You'll have to forgive me for presuming that you were a traditional real estate agent, but your response was exactly the type of response that comes from SALES oriented traditional real estate agents. The problem with your assertion is that the agents involved do not own the client business that they procure on behalf of their companies. The relationship that is established is with the ENTIRE FIRM, through the responsible broker of the firm. Not with "their" agent alone. That's why attorneys MUST do conflict checks before they agree to represent opposing parties...it is a firmwide obligation. If they discover that their firm has already represented the adverse party in the potential suit, they must withdraw from the case, to prevent irreconciliable conflicts. The same type of conflict has arisen here, although the opposing parties in this case are not buyer and seller, but two buyers that have retained the same company to watch out for their best interests, as it turns out, on the same property. Is it unfortunate that the company didn't have some sort of conflict checking ability? Absolutely. But that doesn't release them from the firm-level contractual--or even implied--obligation to watch out for the best interests of their clients. You cannot pit one client against the other, as an agent, without breaking the law. I don't understand why you feel the need to place the interests of the agent above the interests of the client, who had every reason to expect that his/her agent--meaning the entire firm--was pulling solely for him/her. As I've said in a different post, this particular conflict is a mere grain of sand on the beach, when compared with the conflicts that arise on a daily basis throughout this land, when one company purports to be able to represent the competing interests of buyers and sellers in the same transaction, via dual agency. The chief winner in those situations is the company, whom--I might add--were also very large beneficiaries in this bidding war pitting one client against the other. How does the company lose, when one of it's two clients are set to finish as the high-bidders on a property. The company will get it's generous split, regardless of which one of their agents prevails in this bidding war. Do you still not see the conflict? It's heinous, unfortunate and preventable when they appropriate systems are put in place. Jay Reifert, Broker/Owner Excel-EBA