next »

[oldadjunct]

Thanks for the responses, although I'm still somewhat unsure.

A little more information.
The house was on a real estate website. I sent an e-mail to the realtor listed on the website. The  realtor showed me the house.

THose suggesting I hire a realtor, I would tell the realtor "I found a house I want to buy, please represent me."

As Pry said, go with the listing agent.  Negotiate price through them.  Everything else (appraisal, inspections, document language) is boiler plate.  On first pass I would differ with Pry about raising the issue of commission with the listing agent, but on second thought why not?

I still question the need for an independent survey up front at purchase; save that money for an argument (what movie or TV show have I seen recently where a much put upon mild mannered protagonist came home each night to see the neighborhood bully encroach on his ill defined subdivision lot?).  Admittedly, I have always lived in well established areas where the lots were meets-and-bounds laid out in the deed.  The only place, of many, that I have owned where there was even a whiff of a boundary dispute was, ironically, laid out with sunken granite posts at every corner of each lot.  "Seriously, you are wondering where your line is???"

[prytania3]

Thanks for the responses, although I'm still somewhat unsure.

A little more information.
The house was on a real estate website. I sent an e-mail to the realtor listed on the website. The  realtor showed me the house.

THose suggesting I hire a realtor, I would tell the realtor "I found a house I want to buy, please represent me."

As Pry said, go with the listing agent.  Negotiate price through them.  Everything else (appraisal, inspections, document language) is boiler plate.  On first pass I would differ with Pry about raising the issue of commission with the listing agent, but on second thought why not?

I still question the need for an independent survey up front at purchase; save that money for an argument (what movie or TV show have I seen recently where a much put upon mild mannered protagonist came home each night to see the neighborhood bully encroach on his ill defined subdivision lot?).  Admittedly, I have always lived in well established areas where the lots were meets-and-bounds laid out in the deed.  The only place, of many, that I have owned where there was even a whiff of a boundary dispute was, ironically, laid out with sunken granite posts at every corner of each lot.  "Seriously, you are wondering where your line is???"

Oh no, I wouldn't mention the commission piece until the deal was on the table.

[pedanterast]

As a buyer, I dont think that you need a real estate agent.  Essentially, one is as good as the other.  They ALL work for the seller.... The seller is paying the commission.  The agent works for them.

Some will claim to be "buyer's agents".  But, they are "agents" and in the end represent the seller.  

This is not true of the most recent state in which I lived, where a buyer's agent, by law, has a fiduciary duty of loyalty to the buyer.  However one could be cynical about this, because the buyer's agent is paid by the seller's agent (so the services are allegedly free to the buyer).  Also, the "buyer's agent" must disclose known adverse facts such as the buyer's lack of creditworthiness, to the seller's agent.  CA law is pretty similar.  So, to an extent the answer to the OP's question depends on the state involved.

On the subject of surveys, I think that could be skipped if it's in a platted development.  If the property lines are defined by "ways and means" or "metes and bounds," the survey could be worth it.

Personally, I would not hire a buyer's agent if I had already found the house.  I did hire a buyer's agent for my last (and I do mean LAST) house search, and was glad I did; he did a good job.  To reward him, I attempted to use him on the sell side and he was terrible, and I fired him (I had refused to sign a 90 day exclusive so some people might argue that's why he was terrible, but that wasn't it).

[oldadjunct]

Thanks for the responses, although I'm still somewhat unsure.

A little more information.
The house was on a real estate website. I sent an e-mail to the realtor listed on the website. The  realtor showed me the house.

THose suggesting I hire a realtor, I would tell the realtor "I found a house I want to buy, please represent me."

As Pry said, go with the listing agent.  Negotiate price through them.  Everything else (appraisal, inspections, document language) is boiler plate.  On first pass I would differ with Pry about raising the issue of commission with the listing agent, but on second thought why not?

I still question the need for an independent survey up front at purchase; save that money for an argument (what movie or TV show have I seen recently where a much put upon mild mannered protagonist came home each night to see the neighborhood bully encroach on his ill defined subdivision lot?).  Admittedly, I have always lived in well established areas where the lots were meets-and-bounds laid out in the deed.  The only place, of many, that I have owned where there was even a whiff of a boundary dispute was, ironically, laid out with sunken granite posts at every corner of each lot.  "Seriously, you are wondering where your line is???"

Oh no, I wouldn't mention the commission piece until the deal was on the table.

Ok, I get that.  You are right.  [buyer] Offer. [seller] Counter offer. [buyer] Counter-counter offer is the time to turn to the agent for concessions. 

That makes sense.  That is how it played out in my last sale, though this is where I differ with you slightly.  My listing agent was saying, "This is a serious offer, take it."  At that point, I said [more or less], "If it is such a good deal, put some money on the table and let's get it done."  She did, with some prodding she put a lot on the table, because, as we tell our students a high F is better than a 0. I think she got about 2%, no co-brokerage involved, out of the sale.