Our September 18th article The Growing Trend of Exclusive Buyer Agency evoked some eloquent responses from our readership. Here are some samples.

Blanche,

From over on the other side of the Pacific Ocean I watch your discussions on the various forms of agency, the gripes about commission rates, and the role of the MLS. I have also watched your consumer advocate Ralph Nader for many years, and decided that there is nothing more tunnel visioned than a consumers' advocate.

Nader and his supporters seem to think that buyers are the only consumers. Sellers and service providers do not count as consumers, and deserve no protection. It is a concept with which I disagree most strongly - we are all consumers.

The level of real estate commission in the USA is more than double what it is here in Queensland where we are legally responsible first to the seller and second to the buyer - but due diligence is also required in our duty to the buyer.

Your commissions have to be high to support 2 people, the buyer's agent and the seller's agent - we do it for the price of 1. In my view the approx 3% saved by using a single agent is in the best interests of the consumers (both buyers and sellers are consumers from my viewpoint).

Your love affair with the MLS has also never taken off here, because our commissions are regulated, and the half commission on a conjunctional sale makes it an unattractive scenario for the agent.

Without buyer and seller agents each wanting a livable commission, and without MLS, your consumers could benefit by significant savings, if Ralph Nader would only stop looking at the grass and start seeing the trees too.

It is my guess that the MLS in the USA is on the verge of collapse, spurred on by the advent of the Internet. Maybe then, consumers will begin to realise that one good, competent, honest agent charging a lower fee is better than 2 agents who earn twice as much. With fees significantly reduced, FSBOS will become less popular, and the biggest single source of rip off (the agentless transaction) will become a far less popular way of selling.

Maybe it is time to bury Mr Nader, along with MLS and your current system of agency - the biggest beneficiaries would be the consumers.

Helen South Lane Realty, Tamborine Mountain, Queensland, Australia http://www.lanerealty.com.au/ e-mail: Helen@lanerealty.com.au

As a long time proponent of buyer representation, It's good to see a positive article. I have practiced buyer representation for many years and have not listed property since 1994. Many of my peers felt and still feel I'm a bit crazy, walking away from easy money (listings). I see it as the only true way to fairly represent my buyer client. In time there will be more seller only services, but for now, many real estate offices offer buyer representation services, then reduce the services via contractual agreement to dual agency or transaction coordinator/facilitator. Why should the parties give up a part of the duties owed without reducing the fees paid? Why is it only the "agent" gets the benefit of lesser services via their commissions?

Respectfully,
Sandy Jurich, Certified Exclusive Buyer's Agent, Certified Buyer's Agent, GRI, broker
Buyer's Choice Realty
Kalamazoo, Battle Creek and southwest Michigan
BuyrChoic@aol.com

Published: September 22, 1998

Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright laws.