We Were LIED To About The NAR Real Estate Settlement!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 жов 2024
- The Biden administration claimed initially that this nar settlement and buyer agency change would positively affect home affordability and protect the consumer.... and the only change is lawyers made hundreds of millions of dollars, real estate agents have to do more paperwork and there is now LESS transparency in the industry. What a change!! We were definitely lied to and I believe it will be business as usual within a year or two.
Leave your thoughts and opinions below on the situation.
🖥️ Find my courses, coaching, and consultations: bryancasellaco...
🌐 Discord Link: / discord
📞 Schedule a FREE Strategy call: tinyurl.com/ca...
ℹ️ Have questions about Real Broker? Let's Chat: calendly.com/b...
💵 Want to support the channel? Donate below:
www.paypal.com...
cash.app/$Brya...
100%!! It's a mess! During their Zoom call, my Board representative admitted they have no idea how this will pan out. Yet, one of the first things she mentioned in her presentation was a penalty fee schedule to punish agents. They have no idea how to implement this, which blows my mind! We just received revised contracts yesterday, and they've created 11 different contracts to replace simple listing and buyer representation agreements. I can foresee so many lawsuits arising from this.
“They” lied to us. As in the lawyers, Shocker! It was a cash grab & jokes on them. Lawyers took all the money.
For top agents, it's business as usual, though it comes with the added paperwork for the admin or solo professionals. Agents who complain often focus on problems instead of solutions, and the market naturally weeds out those who can't adapt. For consumers already confused, this situation may add to their uncertainty. In my opinion, this was largely a money grab, where attorneys benefit regardless of the outcome. I'd like to ask any recipient of the award if the $10 to $20 they received was worth it. It seems that the attorneys may have overlooked disclosing the actual compensation sellers would get from this case. They emphasize full disclosure, but this aspect appears to have been conveniently ignored. Life is simple, but people often complicate it. Let's avoid that pitfall. Great job as always, Bryan, on spreading awareness!
An we get rid of NAR and just do our own thing? Let’s all get broker’s licenses and get E&O insurance and just do our own thing.
Bryan, I wish us realtors could have had you defend us in front of the judge and jury 👍🏼
I agree with you 100%. I am an agent in NC and we have always had the agreements...so not much is going to change in my opinion, however what I don't like is the DOJ telling private for profit businesses how and what to do with their own money. Seems to me they are squeezing low and middle income buyers out of the market. Down payment, closing cost, home inspections, appraisals and now pay the buyers agent on top of all of that...
Don’t even get me started. We just did a 0% buy side commission on MLS for the first time in the MOST prime location for a low price point and we got 1 showing in 10 days in one of the hottest markets in the country. On the buy side if you have to come out of pocket to pay an agent, it might affect your ability to avoid PMI. But to your point, it’s always been an open market and the market bares 5-7% of commissions.
So why not explain to your seller why this isn’t in their best interest
I used to think it was unfair for a seller to pay the entire commission, but I realized that the person who is actually SELLING is the buyer’s agent; similar to a car dealership, the dealership has the “listings,” but it is the car salesman who works with the buyer and shows them around the lot (neighborhood) to see the different cars (homes). The buyer’s agent searches for the homes, shows the homes, and sells the buyer on the home.
This whole thing is a mess. It’s going to cause agents to only show homes that offer a commission and/or cause trust issues for buyers because they see homes on Zillow, etc. and they’ll want what they want.
Who knows; robots might be handling all of it soon so 🤷🏻♀️
That's the reason the buyer's agent is actually called the "selling agent"; at least that's the case in NC.
Haha love your response
I don’t think the comparison to a car salesman is accurate. The car salesman works for the dealership. No fiduciary responsibility to the buyer. When I represent a buyer I advise them. I let them know what homes are overpriced or what homes will likely have a lot of issues with them. I save them money before we even write an offer by not having them waste money on an inspection that will yield bad results.
The reason sellers generally pay commission is because they are the ones that will have the proceeds at closing. A buyer is already on the hook for down payment and their own closing costs. If you add in their agent’s commission they are going to be out a lot of money out of pocket.
A seller doesn’t even see that money and it’s built into the price of their home.
If a seller isn’t offering compensation and my buyers have to come up with it then we will likely negotiate a % drop in price equal to my commission.
Especially if their neighbor sold for the same price and paid commission on both sides.🤷♂️
Lack of Comprehension has allowed this to be a major fallout.
100%
This is NOT helpful to consumers and will result in buyers suing listing agents/brokerages for misrepresentation down the road for being “forced” to use the LA because they couldn’t afford to pay a BA. As always, the only people who make out any situation’s are the attorneys! So why in the fuck isn’t there a class action lawsuit for price-fixing against attorneys? Don’t they always get their 33 1/3%? Since I’ve been in real estate, commissions have always been 100% negotiable.
Exactly, which class action law firm is going to go after class action law firms for price fixing at 33 1/3 % of settlements? 😂
It’s horrible in my market I work with a lot of first time buyers and most can barely afford DP let alone pay anything additional.
Bryan, I figured this deal out in less than a day. You are spot on! Government, Lawyers walked away with a huge payday. NAR (DEI) top brass caved and shelled out all those dues the Realtors have paid in. I predict huge due increases.
Yes! I watched the NAR Settlement Rules video today, they are giving us a break for the next two years, after that a huge increase in fees will come $$$
I hear the trolls also and most of them suffer from major wealth envy. They cant accept the choices they made effect their own life. You dont get rewarded for suffering for virtue.
The clients i have, i work my ass off for. I want them happy, i want to see a positive net on their net sheet. It makes me feel great!
Thanks for your content man. Instant sub.
Exactly, this doesn't change anything. It's just more paperwork to disclose things explicitly to avoid future lawsuits.
Licensed agent in PA and I can confirm that most agents and brokerages I’ve communicated with directly or indirectly all agree that this is a load of BS. This is a horrible time to be a buyer and now we are adding an extra expense onto their closing cost. How can we truly represent and perform in the best interest of the client if we have to tell them “nope, that house you like and can afford you can't buy because you can't afford to pay me, your agent”
Bye bye agents! Agents in PA should do better. Most in my area live rich and put little effort in their clients' wants. No more free money.
@@Ashroyer86 I do not disagree with you!! I have dealt with my share of agents who frankly just don't want to work for the commission. But the issue is, agents are going to get paid regardless but its the consumers who are going to struggle with this unncessary change.
@@Ashroyer86the average agent made 40k last year. You couldn’t be more wrong.
I don't really have much to add. You're saying all the things I've been thinking and asking others about.
Not sure about the rest of you guys but I noticed that on the new BBA for us here in Las Vegas at any given time the client canceled the agreement unless they are already under contract so even with a simple text message they can break the BBA. Just makes it redundant
And it's always been like that! It's thee dumbest thing ever! EVER!!! 😂😂😂😂
You’re absolutely correct!
I’m still trying to figure out WHY this change had to happen ANYWAY! There was no appeal, no renegotiation, NOTHING! The sellers was supposed to be remedied and hardly got anything! The only people who benefited from this are the attorneys! That’s IT! They want us to go around TRYING to figure out how much we are getting for bringing a buyer, but the very people who agreed to this, THEY ALL KNOW HOW MUCH THEY GET PAID! But we have to call and text the sellers agents to find out how much we get from the seller if ANYTHING at all! So what was the point?!
Not only that but my current amendments for the NAR Settlement for the listing side have an option that the listing agent can’t disclose how much compensation they are offering to a buyers agent. 😂😂😂
Unfortunately NAR has done a very poor job of educating us about the lawsuits and giving us guidance moving forward. What you might have missed is that the lawsuits were largely about steering. I don't believe you mentioned it in your video. I have been in the business for 21 years (as a MLO and agent). If you have been active in real estate for any significant amount of time, you know it happens. Agents in the areas I served used to have a saying about lower Realtor commission, "Too low to show". We used to joke about it. I still see agents inadvertently proving the DOJ and the lawsuits were correct by saying agents won't show properties that aren't offering cooperative compensation. I just shake my head. They are feeding the monster. I have asked over 100 agents about the commission lawsuits and none of them had a clue as to what is going on. I'm not saying I agree with the lawsuits but us agents need to understand that these changes aren't going anywhere. NAR decided not to appeal so the chances of all this getting overturned is slim to none. The DOJ is snooping around so this isn't over by a long shot. Whether this will benefit the consumer or not is unknown. Perhaps it will or maybe not. The market will show us. However, something we all need be aware of is that we are going to see new business models when it comes to buyers agency. Most of us aren't going to be ready for it. Wall Street is now buying MLSs and tech companies see a huge opportunity to get into the market. We will have to wait and see.
Buyers agent has no fiduciary duty to the seller. I.e not obligated to show their house
Definitely something smells fishy, what is the real reason for this? This is in detriment of all the parties involved
100% agree I've been a RE Broker for over 25 years. Its all about control. Just for one second forget about RE agents, Brokers and buyers. #1. I'm The Seller I want to Sell my house for the most money in the shortest time and I want to pay buyers Broker 3%. I tell my agent to advertise my property and mention the 3% in the add. I have to tell the Seller I can't in MLS the largest advertising platform available to you? How can someone dictate to my seller who is hiring me not the DOJ and the sellers in that law suite how he can advertise his property? Isn't this a free speech issue? #2 What happens if your seller refuses to pay buyers Broker but Buyer really wants the property says he will pay buyers agent. We get all the way to closing and buyer says you know i had some unexpected expense's I won't be able to pay buyer compensation? What happens now? will Buyer agents require them to put 2.5-3.0% in escrow when they write the offer. I don't believe that is legal? When the seller pays we know the money is there it is coming from the proceeds of the sale. #3 Seller says he won't pay buyers agent gets three offers all asking for buyer Broker comp and refuses all of them. 4th offer comes in asking buyer broker comp. The seller finally agrees he will pay and accept the offer. Is there potential blow back from not offering the commission to the first 3 offers maybe discrimination complaint or worse? Its a Mess for sure.
It’s business as usual but I predict the total commissions are going to rise because sellers will concede to buyers just to sell. You mix that with higher brokerage fees. I bet 7-8% becomes normal.
Agents have to step up
Low income or affordable housing buyers will be affected.
Tinfoil hat time:
“They” know that housing is the quickest and fastest way towards generational health and “they” don’t like that so they’re making it more difficult. All around my area you should see how many low income apartments are being built over actual affordable housing.
No tinfoil hat. Thats the obvious part. It’s an attack on the middle class. No dancing around it.
Thanks BC! 💎👑
1:20 - The MLS I am in says that a commission cannot be disclosed on any platform. Like you had said though, these laws don’t apply across the board and will vary by state and MLS.
This pretty much hurts the FHAs and folks with little money now that they have to come up with the Buyers commission.. I suspect buyers will not be willing to pay 3% to an agent "for opening a few doors". My question is if buyers agents are going to be working at a severe discount what's stopping sellers from discounting listing agents? I can here it now, "the buyer agent said he is getting 1% , why should I pay you 3% when I can go to the buyers agent and have him/her do it for 1%... It seems almost a certainty this will trickle over to listing agents and hurt their pockets too...
100% agree, the whole thing is just I beleive a set up for them ( plaintiff and whoever else ) to make money for this BS lawsuit.
NAR fail to protect us as Members
Imagine how many first time buyers are going to work directly with the listing agent and not do an inspection because they didn’t know they were supposed to. A listing agent represents the seller so they’re under no obligation to say they should or shouldn’t. What a S show. The only people that made out on this is the attorneys.
@@RethinkOpenHousemost lawsuits involving real estate are situations where a buyer or seller self represented. Cool story bro.
Our previous buyer agency agreement had a 15 day right to terminate for buyers. Most agents didn't use it because of it, but it was removed in the new agreement due to the settlement. Big loss for buyers.
Agent since 2007. You're 100% spot on. It's a total joke..Attorneys did well.
I read it was protect buyers whose agent may be cherry picking and not show a home that isn’t paying the buyers agent. Now you can’t see on the MLS. 🤷♂️
I agree it's a step backwards 😔. This is not in the best interest of the consumer.
In CA we already had the form to disclose the Buyer Agency Relationship, so it's really pointless. This whole thing is just skirting blame. You're right on the money BC!
So true man.
Sellers will end up paying more commission. I agree with out that this is not for the consumer. Maybe they were trying to slow down the process of business. I agree that this could cause us more issues down the road if there becomes a predatory situation open up. This is why they probably left the DOJ the door wide open.
FJB
Completely agree. More work.
Doesnt really change anything but being more clear on commission being paid by who. Seems its going to be harder now for buyer agents to get buyers to sign ahead of time (BBA) befire submitting contracts or even seeing a house. Sure experienced agents will have the resume to get clients. Its the newer agents who will struggle more with showing value outside of recent sales. Most peoples first question is how many homes have you sold recently. Just got learn new conversation dialouge and figure out your worth.
I'm not in real estate, but I always enjoy your videos. Keep up the great work!
I agree with you 100%
I agree just more paperwork to do the same thing
been having trouble seeing where the consumer gets the benefit here as well if that was the true goal of this change. My understanding is nothing changes other than no advertising of buyers agent compensation online.
Someone brought it up to me recently and said sellers always had the right to choose what they want to pay a listing agent. And if they agreed to 6 or 7% that’s our fee, now if we choose to share that fee with another realtor who has a buyer then that’s just me granting them 50% of my cut because they did half of it and it was my money as a listing agent to begin with when the seller agreed to that fee.
If I was okay with having my listing agent share part of his commission with another agent why in the world would I not want that advertised everywhere … like where’s the advantage in that for those sellers who choose to allow compensating other brokers
L ruling is my take but whatever, hopefully laissez-faire concept isn’t dead and the cards land where they should be
Spot on! This sounds almost exactly like the rant I had with my broker on this subject. 😅
At 39 and recently laid off, I’m at a breaking point. With $425K saved for early retirement at 50, $10K in an HSA, and a property that could yield an additional $200K, what are my options for generating steady income?
It’s reasonable to consider getting a financial advisor now, but delaying retirement might be a wiser choice.
I’m unsure weather to fine another job or merge all my investment accounts into one. If I do, how should I handle it, and are there any potential drawbacks? I also plan to sell my property, which could add $200K over time. Should I consolidate my investments into a single account or spread them across various markets?
These are crucial questions for a financial planner. I met mine at a NYSE summit, and with her help, my wife and I reallocated our $1.7M portfolio between a traditional IRA and a brokerage account. She’s been making investments with our approval and has helped us recover twice our losses. We’re holding steady and carefully navigating more markets
That’s impressive! My portfolio is struggling. Who’s the advisor?
Lois Jean Frueh. Look her up online; she’s well-known.
I think the disconnect of biy side and list side commission is the right way to go. Each agent can go get their own money. Buyer representation is not going to go away....and sellers paying the buy side isn't going away either. Just write your commission into the offer. If it's the best offer, then great!
They aren’t trying to pay a percentage anymore, they want pay a flat fee.
Nailed it!
100% agree with you.
Im in WA and in the Northwest MLS, which isn't owned by NAR, apparently, brokerages out here have already been locking buyers into contracts before showing any property. And when we go into our MLS, we see buyer brokers' commission % since we're still allowed to display it. I was told that only MLS's that are owned by NAR have to follow the new changes pertaining to commission displayed on the MLS. After hearing from you and a couple of other RE experts, you all say that business will pretty much continue being the same as usual.
Being a new licensee, I don't have anything previous to compare the new changes too, and I do agree that consumers will probably steer themselves away, and also end up paying more to buy a home
@user-ep2ow1nm2m I run off the nwmls
@user-ep2ow1nm2m I see UA-cam removed my comment. Ok, I'm in the nwmls, and washing state has already been doing the soon to be changes in the contracts. John L. Scott is big in the Pacific Northwest, the largest brokerage I believe, and they like for us to be up to date with laws and know the laws within this industry. You can think otherwise, totally cool with me, I just hope you do better research for your clients than you do with this here conversation
@user-ep2ow1nm2m What I'm saying is that there's going to be a change in contracts because of the NAR lawsuit. The MLS that I'm in supposedly has been doing that change. Everything needs to be written and signed here. So, when those changes are made this month, the brokerage I'm with has already been doing it for the past 2 years. Transparency purposes
@user-ep2ow1nm2m I don't put myself on a pedestal. What are you talking about??
I'm just pointing out that when changes are to be made, the area I'm in doesn't have to make change because it's already been done
NAR doesn’t “own” local MLS systems.
Legislation, Liars, Li... you can find all three close by!
You would have done a better job defending us Realtors than NAR did. I can’t believe they caved the way they did. Seriously, what is the point of NAR…useless.
I had an agent bring me an offer for less than listing price and asked for an extra .5% I told him to raise the offer price and I will ask my seller. He raised the offer price and received an extra .5% Not sure how that was helping his buyers
It was in the contract the buyer signed. They were aware. Service costs money. Applebees sells steak. So does Ruth Chris. Why does Ruth Chris get to charge more? I mean they’re both steak
I think will and should lower commisionss. 5-6% at current rate at current home prices is theft, especially in todays world where people fund thier own homes. People never cared because home value have always gone up so they are making money and people really don’t realize how much they paid to get fd by realtors
You work at Starbucks dog
The market will work it out. The best will adapt.
A smart seller will obviously offer a good commission you would think
You are getting two case confused even thou they are now overlapping. This settlement isn’t about buyers, it’s about sellers. The sellers claimed they didn’t know some of the money they were paying listing was be given to buyers agent. The DOJ overlapping, is claiming that want to protect buyers by disclosure. DOJ is not happy with settlement. They only want hourly or flat fee. Fixed fee
MLS was around way before internet hence why it’s called Mailing List Service.
@@RethinkOpenHouse that’s the modern term. In later 20 century it was the mailing listing service, you would get a monthly page via us postal mail. Then you kept a binder in the office, ever month agents would come to the office and wait for the manager to release the book. 📕 the senior agent would get to review the book first. Also it didn’t cover the whole state or district. You had to pay for each area. I guess that’s still the same.
@@RethinkOpenHouse have you ever heard of nuclear hydrogen monoxide welding ?
@@RethinkOpenHouse see I am glad we have so much in common
It's only a 7 year agreement.
The word superfluous is fitting
It seems simple to me.
If it's the agents fiduciary duty to have their clients best interest in mind, then disclosing a listing firms compensation to a buyer agent could incentivize dishonest buyer agents to filter out lower commission properties from the pool of properties they present to their clients.
“Simple” is simply disclosing everything up front and not hiding anything. This is the opposite
It’s 2024. Anyone looking at houses can look at Zillow. Not to mention there are thousands of agents in each market.
This is confusing the consumer and the agents
Can’t the seller can just offer seller concessions in the MLS to cover closing costs/ buyers agent commission?
We are over payed 😂, if that’s true what’s the name or classification for the lawyers involved in the lawsuit? Asking for a friend 😊
It was never about the buyer/consumer! Also, what about all the buyers who won't want to see sellers' properties who are not willing to pay the buyer's agent's commission because they don't want to have to pay it themselves?? The Department of Injustice strikes again!
Great point! I never saw it from that angle.
The time has come for RE agents to pay the price for their colleagues poor performance. Karma is a bitch
Nah just your mom