Don’t even get me started on what a colossally bad idea the posting of listings is for everyone concerned.
The government of Canada requiring us to allow unrepresented Sellers the opportunity to place their properties on MLS so that fully-represented Buyers can jump at the opportunity to exercise their finely-honed negotiation skills till the cows come home against these unrepresented Sellers is akin to a farmer directing a ranch hand to leave the chicken coop door open to make it easier for the fox to visit the hens.
Absolutely nobody benefits from the posting of listings – Sellers, Buyers, nor agents. It is a smoke and mirrors sideshow, at best. Something Mr. Haney of the old TV show ‘Green Acres’ might try to pull. Brokerages choosing to exercise the option of posting their listings should be ashamed of themselves. OK, diatribe over.
Back at the ranch, we Brokerages must be able to effectively handle these situations when they occasionally occur.
Let me tell you a story.
We represented a Buyer on a posted listing this week. Offers were required to be faxed, not personally presented. (Don’t get me started on that one, either!) This posted listing invites the co-op brokerage to enter into a 2.5% commission agreement directly with the Seller. Fair enough, we did.
What I want to draw to everyone’s attention is the need to very, very carefully review every clause in the Schedule B’s that are attached to posted listings.
This particular Schedule B had a clause in it directing the deposit to be held by the Seller’s solicitor, with no interest. I don’t think so! Brokerages have requirements to disburse earned commissions to co-op brokerages within specific timeframes after deal completions. Lawyers do not. We sometimes have waited weeks on end for lawyers to disburse balance of commission cheques.
We deleted their clause and inserted one having the Buyer and Seller direct that the substantial deposit be held in my trust account with interest being paid. That change was accepted.
More importantly, the brokerage processing the posting of the listing has arbitrarily decided that it is entitled to $195 of the selling brokerage’s commission and has included a clause in their Schedule B directing the lawyer to pay this ‘processing fee’ directly to the listing brokerage from the selling brokerage’s commission, at completion. Yep, you read right.
This is so wrong I just want to spit.
Who are they to require the co-op brokerage to underwrite their inability to secure a listing compensating them what they feel their miserable services are worth? Moreover, who are they to put that cash grab into the Schedule B? The offer is appropriate only for terms of sale between the Buyer and the Seller.
Agent compensation is to be addressed separately between the Seller, the Buyer and their respective agents in individual representation agreements. It is not appropriate to slip a clause into the last clauses of the Schedule B requiring the co-op broker to pay the Listing Brokerage anything whatsoever. Sleaze.
We deleted the clause authorizing payment of their misplaced ‘administration fee’ from the Schedule B and had our Buyer client initial this deletion. Our faxed offer came back to us as a sign-back, minus the Seller’s initials on this deletion. They really want us to pay their $195.
I am appalled by this brokerage’s colossal lack of professionalism. It is no wonder we all are under such attack on so many fronts these days.
Real estate agents’ fortunes and reputations are not destined for improvement until we are able to put our client’s interests above our own and we, as agents, work collaboratively together to get the deal done for our respective clients. Have your clients pay you what you think your services are worth. Don’t look to others’ clients to pay you your fees.
As a final shot, the property has been on the market for almost eight months.
You get what you pay for. Or in this situation, you get what someone is trying to get someone else to pay for.