All Forum Posts by: Dan DiFilippo

@Corby Goade different states have different disclosure requirements. Some states permit you to just say "I don't know" as a disclosure. And agents are only required to disclose issues in their own homes if they're aware of them. Other states only permit "Yes/No" or "No Representation". And no representation is unavailable to agents. Which means your answers have to be affirmative answers. "There expressly isn't a problem with the roof". "There expressly aren't any structural issues."

You're creating liability for yourself unless you essentially get a pre-market inspection and then some.

@Ralph Nagle

You seem like a real tragedy of an existence.

If anything, agents help keep prices stable and incentivize longer-term ownership in homes instead of speculative transaction.

I came here to tell @James Hamling that he was wrong, but going through this whole thread, he's not only pretty much 100% correct, but boy do I pity him for having to put up with the lot of you jokers.

@Chris Dee

So presuming your state works the way mine does, and I expect it would. I understand this element of agency law is pretty typical.

You can't force him to write an offer for you. He's not obligated. In fact, he *can't* submit an offer for you because you won't sign his agreement.

He showed you the house already. Agents *can* show houses without a signed agreement. But the reason they might not is that it gives them less protection in terms of being able to guarantee themselves any compensation for the work they're doing showing homes. But this agent did show you the home without a written agreement.

Unfortunately for you, an agreement beforehand would have done more to protect *you*. Because now the agent is your procuring cause in the purchase, should you go on to buy that particular house. They'd have a strong claim for compensation.

Something else you should consider here is that it's possible you read the contract incorrectly. Most contracts state something to the effe t of "compensation due to agent shall be_____________" and then they have filled in "3% of final sales price" or whatever their number is. And you read that part of the contract and think that it means you owe that money. If you read through the remainder of the compensation section, however,it says that the agent will first seek that amount from the listing agent or seller. In this case, a number like 3% is what the contract states, you *are* ultimately responsible for it, but won't have to worry about paying it so long as the listing offers a sufficient commission to cover it.

I guess you just don't know.  Or perhaps it's the case that it rarely happens in your market.  Again, though, I don't have any indication of where this sale is taking place and there are plenty of markets, including mine, where dual representation is common in this kind of circumstance.  To immediately assume that it's impossible is just absurd.  I don't know why you'd do it.

This is not necessarily the case at all, no. Like at all.  Without knowing where this is taking place or what the contract details are, we cannot know that the agent is working for the seller solely.

It likely depends on your market and the contract that you used.  My own market (and seemingly this forum) is full of people who have the same misconception that once you're out of what's commonly referred to as "the inspections period", that you are no longer permitted to make inspections of the property.  The contract we typically use does not state that explicitly though, and the reality is that you can still inspect up until day of closing.  Obviously, your contract may be different.

A good person to talk to would be an agent representing you.

@Lucia Rushton then why are you making rookie mistakes?

@Lucia Rushton I have to assume you're a rookie, based on what you've said; yes.

@Lucia Rushton careful, rookie. You don't know it's at a discount.