For Awareness - Moehrl v National Assoc of Realtors

[Ryan Wamsat]

I ran across this article, which may be of interest to many here: Class-action lawsuit takes aim at real estate commissions

The article contains a link to a PDF of the complaint, which is Moehrl v National Assoc of Realtors.  

This section seems to be at the heart of the matter:

"This method of setting the buyer broker commission is wholly different from the method that would exist absent the Buyer Broker Commission Rule. Absent this rule, buyer brokers would be paid by their clients and would compete to be retained by offering a lower commission.The Buyer Broker Commission Rule ensures that price competition among buyer brokers is restrained because the person retaining the buyer broker, the buyer, does not negotiate or pay his or her broker’s commission. In addition,the seller’s inflated commission offer cannot be reduced by buyers or their brokers, as Defendants also prohibit buyer brokers from making home purchase offers contingent on the reduction of the buyer broker commission.Real estate brokers handle most residential real estate sales in the United States.In a typical transaction, separate brokers will represent the seller and the buyer of a home.Both the buyer broker and seller broker(also known as the listing broker)are paid a percentage of the property’s sales price.Currently, total broker compensation in the United States is typically five to six percent of the home sales price, with approximately half of that amount—and increasingly more than half—paid to the buyer broker."

[Steve Vaughan]

 At least there are 2 of us out there, Mike.  

I'm not opposed to the idea of someone paying their listing agent to specifically market their home.  A ton of people need the help and there are some great agents out there.  But why are they forced to pay for their future buyers' agent 2.5-3% as well? 

Agents/agencies will argue the 2.5-3% is negotiable, but its really not and only a tiny % of sellers change it. If they do, their listings will be ignored and avoided.  Collusion and a slap in the face to what being a fiduciary is supposed to be.

If buyers started having to educate themselves or pay out of pocket for THEIR agent,  they'd have a huge incentive to educate themselves and shop around. Can't have that.  

The 'it costs you nothing to have a buyers agent' argument would collapse as it should. That's total BS.   You and I both raise our prices when agents are involved as do the majority of sellers everywhere.  They have to. I always sell 6% less solo.  On my last home this saved the buyer $13k.