Comments on: The Client is Never Always Right

By: Cyndee Haydon

Cyndee Haydon — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 05:25:30 +0000

Ardell – I enjoyed this post from both sides – yours and Broker Bryant’s, especially since I practice here in Florida myself. Was just exploring here in Rain City.

By: Up2Date » Blog Archive » Attention Realtors: From Which Side of the Mouth do you Speak?

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 03:42:49 +0000

[...] I read many Real Estate Blogs, and a very good one is the Rain City Guide, it offers great content and is well written. Ardell DellaLoggia does a great jog of explaining what fiduciary duty represents. [...]

By: ARDELL

ARDELL — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 16:03:22 +0000

Look forward to it, Craig.

I once polled consumers about what they think an “agent” is, as the legal definitions are not as interesting to me as the public’s perceptions.

My favorite came from my brother. He said I want to say to my agent, “See that house over there. I want it. Then I want to come back in a month or so with my stuff, and move into it.”

By: craig

craig — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 15:54:50 +0000

For the record, the terms “agent” and “fiduciary” are not synonymous. An agent is one who acts on behalf of and can legally bind another, the principal. An agent does not necessarily need to be a fiduciary, and an agent/principal relationship is not necessarily a fiduciary relationship. On the other hand, there are standards to which an agent will be held. Unfortunately, I don’t have the time right now to research the issue in order speak authoritatively on the issue. Perhaps my next post…

By: Broker Bryant

Broker Bryant — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:40:20 +0000

Marc and ARDELL, You both make good points about it really being how the broker acts as to what his relationship truly is. With that in mind, I would certainly rather be standing in front of a Judge explaining how I crossed the line from TB to agency than the other way around. My point is. if you hold yourself out as an agent then you best be performing up to the fiduciary responsibilities required. And I think that is the rare agent that can do that.

By: Marc Vitorillo

Marc Vitorillo — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:23:37 +0000

Ardell makes a very good point about BB that he may act at a higher level than TB. I just think that clients get the “deer caught in headlights” when you mention about fiduciary. If some agents, don’t fully understand the concept, imagine the customer hearing this the first time. I was in a 150-agent office before and this would make sense for a broker to have their agents have the default of TB to fully have the best interest for their client. As a Broker/Owner of two real estate boutique companies, I would much prefer the Single-Agency Fiduciary with the Right to Transition to TB (transition when you are showing homes that are your own listings). This way the default is always at the client’s best interest.

Now, it’s not merely the label of either Single-Agency or TB, but also the agent’s action. I have seen way to many times, when a seasoned agent gives me the whole story about how motivated their seller’s are as they have 4 other properties to sell (and that’s without me asking about it first).

Just like someone saying they are full-commission or full-service, it really depends on what they actually do for the client. Period.

By: Broker Bryant

Broker Bryant — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:41:15 +0000

ARDELL, Lack of training for the broker and lack of education for the consumer pretty much says it all. I feel a post coming on

By: ARDELL

ARDELL — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 02:29:43 +0000

BB,
You should talk to Bob Delmar about the “Walk Like a Duck Trials” in Florida. When you say TB and act at a higher level than TB, they hold you to single agency fiduciary standard. At least that’s what I heard from Delmar who is very active in Agency issues in Florida.

I’m not sure how they resolved that. The problem was that there was no training on how to BE a Transaction Broker vs. an agent, so when the Broker tried to use the “we’re a Transaction Broker” defense, that didn’t stick because the licensee acted the same way as he did when acting as a single agent. So changing your Title doesn’t work. And changing how you work, is near impossible.

By: Broker Bryant

Broker Bryant — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:24:20 +0000

ARDELL, you understand agency and give your clients the full package. But do you think the majority of agents do? I don’t. That’s why I prefer TB. To me it’s a better picture of what we really do. I still represent my customers and I still look out for them and advise them. BUT they are not liable for my actions as they are in a fiduciary. If I were the consumer I would prefer that. How many agents truly and honestly put their clients needs first? Not just say they do but really do? I do and I’m not an agent. To me service is service no matter what we call it. Fiduciary/agency is a very complicated and precise form of representation. Just because the consumer thinks they have an agent does not mean they do. At least in TB they are not mislead. Not from you but from many others. Make sense?

By: ARDELL

ARDELL — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 00:12:00 +0000

HI BB,

I was there the day TB was introduced in FL. It was the same day Dual Agency was outlawed. I loved the old paper that said “I do not represent you until and unless you hire me to do so”.

Our Broker, for their own liability reasons, also told us to get people to accept TB vs. Full Fiduciary. But I couldn’t do that as I could not for the life of me understand why a consumer would elect TB over full fiduciary, if the cost for the service was the same? I totally get TB if it is cheaper. But not if it is lesser at the same cost.