Seller agent – dual agent? Agency hot potato!

In a recent article, I offered my opinion that a listing agent can better avoid liability by avoiding dual agency. If a buyer approaches you about buying your listing by all means sell it, but do so as a seller’s agent. I acknowledge that this is not always possible, but all too often listing agents will immediately jump to a dual agency relationship when they could have sold the property as a seller agent only without any compromise in the commission earned.

I heard from a number of you that disagree with my approach. Some of you would prefer to take on as clients (agency relationship) those buyers who seek to buy your listing and who are not already represented. Some members have simply told me that the best practice is to step up to the plate and be an agent for both parties and give them the benefit of representation.

I have heard these arguments, but continue to hold onto my original opinion. All too often listing agents unwittingly take on a fiduciary responsibility for a buyer and then fail to follow through. When you begin your representation as a buyer’s agent, you tend to think on the buyer’s behalf from inception to settlement. Listing agents who subsequently become dual agents somehow, in my opinion and only on occasion, will focus more on closure than the nuisances of advising buyers of the myriad problems to investigate. Certainly, my experience as a litigator (not as a real estate licensee) has suggested to me that taking a buyer as a client opens the door to liability far greater than representing a seller alone.

Does anyone else think like me? Let’s hear your thoughts.

No related posts.

 Print This Article

Tags: agency, dual

This entry was posted on Monday, February 16th, 2009 at 8:28 am and is filed under Legal Issues. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.