BawldGuy - as usual, you make excellent points. (for those reading, I'm not sure if Jeff is ever wrong...)

I'll amend the post to make sure it's clear that the "evilness" of dual agency is my opinion.

And look for a likely lengthy tome soon on my opinions of dual agency.

"Would love to be dual agent for you and I with drinks at BarCamp."

Count on it my friend!

Almost forgot -- I usually entertain The Boss with funny snippets from RE blogs upon her arrival from work at night. So far your comment -- I’m not sure if Jeff is ever wrong…) is the slam dunk winner, guaranteed to make her cry through her laughter. :)

Jay -- Can't wait to read about your dual agency thoughts. Mine can be found in very first few posts on BHG in dual agency shootout with Darkside Boy, uh, I mean Greg. :)

See you soon.

First of all, a NAR ethics course is oxymoronic on its face.

Second, you're free to define dual agency as evil. It's also incumbent upon you to ensure readers understand the statement is merely your personal opinion.

Third, the 30+ years I've literally had clients IMPLORE me to represent both sides, and it happens multiple times yearly.

Finally, if it's evil, I'd love to hear the reasoning for the exceptions, allowing the agent to commit 'evil' purposefully. I think cheating on one's spouse is evil, but I don't allow for exceptions that are few and far between.

Would love to be dual agent for you and I with drinks at BarCamp. :)

That's a new one. While I have heard people make the argument that Dual Agency is unethical, I haven't heard someone say that NOT practicing Dual Agency is unethical.

It's all about disclosure and informed consent - one way or the other.

After explaining the process and allowing the client to make an informed decision about how THEY want to be represented, isn't it their choice? I think so.

If my buyer is OK with Dual agency and it's limitations, fine.It works both ways, and the same for the seller. If my firm wasn't was against it:: "Mr. Seller, this is what Dual Agency is. Our firm does not believe in it because _______, so we do not practice it. We will market your property, represent you, and make sure any buyers have an agent to represent them exclusively. It won't be me as the listing agent. Sound good? Sign here."

An ethics trainer saying it's unethical not to practice dual agency? Please.

Hi Jay - I just took the ethics class last week, and I must say, it was better than I expected. Of course, our instructor, Bill Gallagher, was not as confused about dual agency as Francy's.

Norm - great question. And you pretty much answered it... we'll show the listing, explain dual agency and if the person really wants to submit an offer we discuss a couple of options -- we can refer it out to another brokerage, or another agent within our brokerage.

Technically, if an agent in our brokerage handles the other side, that is still dual agency. But that is a far more agreeable scenario than one agent handling both sides. Buyer's and sellers seem to realize the inherent risks in single-agent dual agency.

And the truth of the matter is, it doesn't happen very often that a buyer makes a call from a sign, ad or whatever and winds up actually buying that home.

I agree with Charleston. This doesn't sound like an ethics questions to me and it certainly seems reasonable that a broker should have the right to decide how clients of his or her brokerage will be represented.

Jay, I'm curious how you guys deal with inquiries on your listings which come directly to the listing agent. Do you tell the buyer that you're happy to show but won't work as a dual agent?

I am amazed that dual agency is allowed in Arizona and wonder how many other states allow the practice. Kudos to you for staying away from that nightmare.

Our local board provided a 3-hour DVD that members of my office will be sitting through this month. The canned presentation should eliminate presenters adding their own color commentary.

Jay, I did the requirement on line. The NAR has made such a mess out of continued education - it has become a breading ground for unethical has beens (instructors) stealing money out of my pockets because they can no longer earn their own commssion dollars. Hey, wait a second - I think I'm going to get certified to teach classes. Nice post, but I gotta go!

imho, the teacher simply doesn't understand an ethical dilemna vs. a business decision. Can he at least spell fiduciary if he doesn't understand the concept :)

If an unethical realtor teaches ethics, what does that say about NAR? That is why the entire foundation for the association is unsound. I bet if you gave a test to every member of NAR regarding ethics, more than 50% would fail, including your wife's teacher.

Dual agency is very tricky... It is challenging to remain impartial to both sides since at the end of the day, you want to provide the best service to your clients at all times. When I am in a potential dual agency situation, I make it very clear to my clients as to what I will or will not be able to do on their behalf if we move forward. I look forward to your thoughts on the matter!

I met a lot of sellers and buyers who think dual agency is a good idea. The sellers are happy their home is getting sold by whoever:) The buyers sometimes think there could be some financial gain to them, if both sides of the transaction are handled by one agent, or by two agents with the same broker. IMO, they do not fully understand what dual representations means. My thoughts on this subject would make for a very long comment:) Looking forward to reading more of yours.

BawldGuy - as usual, you make excellent points. (for those reading, I'm not sure if Jeff is ever wrong...)

I'll amend the post to make sure it's clear that the "evilness" of dual agency is my opinion.

And look for a likely lengthy tome soon on my opinions of dual agency.

"Would love to be dual agent for you and I with drinks at BarCamp."

Count on it my friend!

Almost forgot -- I usually entertain The Boss with funny snippets from RE blogs upon her arrival from work at night. So far your comment -- Iu00e2u0080u0099m not sure if Jeff is ever wrongu00e2u0080u00a6) is the slam dunk winner, guaranteed to make her cry through her laughter. :)

Jay -- Can't wait to read about your dual agency thoughts. Mine can be found in very first few posts on BHG in dual agency shootout with Darkside Boy, uh, I mean Greg. :)

See you soon.

First of all, a NAR ethics course is oxymoronic on its face.

Second, you're free to define dual agency as evil. It's also incumbent upon you to ensure readers understand the statement is merely your personal opinion.

Third, the 30+ years I've literally had clients IMPLORE me to represent both sides, and it happens multiple times yearly.

Finally, if it's evil, I'd love to hear the reasoning for the exceptions, allowing the agent to commit 'evil' purposefully. I think cheating on one's spouse is evil, but I don't allow for exceptions that are few and far between.

Would love to be dual agent for you and I with drinks at BarCamp. :)

That's a new one. While I have heard people make the argument that Dual Agency is unethical, I haven't heard someone say that NOT practicing Dual Agency is unethical.

It's all about disclosure and informed consent - one way or the other.

After explaining the process and allowing the client to make an informed decision about how THEY want to be represented, isn't it their choice? I think so.

If my buyer is OK with Dual agency and it's limitations, fine.It works both ways, and the same for the seller. If my firm wasn't was against it:: "Mr. Seller, this is what Dual Agency is. Our firm does not believe in it because _______, so we do not practice it. We will market your property, represent you, and make sure any buyers have an agent to represent them exclusively. It won't be me as the listing agent. Sound good? Sign here."

An ethics trainer saying it's unethical not to practice dual agency? Please.

Hi Jay - I just took the ethics class last week, and I must say, it was better than I expected. Of course, our instructor, Bill Gallagher, was not as confused about dual agency as Francy's.

Norm - great question. And you pretty much answered it... we'll show the listing, explain dual agency and if the person really wants to submit an offer we discuss a couple of options -- we can refer it out to another brokerage, or another agent within our brokerage.

Technically, if an agent in our brokerage handles the other side, that is still dual agency. But that is a far more agreeable scenario than one agent handling both sides. Buyer's and sellers seem to realize the inherent risks in single-agent dual agency.

And the truth of the matter is, it doesn't happen very often that a buyer makes a call from a sign, ad or whatever and winds up actually buying that home.

I agree with Charleston. This doesn't sound like an ethics questions to me and it certainly seems reasonable that a broker should have the right to decide how clients of his or her brokerage will be represented.

Jay, I'm curious how you guys deal with inquiries on your listings which come directly to the listing agent. Do you tell the buyer that you're happy to show but won't work as a dual agent?

I am amazed that dual agency is allowed in Arizona and wonder how many other states allow the practice. Kudos to you for staying away from that nightmare.

Our local board provided a 3-hour DVD that members of my office will be sitting through this month. The canned presentation should eliminate presenters adding their own color commentary.

Testing retaggr... pardon the intrusion...

Jay, I did the requirement on line. The NAR has made such a mess out of continued education - it has become a breading ground for unethical has beens (instructors) stealing money out of my pockets because they can no longer earn their own commssion dollars. Hey, wait a second - I think I'm going to get certified to teach classes. Nice post, but I gotta go!

imho, the teacher simply doesn't understand an ethical dilemna vs. a business decision. Can he at least spell fiduciary if he doesn't understand the concept :)

If an unethical realtor teaches ethics, what does that say about NAR? That is why the entire foundation for the association is unsound. I bet if you gave a test to every member of NAR regarding ethics, more than 50% would fail, including your wife's teacher.