testLowest Price Guaranteed. Last VisitorsSave on Wellbutrin XL and generic Bupropion SR Compare our prices. Celexa Save over 70%. Learn about the causes symptoms, and available treatments for depression.Choose a lawyer 25 mL of FLOXIN Otic, which is equivalent to 5 dropsAccurate, FDA approved Floxin information for healthcare professionals and patients - brought to you by Drugs Floxin com Floxin is an antibiotic

There was a post on SFGate.com today about dual agency (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/ontheblock/detail?&entry_id=36240). Dual agency can be a couple of things, but basically, it means that the real estate BROKER is representing both the buyer and seller of a property. Since I work for Zephyr, and Zephyr does so much business in town, many of my transactions are “dual agency” because both myself and the other agent work for Zephyr, and Zephyr is our broker.

The other way a dual agency can work is when the same agent represents both the buyer and the seller. This situation raises a lot more eyebrows, so to speak. Seems like an inherent conflict of interest, right? I’ve actually done it a couple of times with the full understanding and permission of both my buyer and seller clients. One situation, my buyer clients found a seller that wanted to sell to them directly, so I represented both sides, after they’d agreed on price and terms. Another situation, the buyer I represented didn’t want any input from me on price, and came to that on his own.

In the third case, it was different. I wrote the offer for the buyer and presented it to the seller. When I met with the buyer to write up the offer, we discussed price just as I would with any buyer client. I didn’t disclose to my buyer how low the sellers would go, or any information above what I would normally share to a buyer’s agent. When I presented the offer to the sellers, I didn’t disclose to my seller how high the buyer would go, or any information above what I would normally disclose about an offer I received. No one else was writing an offer, so it was a simpler negotiation process. All parties were happy, including me. I could manage the transaction smoothly, because I was the other agent and I was very cooperative with myself! I lowered my commission, so the sellers made more money than they would have with another buyer, which made my buyer’s offer more attractive. The buyer was able to use the agent they trusted, me, and I knew the house intimately, so my representation paid off for them.

There was one situation where I didn’t want the additional liability of representing both parties. The transaction was too complicated and that would have just added another degree of complication. Also, depending on the clients, it can be a difficult situation, and in those instances, I trust my intuition, and refer the buyer to another agent rather than risk representing both parties. I typically base my decision on whether to be a dual agent on whether I think I can fairly represent both parties, and whether I think they’ll agree, both in the moment and for years to come. My business is built on my reputation, so your opinion of me now and five years from now is of utmost importance. I don’t take these decisions lightly, and neither should you, as a buyer or seller. Trust your instincts and ask every question that comes to mind. Feel free to contact me with any of your questions, if you don’t already have an agent representing you.

Cheers!
Michelle
Direct: 415.637.1898