Here is the situation: You and your spouse are licensed agents and work together under the same broker. You have a listing, REO property, that pays 6% commission, 3% each side. However, it only pays 4% if the listing agent is also the selling agent.

A buyer contacts you regarding the property. You are busy with several buyers at the time so you discuss this with your spouse and decide to pass the buyer to your spouse. The buyer does purchase the property. You recieve 3% and your spouse 3%. By passing the customer to your spouse you gained 2% in your family's earnings. Is this ethical?

I have not had this happen yet. However, I have several bank owned properties where the agreements are worded as in the example above. What if I did pass a buyer to my spouse for my own listing...what do you think?

Stick it to the MAN!!! How dare they want to pay you 4% for doing all the work! I'd grab the whole pie and after closing, I'd run down the asset manager and drag him outside for a game I like to call, "Make the Banker cry like a Girl" But thats just me. BigC

^^^^^^^^^get em BicC!

There are a couple issues here. First, many law suits are filed against agents that attempted to represent both the buyer and the seller. Dual agency is asking for a law suit in my opinion. Now, you add in the REO element where full disclosure is pretty much nonexistent, the risk of litigation becomes greater. As a matter of practice, I never double end and REO sale. Secondly, you are suggesting that you might deceive the AM by passing off the sale to your spouse to circumvent the commission split. I think that the chances are good that you may lose the account if you were found out. Is one transaction worth the loss of an account? Not in my book. If your wife works as your buyer rep, disclose it to the AM and ask how to proceed with the split. Better to ask up front.

I agree with Phoenix. I only handle REO's. Why risk losing a lot of long term business over one deal?

It's not location location location anymore.

It's disclose disclose disclose

Thanks for the comments. Phoenix, I am not representing the buyer and seller. I am representing only the seller, the bank. I make it very clear to the buyers that contact me about my listings who I am representing and explain the benefits of a buyer's agent. They are free to find a buyer's agent to assist with the purchase.

If this did come up I would certainly let the asset manager know the situation. Have any of you worked within a team of realtors? Curious how they handle similar situations.

My wife and I are agents. I specialize in REOs and have no patience dealing with buyers. She loves working with buyers and has no interest in listings. We work as a team, and yes she sells my listings. We even put her name rider on my yard sign so the buyers call her directly. I give her the same answers and info as I do any other agent that calls, and a big part of my business model is involving as many agents as possible in showing and selling my listings. Why should my wife be left out?

Is it ethical? I don't see a problem - we disclose our relationship at the beginning, the buyer has every opportunity to use a different agent, we disclose some more, we disclose in writing.

I don't treat her any different than I would any other buyer's agent, she doesn't get any inside info, but I also see no reason to cut her out of a deal just because she messed up and said yes when I ask her to marry me.

To me this is a non-issue. First off some states allow dual agency and others it is illegal. In my state GA it is allowed but I never use it. I still easily get both sides of the deal. We have a box where we represent the sellers and not the buyer that we check. If they don't like that I can refer them off for a fee or they can pick who they want for representation.

Ethics have nothing to do with liscense laws for your state. Ethics are imposed by NAR and your association with them agreeing to be possibly sanctioned for violating the rules. I know many broker,agents who are NOT REALTORS and ethics don't apply.

In your case according to the wording you are not the listing agent and selling agent as there is another party involved. Whether it is your wife or someone else who cares??

One issue if you would tell her to hit a certain number with your offer then your fiduciary duty to the seller might be compromised but that is with any selling agent.

To me this is one of those grey areas where you will get many different responses. Personally in my mind banks shouldn't be so da%n cheap. If they have to pay out 6 but can get it off their books that's the least of their worries.

Triton63

Your plan doesn't work, your broker is the listing agent if your handling it, and your broker is the selling agent if your wife handles it, because you both are sub-agents of the same agent, your broker.

Because of the way we tend to use the terms every day, licensees seem to think of themselves as the agents, they are not the agent, the brokerage is the agency involved. So you need to think in term of the selling office and the listing office (if different brokers).

I Agree with Bay Area Brian, as locally we have the same regulation, in that the brokerage firm is the "Agent"

Locally, In an instance where there are two representatives in the same brokerage firm, with one representing the seller and one representing the buyer, it would be deemed a "Undisclosed Dual Agency Relationship" and contrary to law, unless the express consent of all parties was obtained.

Locally, representatives are required to make full and timely disclosure of a Dual Agency Relationship to all parties to the transaction.

Full disclosure, meaning all positive and/or negative aspects of a dual agency relationship, and obtain the written consent of all parties, failing to do so, would invite prosecution by the regulatory authorities and perhaps the subsequent filing of a Civil Action by anyone of the parties.

Therefore,one might consider that "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure".

Important Notice: This information is provided as basic educational information by the author and is not a substitute for the advice of an expert and/or the advice of a lawyer. There is NO representation as to legality, accuracy, correctness of the herein information and the reader is strongly urged to consult a lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction to ensure accuracy before acting on this information .

It seems to me your premise is wrong. Having two different Agents handle a transaction does not remove you from Dual Agency. Anytime 2 Agents who are affiliated with the same Broker represent Buyer and Seller Dual Agency exists. Commissions are not paid by Buyer and Seller to Agents they are paid to Brokers. In my state if an Agent receives a commission from anyone other than his/her designated Broker it is illegal.