Regulations Governing Underground Home Heating Oil Tanks

Page 4 of 4  


You're missing the point. They have a contract with the seller, _by_ _definition_. They are *obligated* to the seller before anyone else. If they want to dance the line and do both, if even allowed, someone is going to lose and it may just be the agent. In most cases (in most states) even the buyer's agent is working for the seller, because he's the one paying the tab. Some states have tried the concept of the "Buyer's Agent", but that works to varying degrees.
Sure, there are cases where the listing _agency_ will do both ends of the deal, but generally not the same agent. I don't think I'd be happy on the buyer's end of that, at all.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
keith wrote:

Unless, of course, they're dual agents in which they can wear both hats simultaneously...
From the realtors' website...
"When entering into listing contracts, REALTORS® ... .... 3. any potential for listing brokers to act as disclosed dual agents, e.g. buyer/tenant agents. ..."
When the REALTORS' organization recognizes the existence of dual agents, it's fairly near to what I'd call conclusive such things exist...
--
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes, I see and agree to your point. But the potential for the above to occur exists with virtually every listing contract, no? Let's say I hire a real estate agent to sell my house. During an open house, they find a buyer that doesn't have a real estate agent. That agency typically winds up handling both sides of the deal. In NJ here it happens the vast majority of the time in that situation. Are you saying that some states or listing agreements prohibit them from also representing the buyer? I'd think not many realtors would be interested in listing a house with those restrictions, because it effectively cuts their max commission in half. The buyer would then go find another agent to represent them, splitting the commission in half.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Yet again I reiterate -- what is allowed depends on State law and what is _legally_required_ to be disclosed is also locally regulated. The above statement comes from the Realtor(R) Code of Ethics which say "should be disclosed" but how clearly that is done ime is from "mumblejumbleobtwi'malsomumblemumbledistractionshowingmumblemumbleOK?" to simply "it's in the contract very fine print; find it". That the particular section wasn't even adopted by the realtors until sometime in the '90s is indicative of how dear they hold the idea of "all commissions possible are mine".
I brought it up for OP's attention to point out that he can't _NECESSARILY_ be assured that the advice he or his friend are getting is totally unbiased w/o knowing the ground rules under which that advice is being given. And, of course, even if the agent is serving solely as seller's agent, there's still incentive to close the deal in a hurry which means may suggest doing things like this that may indeed expedite a sale but may not really be necessary.
This real or potential conflict of interest is why everyone should have representation on their own payroll who are fiduciarily bound to provide information solely in the best interest of their client. (imo, $0.02, etc., ...)
--
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:
...

...
Sorry for the empty posting... :(
I didn't see the question buried in the hypothetical situation that is the norm in locales that do allow dual agents. I wasn't/aren't much interested in arguing/discussing what is or isn't common practice; only the point previously raised to OP of "at least be aware of who is bearing advice and what may be their underlying motives...".
But to answer the question, the answer is "yes" there are states in which dual agency is not permitted (although they are relatively few, there are some). In one of those states, yes, the prospective unattached prospective buyer either has to handle the process on their own (where that is allowed but probably not the wisest choice for most even if is) or get another realtor to be their buyer's agent. The states I know of otomh are KS, MD and (I think AL). VA was discussing the issue; they were allowed; don't know if it changed or not. Who else might be on the list I've no clue; I've not researched areas I've either not resided in or had other reason to know about.
In states which don't allow it, it doesn't matter what the realtors wish were the law; the law is the law and since all are under the same jurisdiction it's not a competitive issue.
There are many arguments on both sides; the convenience one as your example is probably the one that wins in the argument (other than that realtors are one of the best-heeled lobbying organizations in virtually all State legislatures, of course).
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Of course at the end of the day, there is another problem. And that is that real estate agents, regardless of who they represent, are almost always paid on a SALE COMMISSION, not by the hour. So, even if you have an agreement and realtor who is supposed to be working only for you, they usually have a high incentive to just get the deal done. A classic example would be whether they really have any incentive to get you the highest price as seller. Face with getting a sure commission of 6% on deal at 300,000 or trying to get the $320,000 it might really be worth, it's obvious from an immdeiate financial perspective which is more advantageous. It's better for them to just get the deal done at the lower price and move on to the next deal.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote: ...

Of course. Again the whole point of the point made was to make OP patently cognizant of being aware of the point of view of advice received vis a vis the provider of that advice.
--
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 4 May 2010 08:12:50 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

That's what I would do. As a buyer I'd no more use the seller's agent than the seller's attorney. That's nutz.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They're still working for the seller.

I never said they didn't exist. Get your glasses fixed.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

The new tanks that were required for gas stations were double wall with leak monitoring in the space between.
At some size (1000 gal?), surface tanks are required to have secondary containment, which could be a concrete floor and walls high enough to contain the tank contents.
Residential is exempt from the federal requirements unless they have changed. States could regulate residential.

The oil supplier may be another source of information on what the reality is.

I agree that the seller's agent is paid by the seller and is working for the seller. Here the buyer's agent is generally paid by the seller and is working for the seller. The buyer may have their agent working for them, in which case the buyer probably pays their agent.
The sellers agent should know what the options are. _That is their job._
Might be wise to find out what the RI regs are and what the insurance companies require. Could ask the sellers insurance company (but may be better to ask anonymously).
All we have is the prospective buyers "were told".

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nonsense. If you list your home with an agent, I'd like to see one example of a listing agreement where the broker is not then legally bound to represent your interests as seller and be on your side of the transaction.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As far as insurance goes it is difficult to get Homeowners insurance or unusually expensive. The insurance company just wont cover damaged caused by it. In the last few years there have been a lot of houses flipped that had them. Pretty much universally they got dug up mostly to be replaced with NG Jimmie
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.