The point by a concerned official service...
"It is your responsibility to search for an agent who will represent your interest in the real estate transaction. If you want someone to represent only your interest, consider hiring an 'exclusive buyer agent' who will be working for you."
What else can be added, here is a text every single word of which has its importance, which proudly shows the evidence and whose logical aspect could appear as a pleonasm if there whas not what follows...
It must indeed be well understood by the clientele that the rule, when it exists, insures only a limited protection and that it can be totally unable to stop the unchecked assertions as, for example, to be : completely, entirely, only, exclusively in the service of the customer... furthermore a nonsense outside our Society.
The presence and use of these terms must be approached with much caution, because they can be very well part of a strategy of agents' adaptation to "double gaming" when it is question to only lean on a text of law not governing exactly the provider's commitment modalities, as that of January 2nd, 1970 "Hoguet" in France, which only deals with the transactional intermediation.
The report is evident : in Europe as somewhere else, to use as means of rhetoric argumentation the false appearance is a part of realities of the double-game, the customer has consequently no other choice than the one of an approved agent.
Jurists tell the truth...
"Law firms wouldn't represent different parties in the same financial transaction because the conflicts of interest between the buyer (who seeks the lowest price possible) and the seller (who seeks the highest price possible) are so fundamentally incompatible as to make it impossible to represent both sides fairly. Throw in the fees for "representing" both sides at once and the potential for unfair dealing intensifies. That is why this conduct has always been wrong for fiduciaries."*
So the fundamentally incompatible can become bearable from a jurisdiction to another, it will be advisable from then on to refer to the simple common sense which sees the interests of the clientele coinciding with the use in the specialization and the unique allegiance of the provider. This standardization towards the exclusivity is already established at the international level by associations as in Europe.
"Now that dual agency is recognized as illegal, many real estate firms are presenting "disclosed dual agency" to consumers as if it were an alternative service, rather than another term for disloyalty. Disclosure of dual agency doesn't resolve conflicts of interest : it just attempts to legitimize them. The law still would hold home sellers accountable for their agent's actions --a buyer can sue for his money back after closing-- and the buyer would continue to have no assurance that the advice the agent provided him led to the best possible deal."*
What is only moving the problem and always contains same inconvenience at several levels : dissatisfaction of the consumer, the long procedures and mainly costing time for our court intitutions.
It is evident that this "alternative" practice of combination of the services, offers of "packages" in all included is misleading all the more while it is perfectly legal, quite common in Europe, the risk of possible pursuit turning out rather low considering little of information given to the customer. The action a priori is thus indispensable, it begins with the delivery of this information and one must appeal to the responsibility of the public, the first one judges of his interest.
"Disclosed dual agency is not an option a sophisticated consumer would choose. The sophisticated consumer knows, at the beginning of the process, whether he wants to spend the extra money to have the loyalty and protection of a broker acting as an agent. He does not begin an agency relationship or agree to pay the full fee only to consent to the agent's infidelity in the middle of a transaction, just so the agent can collect another fee in the same deal."*
Unmistakably the way of the reason, but until the example of what remains an elite is followed and until the legalism is acceptable, the association militates so that everything is at least clear for the clientele, which one "dual-agent" cannot pretend to be exclusive. In this case, the only current solution for the customer wishing to secure his purchase and real estate investment in Europe is the approval.
* These extracts arise from the text : Real Estate Agents : Get Your Money's Worth, appeared in Consumer Reports and written by Maureen F. Glasheen, former councillor with the State Department of the city of New York
"Lawsuits involving dual agency are becoming more and more common. Real estate brokers and agents should give serious thought to all potential consequences before entering into a dual agency situation."
The Pitfalls Of Dual Agency Stanley F. Bronstein, Real Estate Attorney.
You need more ? Contact us.
Exclusive Buyer Agent & property finder Aberdeen Amsterdam Athens Barcelona Bayonne Belgrad Berlin Bern Biarritz Bordeaux Bratislava Brussels Bucarest Budapest Copenhague Dublin Dusseldorf Edinburgh Florence Geneva Glasgow Helsinki Innsbruck Leeds Lille Lisbon Ljubljana London Lyon Luxembourg Madrid Malta Manchester Marseille Milan Munich Nice Nicosie Paris Porto Prague Riga Rome Salzburg Seville Sofia Split Strasbourg Stockholm Tallinn Toulouse Venice Vienna Vilnius Warsaw Zagreb Zurich...
The European Exclusive Buyer Agents Society (AFCIE) is the reference body for : expatriate & offshore Real Estate - Real Estate investments & transactions - Real Estate Legal advices - Ce site en Français