undisclosed dual agency... do you want it?conflict

New ruling from the closely watched case on dual agency in California. Also touches on the square footage issue that 300mercer often points out here:

https://www.inman.com/2016/11/21/california-supreme-court-rules-dual-agency-case/

Keith Burkhardt
TBG

I'm not licensed in California, but it doesn't seem like dual agency is the problem in the Malibu case. Listing realtor was using 15K square footage instead of the city's 9K, and not explaining how he got there, which seems like a violation of his duties to be honest and fair to buyers even if he's not their fiduciary. If the guy's going to commit fraud in absence of being a fiduciary, is asking him to adhere to a higher standard really going to make him behave?

ali r.
{downtown broker}

If there is dual agency, I think most agents in NYC are reasonably ethical/smart enough to know that they need to disclose. Even if they don't go by the book and make you sign an agency disclosure form right away, they'll at least let you know and make sure you understand they represent both parties.

If it's obvious they only represent you, then I know many agents who are unfortunately rather lax and may not make you sign an agency disclosure at the very beginning like they should. Some have the view that as long as it's done at some point before the close of the transaction is okay.

With that said, dual agency obviously doesn't make sense if you're a buyer. Why would you sign up for that? You're basically giving away your right to representation. You're throwing away free service you're paying for that's built into the sales price. Definitely get a broker commission rebate and some free advice if you're going to buy. And yes it's completely legal (http://www.hauseit.com/nyc-broker-commission-rebates-legal/) and in fact encouraged by the NY State Attorney General :-)