Quote:
Originally Posted by FrugalFish
You bring up an interesting point that I haven't seen in this thread yet.
I've been told that in some parts of the US (generally the further east you are), both seller and buyer agents are legally obligated to put the best interests of the seller first. The further west you move, the less likely this is to be true. Here in CA the agent chosen by a buyer is obligated to see to the buyer's interests first and foremost.
I've read that if you live in an area where your agent, as a buyers agent, must serve the seller first and foremost, that you should consider hiring your own independent buyers agent- someone who is paid by the buyer (either in a commission or with a negotiated flat rate) with an obligation to serve only the buyer.
In some parts of the country it seems like the seller ends up with 2 agents- the second one unknown until he/she brings them buyers. It seems very out of balance for the buyers IMO- we would have been up a creek if our agent could not have stood firm for our best interests.
|
Not true in RI. We have seller's and buyer's agents. The buyer will sign a disclosure form with their agent and the agent has fiduciary duties to the buyer (care, accounting, obedience, loyalty and disclosure). They only represent the buyer.