethically, while everyone else can do as they wish.......how about accountants, lawyers, etc, etc.

IMHO, ethics isn't defined by any form of license. It can't be regulated by laws - some of which may be unethical in certain situations as well! However it can be taught - generally by example.

Unethical people may feel that certain laws and rules that limit others do not apply to themselves - think Gordon Gekko....tha type of attitude really exists, and encountering it frequently is one reason why I left the business executive scene.

Within professions of all types you get wide ranges of levels of ethics.

Ethical people prefer to deal with people who are also ethical....

Unfortunately so do unethical people

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[superted]

So, police have a license which requires them to behave ethically, while everyone else can do as they wish.......how about accountants, lawyers, etc, etc.

They have their own forms of regulation be it external or internal. The RE internal watchdogs have lots of catching up to do IMO

IMHO, ethics isn't defined by any form of license. It can't be regulated by laws - some of which may be unethical in certain situations as well! However it can be taught - generally by example.

I agree.. But to add to the ethics debate I spose is scalable depending on you viewpoint and the business situation. Somepeople may genuinely feel that they are not unethical but other people feel they are.

Unethical people may feel that certain laws and rules that limit others do not apply to themselves - think Gordon Gekko....tha type of attitude really exists, and encountering it frequently is one reason why I left the business executive scene.

Good example. other posts have said that being unethical = leads to an unsuccessful business but the most successfull business's have been unethical at times, for example microsoft (anti trust case)

Within professions of all types you get wide ranges of levels of ethics.

I agree (weee are we finding middle ground or are we still a long way to go

Ethical people prefer to deal with people who are also ethical....

Unfortunately so do unethical people

I would deal with an unethical person if the business deal was good (but have my eyes so far open I would look like a startled deer)... but the dilemna most of the time would be how would i even know that person is unethical unless you accidently found out as in exy's case

So are you saying that exy shouldnt deal with an unethical REA?

 

[Aceyducey]

So are you saying that exy shouldnt deal with an unethical REA?

Preferably yes - but now in a legal relationship should stand by it.

And do more checking next time

At least the REA told Exy...... she was clear that it was a negotiating tactic on behalf of the buyer.

When on the other side buying properties we've had an REA tell us we didn't need to make a higher offer as the vendor would accept it.

We said fine and added that REA to our list of people we won't sell through

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[pennyk]

A bird in the hand...

If it were me, I'd go with the buyer you already have, not your friend. I think there is an issue of ethics in going against the contract. But also if you let this sale fall through and then your friend falls out for some reason, you've lost out both ways. I'm also always cautious about financial transactions with friends - there's lots more to lose than money. Either that, or I'd be upfront with the agent and tell them what's happened and see what they say. if they want it done thru them, negotiate a lower commission. But I'd be honest about what is happening.

We were in a similar situation, but as the buyers with our PPOR. This house was on the market for ages, we'd seen it at an open home 6 mths previously and weren't in a place to buy it. When we got a definite offer on our previous place, we came up to have another look, it had been taken off the market. So, we knocked on the door and bought it privately. But we were aware that the person, whilst their contract period had expired was bound to the agent, as we had been to an open home, and it stated in their sale contract that if the agent had introduced someone to the house, they were entitled to the commission. So, after we had already spoken to the owner, we rang the agent to let them know what we wanted to do, and they said that they would not pursue a commission. So, our experience is that honesty is the best policy.

Pen

 

[superted]

When on the other side buying properties we've had an REA tell us we didn't need to make a higher offer as the vendor would accept it.

We said fine and added that REA to our list of people we won't sell through

Cheers,

Aceyducey

Ethical people prefer to deal with people who are also ethical....

Unfortunately so do unethical people

And you still went through with the deal and had a participating hand in something that you and other members would call unethical

There are agents i have found that i would never sell through but definately would buy through as it is a BUSINESS transaction..

But Lying is lying period!!

 

[Aceyducey]

And you still went through with the deal and had a participating hand in something that you and other members would call unethical

No SuperTed, I'd call this incompetent, not unethical.

The agent should have said 'of course a higher bid would encourage the vendor to make a decision on your offer'.

The failure to do so is a sign of lack of experience, not lack of ethics.

And I certainly did not behave unethically by not raising my offer. That's a negotiating point, not an ethical issue.

Recognising the distinction between ethics & incompetence is important. There are many incompetent people who are ethical, they are simply not good at their jobs.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[superted]

Mmmm Acey

So now an agent that gives away, vendor to REA details given in confidence that do DIRECTLY affect the final sale price is now called incompetent not unethical.

Am i being over cynical or does this smell of hypocrisy


Ted

 

[Aceyducey]

Am i being over cynical or does this smell of hypocrisy

Think about it....

1) There was no advantage to the REA in making this statement. They neither benefited financially or in terms of time to money (faster sale, cash sooner) or in terms of future business, kickbacks, social or political gains of any kind. So no motive.

2) The REA did not supply any information about the vendor other than they would accept the current offer. This is common information provided in every negotiation. So nothing confidential provided - it was simply poor timing by the REA as to WHEN the information was provided.

I'm very comfortable with this situation ethically - your ethics may vary, though from this thread they don't seem to be as strict as mine

If instead the REA had said from the outset - look I know the vendor will sell at price X - how about you throw me $500 and I'll guarantee you'll get the place at that price - THAT's unethical!

Ted, I suggest you review some works on ethics to help you distinguish between an ethical dilemma & incompetence/naiveity/inexperience/over-enthusiasm/mistake.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[crest133]

My suggestion - Go discuss the matter with the agent on the basis of "wotif", asking what commission they would accept if you found a buyer yourself, especially if it was a friend who became aware of the property being for sale through your own efforts, not the agent's marketing. Although it is currently an exclusive agreement which assures them legal claim to commission for any sale during the contract period, you can amend the written agreement by mutual consent. Then introduce your friend to the agent and buying process. There are many instances especially in any equation where humans are involved where the lines are blurred. Better to clarify some of the blurred parts. Everything is negotiable with agents. Better too if your friend took some of the pressure off you by being patient or reorganising their affairs somewhat to suit the situation they're walking into. Give & take.
good luck
cheers

 

[JFEWSTER]

Exy

Stay with superteds advice. Wait till the contract runs out then sell privately.

Ideally wait 3 more months, just to be sure.

The only time you can get into trouble is if the agent can prove that he/she introduced the future buyer to the property.

Thats why many agents take names and addresses at "opens".

If its a close friend, then they probably already knew that the property was going to be for sale, rather than finding out by seeing the "for sale" sign.

 

[sbe]

Hmmmm.... now this one's controversial.....

Here's what I would do (because there's no reason you can't do this honestly, ethically AND protect your interests).

1. Get the offer from your friend in writing. Tell them what you're going to do so they are in the loop.
2. Call the agent. Tell them you have found a private buyer who will pay $x, without commission once the agency contract lapses. If they can sell it, they will need to sell it for a price that gives YOU $x back, after they take their commissions (ie increase the price - vendors right)
3. Wait and see.

One of four things will happen.
1. Agent will sell the house for the price you want.
Pro: Honoured original contract, no friend / family involved, good price.
Con: Friend misses out - but they should understand you were contracted to the situation.

2. Agent cannot talk buyer up to cover difference, agency lapses. Sell to friend.
Pro: Friend gets property, Honoured original contract, good price.
Con: Friend buys property.

3. Agent cannot talk buyer up to cover difference, agency lapses. Friend renegs on deal.
Pro: Honoured original contract, tried to help friend.
Con: No sale, friendship issues.

4. Agent cannot talk buyer up to cover difference, says you can sell to friend and releases contract. Sell to friend.
Pro: Friend gets property, Honoured original contract, good price.
Con: Friend buys property.

In any case, YOU come out with your integrity and honour intact. At the end of the day, sometimes it can be all you have. Dont throw it away.

Best of luck.

Simon.

 

[stanley]

Ted, I suggest you review some works on ethics to help you distinguish between an ethical dilemma & incompetence/naiveity/inexperience/over-enthusiasm/mistake.

I disagree.

Based on what Exy has said, i would classify this particular RE agent as unethical; and perhaps also incompetent, naive, inexperienced, over enthusiastic and erroneous in her judgement.

I base this on:

She told a buyer who had put in an offer that a second & third buyer had offered more than them when in actual fact there were no second & third buyers.

According to the Real Estate Institute of Queensland (REIQ), all RE agents must abide by a Code of Ethics. This includes:

Article 11. Duty to Ascertain Facts
It is the duty of a Member to act professionally and to ascertain all available pertinent facts concerning the property accepted under an agency so that, in offering the property, the Member may avoid error, exaggeration, concealment or misrepresentation.

Article 12. Protection Against Misrepresentation/Offensive Behaviour
It is the duty of every Member to protect the public against fraud, misrepresentation, offensive behaviour or unethical practices in real estate transactions.

According to the REINSW RE agents must abide by a Code of Conduct which includes:

2.6.1 A member must act in accordance with the instructions of a client except where to do so would be unlawful or contrary to good agency practice.

2.6.2 An agent must not:

(a) advertise or offer for sale or lease any real estate or business at a price or on terms different from that authorised by the client;

2.6.3 The price at which a member offers a property shall be in accordance with the instructions of the client. However, if the member considers that the price asked by a client is more or less than fair market value, the member shall advise the client accordingly.

2.7 A member must act fairly and honestly and to the best of his or her knowledge and ability with all parties in a transaction.

2.7.1 A member must not mislead or deceive any parties in negotiations or a transaction.

... amongst other things that can be found here.

For the record, i think JFEWSTER has come up with a good suggestion.

 

[Exy]

Hi All,

Thank you for all your help and advice.

I spent the weekend thinking up of things to say and playing out different scenarios. At the end of the day, it all worked out well for us and I really didn't have to say too much.

I got a call on Monday from the REA saying the buyer had pulled out because they found another property and were glad we didn't send them the signed contract. In my rush to get home and the dilemma I was facing, I actually forgot to bring the contract home to be signed by my wife. I ended up telling the REA I no longer wanted to put the property on the market as a friend had lent us money to use as deposit in building our new home and therefore did not have a need to sell. The REA agreed and didn't even try to talk us out of it.

Also, my friend stuck to their word and deposited the money into my account first thing Monday. I have just heard from my broker and formal approval is any day now. Now, my friend and I just have to pick a good date to exchange/settle.

Thank you once again for your feedback.

Exy

 

[Aceyducey]

Exy,

I am VERY disappointed at your decision to pursue an unethical & illegal course.

You lied to the agent and are deliberately collaborating to breach the legal agreement with that agent.

When the agent discovers your actions, they are entirely within their rights to sue you for their commission, regardless of when you exchange and settle, because you have already taken a consideration via the deposit.

If you were an agent there would be a number of people on this forum up in arms about your unethical behaviour.

Aceyducey

 

[superted]

Good for you Exy as you didnt end up dealing with that unethical agent ;-).

Exy didnt lie, he only divulged enough of the truth that suited the situation. Which is actually a win for everyone.

Id still wait the 2 weeks before dealing with your client/friend YOU (not the agent) introduced to the property.

Funny things always sought themselves out in the end.

Waiting