I want to be a Buyer Agent in NSW or other...
Reply: 1.2.1.2.1
From: Mike .
Hi Ross,
Thanks for your thoughts so far re licensing and Scouts/Finders.
If you don't mind I'd like to reply to some comments you made in Post 18.
"But yes... a finder could be classed as a non-agent... but I'd bet the "ranch" that person will NOT behave like a non-agent."
What is a non-agent? How should a non-agent behave? How do you think a Finder would behave? Are you saying a non-agent is a Marketer? A simple due diligence question all buyers should ask anyone flogging real estate is, "Are you a fully-licensed Real Estate Agent? Can I see your license, please?" Then verify this with the relevant State authority. If they are not fully-licensed it is Caveat Emptor and the buyer should take full responsibility of the outcome of their decisions from that point on.
"True. But I'm 100% sure that at some time... the non-agent will comment on value... or make a suggestion regarding the deal. Thereby creating an agency relationship (...legally speaking)."
There is an old legal saying, "If it isn't down on paper, it didn't happen."
"I think you've suggested and/or advised about market value. Under market value... attention of buyer... profitable deal? Therefore... you're acting for somebody... (the buyer's benefit?)"
The Finder could simply have the Looker sign a disclaimer to the effect that the Looker understands and agrees that the Finder is NOT working for the benefit of the Looker.
The Finder is not paid a retainer unlike a Buyers agent who gets a fee whether the client buys or not. A Finder without an agency agreement cannot do this.
"What happens and what is legal all depends on what the judge says when... the Sh!t hits the fan."
The matter would be thrown out of court because there is no evidence of an agency relationship. "If it aint on paper...etc." Besides Caveat Emptor has been satisfied with the Finder's disclaimer.
"But at the end of the day... I believe in 100% representation! Represent the seller, the buyer or yourself. But make sure everyone knows who you really represent! (* I think one of my friends calls it transparency.)"
That's what I've been saying re the Finder's disclaimer. Why would a Finder get licensed? Would you have them take out professional indemnity insurance, as well? Then they WOULD be vulnerable to being sued. It's a nonsense!
"A buyer agent doesn't list property for sale therefore... it's NOT a silent listing. We just know about certain information and we used that to find and BUY. (We represent the buyer and we therefore... chase expired lisitngs... follow unkept homes... we run with a lead... we hear a rumour and we chase it.. some seller agents feed us info, etc." [Your quote from Buyer's Agents - Silent listings]
So you run with leads and chase rumours. That's all a Finder provides. Would you ever consider sueing someone for providing a lead or a rumour? Methinks the courts would throw it out.
In conclusion: I think it is bureaucratic overkill to expect a Finder to get licensed and insured. The industry that legislated that are the same one's to benefit from the fees and premiums - it's a bl*y rort!
<p>
As for the Looker: I think anyone making a purchasing decision and risking tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars solely on the word of anyone licensed or un-licensed should accept responsibility for the outcome if it goes pear-shaped. To shift blame without having done one's own due diligence is also a nonsense.
<p>
Regards, Mike (trying to unlock horns
Reply: 1.2.1.2.1
From: Mike .
Hi Ross,
Thanks for your thoughts so far re licensing and Scouts/Finders.
If you don't mind I'd like to reply to some comments you made in Post 18.
"But yes... a finder could be classed as a non-agent... but I'd bet the "ranch" that person will NOT behave like a non-agent."
What is a non-agent? How should a non-agent behave? How do you think a Finder would behave? Are you saying a non-agent is a Marketer? A simple due diligence question all buyers should ask anyone flogging real estate is, "Are you a fully-licensed Real Estate Agent? Can I see your license, please?" Then verify this with the relevant State authority. If they are not fully-licensed it is Caveat Emptor and the buyer should take full responsibility of the outcome of their decisions from that point on.
"True. But I'm 100% sure that at some time... the non-agent will comment on value... or make a suggestion regarding the deal. Thereby creating an agency relationship (...legally speaking)."
There is an old legal saying, "If it isn't down on paper, it didn't happen."
"I think you've suggested and/or advised about market value. Under market value... attention of buyer... profitable deal? Therefore... you're acting for somebody... (the buyer's benefit?)"
The Finder could simply have the Looker sign a disclaimer to the effect that the Looker understands and agrees that the Finder is NOT working for the benefit of the Looker.
The Finder is not paid a retainer unlike a Buyers agent who gets a fee whether the client buys or not. A Finder without an agency agreement cannot do this.
"What happens and what is legal all depends on what the judge says when... the Sh!t hits the fan."
The matter would be thrown out of court because there is no evidence of an agency relationship. "If it aint on paper...etc." Besides Caveat Emptor has been satisfied with the Finder's disclaimer.
"But at the end of the day... I believe in 100% representation! Represent the seller, the buyer or yourself. But make sure everyone knows who you really represent! (* I think one of my friends calls it transparency.)"
That's what I've been saying re the Finder's disclaimer. Why would a Finder get licensed? Would you have them take out professional indemnity insurance, as well? Then they WOULD be vulnerable to being sued. It's a nonsense!
"A buyer agent doesn't list property for sale therefore... it's NOT a silent listing. We just know about certain information and we used that to find and BUY. (We represent the buyer and we therefore... chase expired lisitngs... follow unkept homes... we run with a lead... we hear a rumour and we chase it.. some seller agents feed us info, etc." [Your quote from Buyer's Agents - Silent listings]
So you run with leads and chase rumours. That's all a Finder provides. Would you ever consider sueing someone for providing a lead or a rumour? Methinks the courts would throw it out.
In conclusion: I think it is bureaucratic overkill to expect a Finder to get licensed and insured. The industry that legislated that are the same one's to benefit from the fees and premiums - it's a bl*y rort!
<p>
As for the Looker: I think anyone making a purchasing decision and risking tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars solely on the word of anyone licensed or un-licensed should accept responsibility for the outcome if it goes pear-shaped. To shift blame without having done one's own due diligence is also a nonsense.
<p>
Regards, Mike (trying to unlock horns
Last edited by a moderator: