Every time we're interested in a house I'm always like "Tell them we'll do 1.4 with x contingency but we will waive y contingency".

And then the realtor insists we have to draft the entire fucking contract and sign it otherwise "we won't be taken seriously."

Why am I signing a contract for something the seller never agreed to and btw, i've never even talked to the seller...

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47595625)

tbf, the fill-in-the-blank state RE contracts take like 10 minutes to do.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47595669)

Why would you want to look to Clause 54(c) to see if they are waiving the inspection contingency.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47596146)

anyway, i've seen states where the form contract has all the major fill in the blanks on the cover page as a rider or something to make it quick to fill out. that's certainly an efficient way

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47601076)

Would truly be one of the best use cases for eliminating the middle man

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47596602)

https://www.biddit.be/nl/catalog/detail/254788

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47607686)

from a practical pov, it also moves the deal along quicker

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47601185)

also not forming a contract until inspection is functionally identical to a contract with an inspection contingency.

and if you're in a sellers market where only no inspection contingency contracts are the only ones considered, then you will not have time to conduct an inspection before the seller accepts a written offer.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47607781)

when deals fall apart realtors gets screwed unless the written contract has been agreed to. then they get their commission, regardless.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47601936)

you're a faggot, right?

and when i said a deal falls apart, i wasn't referring to something like the buyer not getting specified financing. that's not a deal falling apart, that's a deal never being finalized

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602180)

also, did you miss the day on statute of frauds? a verbal contract for the transfer of real property isn't enforceable, you dumb fuck.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602199)

you think a contract is not enforceable against the buyer because the buyer gets cold feet and is then no longer 'willing'? you think that's the definition of 'willing'?

why are you bringing up the statute of frauds? the entire thread is about why do real estate agents want offers in writing rather than verbally?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602475)

who pays the commission in a standard real estate deal, dummy? the seller. the COMMISSIONS are paid to the buyers agent UPON CLOSING and the seller earns them when a WILLING AND ABLE BUYER is brought. if the buyer is no longer WILLING and the deal falls apart the realtors get NOTHING.

yes, of course the contract can be enforced against the buyer. but if it is then the deal hasn't "FALLEN APART", it is just enforced through the courts. and in practice that never fucking happens. so it has NOTHING to do with protecting commission.

you're the one that mentioned WILLING AND ABLE buyer, which is based on the LISTING AGREEMENT, not the OFFER, which is what is being discussed here. and, in practice, again, never fucking happens. realtors aren't regularly collecting commissions from people that back out of deals, even if they might be entitled to, you dumb fuck. you said they get paid regardless. they don't. only in extremely rare circumstances does this happen. a buyer insisting on a written offer has NOTHING to do with protecting their commissions in case a deal falls through, you literal fucking retard.

"why are you bringing up the statute of frauds? the entire thread is about why do real estate agents want offers in writing rather than verbally?"

is this a real question? because a verbal offer isn't enforceable for real estate transactions.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602497)

you are a retard. no fuck it's not enforceable, but it takes 5 minutes to pass along a verbal offer to the seller and get a tentative agreement. real estate agents who don't do this don't do it for their own reasons such as wasting their time.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602508)

"when deals fall apart realtors gets screwed unless the written contract has been agreed to. then they get their commission, regardless."

you don't specify when the deal falls apart "for reasons not covered in the contract", which is 99.9% of the time. and even that 0.1% of the time the deal falls apart and the agents are entitled commission, they are almost never getting it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602527)

"and when i said a deal falls apart, i wasn't referring to something like the buyer not getting specified financing. that's not a deal falling apart, that's a deal never being finalized"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602531)

2) as pointed out several times now, that is because of the LISTING AGREEMENT, not an OFFER, which is the topic of this thread

3) what the fuck is the difference between a deal "falling apart" and a deal "never being finalized?"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602532)

no fucking shit there is a difference between a listing agreement and the offer.

but every listing agreement for real estate requires a written offer

so, why would a real estate agent want an offer in writing? so they don't waste their time #1 and #2 so that they can earn get be entitled to a commission

3) i already said that above. if you weren't so gung ho on sucking cock, you'd see that falling apart means for reasons not containted within the offer to purchase. anything not achieved within the offer to purchase means 'never being finalized'. i provided that definition above already, even if it should have been obvious

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602551)

but im done with this. you're so stupid, but i must be stupid too for even attempted to confront you logically.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602572)

you are clinging to the idea that realtors never sue for commissions to which they are entitled to. please advise your clients accordingly.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602585)

for example the buyer’s agent is expecting to split 5-6%

they call the seller’s agent and make the offer, which is accepted. everyone is happy

when they move to contracting the seller’s agent says “the buyer is only paying 4%, I’ll give you 1.5%.” the buyer’s agent can’t then spoil the deal by insisting on a higher number

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602222)

the reason realtors generally often insist on a written offer is because contracts for real estate *must* be in writing to be enforceable. it has nothing to do with enforcing commissions. which, of course, can be altered from the listing agreement during the offer phase.

and sure, having all the terms on paper to prevent people from pulling the rug later is why we have written contracts to begin with. i'm sure this sometimes happens with commissions, but probably rarely, more often it's going to be contingencies and shit. the commission split is one of the most significant contract terms, so i doubt the "haha whoops i meant you only get X%" happens very frequently.

nevertheless, the sales contract isn't used to enforced paying commission on a seller's breach. not only does that hardly ever happen, but the juice isn't worth the squeeze. how often are realtors suing breaching sellers to recover commissions? most people are judgment proof and aren't worth suing unless they are insured.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602268)

either way, i was just pushing back against sealerclubber because his just completely wrong and stupid. 1) sellers torpedoing a deal with a ready and willing buyer is extremely rare, and 2) even in those situations realtors aren't frequently suing. ask a realtor how many times they've sued a seller for a commission because they wouldn't accept a willing and able buyer.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602456)

1) who cares if it is 'extremely rare'. a realtor is entitled to a commission if the seller backs out without a legitimate, contractual reason

2) very stupid argument by you. no surprise. just because something isn't likely to occur, the threat that it can occur is valuable. since there can be no threat unless everything is in writing, a real estate agent wants things in writing. it really isn't about the buyer taking the offer seriously, it's about the real estate agent not wasting her time with someone who is not serious.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602494)

1b) BECAUSE YOU SAID THEY GET THEIR COMMISSION REGARDLESS! if it doesn't happen in practice then they don't get their commission, as you stated.

2) which has nothing to do with COMMISSIONS being paid if the deal falls through. go ask a realtor how many times they've recovered commissions from a real that fell through, even if one of the parties breached?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602505)

1b) realtors can and do sue for their commissions. it doesn't matter if it is uncommon. that's like saying attorneys don't sue for their unpaid fees.

2) i don't need to ask realtors what they do in practice. they are entitled to their commission if they provided what they are contracted to do

If Buyer Defaults, Seller Still May Owe Real Estate Commission

By Christopher Combs | July 10, 2022

Question: We signed a purchase contract for the sale of our Peoria home, and escrow is scheduled to close next week. Although we are prepared to close, we have been having second thoughts about moving to a California beach town. Therefore, we were not exactly unhappy when the buyer telephoned us that he no longer wanted to buy our Peoria home. In fact, the buyer said that we could even keep his $6,000 earnest money. When we contacted our listing broker to say that we wanted to cancel the transaction, however, our listing broker said that we would still owe her a 5% real estate commission. How can we owe a 5% real estate commission to our listing broker when we were ready to close the sale of our home, but the buyer backed out?

Answer: Under most listing agreements a listing broker is entitled to a real estate commission whether or not the transaction closes, if the listing broker produces a ready, willing, and able buyer with no remaining contingencies in the purchase contract, e.g., inspections or financing. Therefore, if your buyer was a ready, willing, and able buyer with no remaining contingencies in the purchase contract, and simply does not want to close the transaction, you may owe the 5% real estate commission to your listing broker. You then would be entitled to sue the buyer for your damages, including the payment of the 5% commission, because of the buyer’s breach of the purchase contract.

Note: Under the listing agreement with your listing broker, your listing broker may also be entitled to a portion of the $6,000 earnest money forfeited by the buyer.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602516)

and, again, that happens only in edge case scenarios that i talked about right at the outset. 99.9% when an RE deal falls through it's covered by a contract. so the vast majority of the time they aren't even entitled to their fees to begin with.

edit: also notice you just quoted about LISTING AGREEMENTS, which is different from an OFFER, which i pointed out right at the outset. god you are so fucking stupid.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602530)

earn

verb as in make money

Compare Synonyms

Strongest matches

acquire

bring in

collect

derive

draw

gain

get

make

obtain

pick up

realize

reap

receive

score

secure

win

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602541)

and, once again, that rare exception i noted in my very first response to you, with DOESN'T DERIVE FROM THE OFFER ANYWAY.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602550)

My mentor and former PAR legal counsel, the late Tom Caldwell, used to caution brokers intent on suing clients for fees by asking that. The clear message is that when you sue for a fee, the client is going to bite by claiming that no fee was owed because of the malpractice committed by the broker or salesperson.

I represent brokers who sue for their fees and the defenses always include claims of malpractice. It is true that my clients win most of these cases, though the only credit I lay claim to is that I am selective about the cases I take.

Sep 6, 2018 — A real estate broker north of Toronto is suing a consumer for commission even though a $900,000 home sale arranged by his company fell through.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602581)

you said "when deals fall apart realtors gets screwed unless the written contract has been agreed to. then they get their commission, regardless."

1) the vast majority of the time when a deal falls through it is covered by a term in the contract, and the agents aren't even entitled to fees, so they don't "get their commission, regardless."

2) even when a deal falls through due to a breach and commissions are owed, the vast majority of the time the realtors don't sue, hence they don't "get their commission, regardless."

why do you think the author says "I am selective about the cases I take."? because the situation where there is a breach and it's worth suing the breacher is extremely rare. which i also said.

and i'll autistically point out once again that these cases almost always derive from the listing agreement, not the offer, which is the topic of this thread. the only time the OFFER is used is when the seller backs out and both agents are entitled to commission, which never fucking happens. how often do you think a buyer's agent produces a willing and able buyer and the seller backs out after a contract is signed? and then the buyer's agent sued? almost fucking never. hence, this this very rare scenario is NOT the reason buyer's agents insist on written offers.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602613)

sign a form contract subject to a week long process whereby lawyers exchange form letters amending the form contract.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602206)

whether that is true or not is beside the point. that is the motivation for them insisting on written offers.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47602473)

But this is clearly outweighed by all the unnecessary work of completing these docs back and forth before there's an agreement (not to mention the liability by having all these conflicting docs floating around).

The SOF arguments are stupid. A car is subject to the SOF. Imagine how dumb it would be if you wanted to buy a $25,000 car at a dealership and had to draw up a legally binding contract for $22,000 for the car plus $8,000 for your trade in, and then the car had to add a signed counter addendum offering you $23,000 for the car and $7,500 for the trade in but also had to change the color as your color wasn't in stock, etc.

It's a really dumb processors perpetuated by REALTORS(R)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47605210)

My realtor says, "as a lawyer. You know this is how it needs to be done". I'm like that's not remotely how we do it at all just pick up the phone

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5519444&forum_id=2#47605214)