All Forum Posts by: Aaron Gough

I was finally able to acquire the data after working with the county for a week!  

I own a real estate brokerage in AZ which helps operators of sober living homes buy and sell real estate for use as sober living home.   One of our associates is starting a real estate syndication to purchase and run sober living homes.  They're already running multiple homes and wish to expand. If you would be interested in my putting you in touch with her, please contact me.  Thank you!

I have a list of property addresses and the parcel number in Excel.  I need to add a column for the Property ID.  The only way I know how to get the property ID is to search the assessor or appraisal district website with the address or parcel number, then find the Property ID on that page, then save it.

Is there a downloadable data file will all Property ID's somewhere?
Or, is there some kind of formula I can apply to the parcel number that will give me the Property ID?  I don't know that there is any way to "calculate" the Property ID if I have the parcel number but figured it wouldn't hurt to ask!

Quote from @Account Closed:

Quote from @Aaron Gough:

Quote from @Account Closed:

Quote from @Aaron Gough:

In AZ, sometimes an unrepresented buyer will want to buy a property I'm listing. In order to make their offer stronger, they will ask me to apply the commission normally reserved for the buyer's agent to their offer. In AZ I'm under no obligation to do that--the commission agreement is between me and my seller. If there is no buyer's agent, then I retain the full commission including the buyer's side commission regardless of what an unrepresented buyer asks. Now of course if the unrepresented buyer asks me to be his agent and I agree, and then asks me to apply the buyer side commission to his offer, I can choose to do that or not, in full or in part, at my discretion. But in AZ an unrepresented buyer has no power to dictate what happens to commission in any way.

How does this work in TX? If an unrepresented buyer asks you to give up the buyer side commission for him to strengthen his offer, what are your legal options and obligations?  I know we each have our own policies as to how to handle these situations, but I'm wondering what the law says about your obligations in these situations?

I'm an unrepresented buyer. I buy both in Arizona & Texas. If I make an offer, I've taken into consideration that a buying agent is not necessary nor should anyone be paid for what turns out to be dual agency.

You're not doing any extra work and you aren't help me get a better deal.

If the price isn't dropped by the buying agent fee amount, I'll find a different deal. There just isn't enough margin to pay both sides in today's market with high interest rates. 

Maybe it's approaches like that which have caused NAR to get sued?

Is The 6% Fee For Selling A House About To Get Trashed?

Antitrust Lawsuit Against the NAR

The case, filed in Missouri is Burnett et al v. National Association of Realtors et al

Could very well be!  I do think there's a widespread misperception that commission for the buyer's agent "passes" to the buyer to do what the buyer wishes if the buyer has no agent. I think lots of investors without a buyer agent will instruct a listing agent to do something with the commission, not realizing that the listing agent has no legal obligation to do so.  If we find our investors a deal that we're also listing, we take both sides since that's what our listing agreement instructions from the seller state.  So we still get paid for both sides whether or not an investor uses us on the purchase.  An investor really should use us on the purchase, because we're still getting paid the same--and if we are not repping the investor, we're legally required to give the seller any information we learn which could give the seller an advantage over the investor.  If the investor allows us to represent him on the buyer side, we aren't allowed to give the seller that information.  Also, if our investor client were to be the second best offer in a multiple offer situation, we'd apply an amount of our buyer side commission toward strengthening his offer to get him into first place in a multiple offer situation.  For us this strikes the right balance of being duly compensated for finding our investors deals, but making sure our commission never costs our investors a single deal.

mmmm, no. The buyer pays the commissions. When you pay for your bread at the store, you are paying for the diesel that went into the truck that delivered the bread. The price is baked in. The property can sell for less, if no agent fees have to be paid. The bottom line to the seller is the bottom line, whichever way it is reached.

A $500,000 property with a 6% commission has a $30,000 diesel fuel expense. If I drive to the baker and buy my bread there, it's cheaper. So, I'm okay with an agent getting 3% for bringing the property to market. They have done what they've been hired to do. However, 6% is out of the question and unearned.

I will buy a $500,000 property minus 3% ($15,000) for $485,000 minus whatever I can negotiate. Since you, as the listing agent are going to represent the seller as best you can, you can not possible include my best interests at the same time.

Kinda like putting a screen door on a submarine. It seemed like a good idea at the time.

I understand where you are coming from, and I understand why you don't like using agents.  I have plenty of opinions about how things should work vs how they do in the industry!  My point here was purely a legal one, that being that buyers with no agent have no authority over the direction of commission in AZ (or TX) since sellers pay commissions on listings in almost every case.  Most agents and sellers sign an exclusive right to sell, meaning an agent is paid the commission no matter where, how, or who the house sells to, and no matter what an unrepresented buyer requests. Most unrepresented buyers end up finding the home they buy through the efforts of the listing agent, even if it's to put the home in the places online that an unrepresented buyer finds the home, or a sign in the yard, etc.  Whether or not those efforts are worth 6%--totally understand people thinking they're not. 

My point about agency is simply that in states or situations where an agent chooses to not hand their commission over to an investor to give them a better deal, they're making the same whether the investor uses them as an agent or not.  If that's the case, then a buyer is better off just getting an agent so at least somebody is fighting for them, and they have the additional benefit of their agent's liability in the transaction.

If an agent is representing only the seller, they have a legal obligation to do whatever they can within the law to advantage the seller over the buyer.  But if the buyer signs agency with the listing agent, now the listing agent has a fiduciary duty to both buyer and seller equally.  If they don't represent both equally and there's evidence of that they'd lose their license.

I work with investors who find homes on their own, and we have an arrangement where sometimes we'll be their agent for 1% and refund the 2% back towards their closing costs.  Investors do this because an agent adds a layer of liability between the investor and seller which can be hugely beneficial to the investor--plus well worth the 1% if the agent can negotiate.

As an agent, I'll actually hire another agent to help me sell a property sometimes just because of how valuable that layer of liability is!

Quote from @Account Closed:

Quote from @Aaron Gough:

In AZ, sometimes an unrepresented buyer will want to buy a property I'm listing. In order to make their offer stronger, they will ask me to apply the commission normally reserved for the buyer's agent to their offer. In AZ I'm under no obligation to do that--the commission agreement is between me and my seller. If there is no buyer's agent, then I retain the full commission including the buyer's side commission regardless of what an unrepresented buyer asks. Now of course if the unrepresented buyer asks me to be his agent and I agree, and then asks me to apply the buyer side commission to his offer, I can choose to do that or not, in full or in part, at my discretion. But in AZ an unrepresented buyer has no power to dictate what happens to commission in any way.

How does this work in TX? If an unrepresented buyer asks you to give up the buyer side commission for him to strengthen his offer, what are your legal options and obligations?  I know we each have our own policies as to how to handle these situations, but I'm wondering what the law says about your obligations in these situations?

I'm an unrepresented buyer. I buy both in Arizona & Texas. If I make an offer, I've taken into consideration that a buying agent is not necessary nor should anyone be paid for what turns out to be dual agency.

You're not doing any extra work and you aren't help me get a better deal.

If the price isn't dropped by the buying agent fee amount, I'll find a different deal. There just isn't enough margin to pay both sides in today's market with high interest rates. 

Maybe it's approaches like that which have caused NAR to get sued?

Is The 6% Fee For Selling A House About To Get Trashed?

Antitrust Lawsuit Against the NAR

The case, filed in Missouri is Burnett et al v. National Association of Realtors et al

Could very well be!  I do think there's a widespread misperception that commission for the buyer's agent "passes" to the buyer to do what the buyer wishes if the buyer has no agent. I think lots of investors without a buyer agent will instruct a listing agent to do something with the commission, not realizing that the listing agent has no legal obligation to do so.  If we find our investors a deal that we're also listing, we take both sides since that's what our listing agreement instructions from the seller state.  So we still get paid for both sides whether or not an investor uses us on the purchase.  An investor really should use us on the purchase, because we're still getting paid the same--and if we are not repping the investor, we're legally required to give the seller any information we learn which could give the seller an advantage over the investor.  If the investor allows us to represent him on the buyer side, we aren't allowed to give the seller that information.  Also, if our investor client were to be the second best offer in a multiple offer situation, we'd apply an amount of our buyer side commission toward strengthening his offer to get him into first place in a multiple offer situation.  For us this strikes the right balance of being duly compensated for finding our investors deals, but making sure our commission never costs our investors a single deal.

So if an unrepresented seller asks you to forfeit the buyer side commission to make his offer better, it's your call whether or not you decide to do that?

In AZ, sometimes an unrepresented buyer will want to buy a property I'm listing. In order to make their offer stronger, they will ask me to apply the commission normally reserved for the buyer's agent to their offer. In AZ I'm under no obligation to do that--the commission agreement is between me and my seller. If there is no buyer's agent, then I retain the full commission including the buyer's side commission regardless of what an unrepresented buyer asks. Now of course if the unrepresented buyer asks me to be his agent and I agree, and then asks me to apply the buyer side commission to his offer, I can choose to do that or not, in full or in part, at my discretion. But in AZ an unrepresented buyer has no power to dictate what happens to commission in any way.

How does this work in TX? If an unrepresented buyer asks you to give up the buyer side commission for him to strengthen his offer, what are your legal options and obligations?  I know we each have our own policies as to how to handle these situations, but I'm wondering what the law says about your obligations in these situations?

There are many companies in the US which rent property from landlords at a higher than market rate, and then sublease the rooms to people in a sober living program, recover program, or halfway house program.  For example, Oxford House is a great example of this.  They're a nationwide organization who rents homes from landlords, and subleases the rooms to participants in recovery organizations.

For any readers of this post, I'd like to know of any organizations in your area who rent properties from landlords, and sublease them to people in sober living and recovery programs.  If you can please let me know which organizations you know of in these spaces, and in which location(s) you know them to be operating, I would be extremely grateful!!  We have investors all over the country with properties ready for this use and I'd like to point them in the right direction even if I'm not personally active in those markets!  We're very passionate about helping people in recovery, and info you can provide about who is active in your market would go a long way towards helping people in recovery! 

Thank you all in advance for you help!

Good luck, feel welcome to circle back here if you run into any issues or have further questions!

If you are looking for a buyer:

-You can search tax records for buyers of similar opportunities in the past, then skip trace the buyer name to find the contact details

-Meet-up groups

-Facebook groups

-Wholesaling groups if wholesaling is a thing in your area

-You can contact SFR funds active in your area and ask if you bring then properties to buy if they'll use you as your broker

If you are looking for an investor:

-In our area, doctors and high income earners are often active in investing in real estate and real estate development, if you're comfortable pitching them

-Meet up groups and facebook groups again are a good source of networking, just make sure "investors" aren't actually buyers who would cut you out of the deal

For either, try Boston REIA: https://boston-reia.com/