No, I am not writing it to express my deepest disbelief in Buyer Broker Agreements. There were too many spears broken over it. I guess there is no right and wrong here. Some States require them as I heard, so the whole point there is moot…
But the reasoning made me speechless. Basically, Mike made it clear that unless there is a signed BBA, he can instead of writing an offer, as asked by the customer, turn and buy for his own use.
“For example, you ask a neutral agent to show you a home. He agrees, shows the home, a great home offered at a great price. You tell him you're thinking about making an offer. However, he buys the home for his own investment purposes. That would not be allowed if you had previously engaged the agent as your buyer representative.”
Really? I never heard this happening before. We follow a simple rule that if I showed or even mentioned something to my client in the conversation or e-mail and they showed a tiny bit of interest, they have the right to buy it and this right is over any of my rights.
It is quite often that I say to my customers after showing a unit, that if they are not interested, I might have another party. Usually, these are hot properties, and I would set the time for my customer to tell me if they are interested or not.
But under no circumstances would I buy from under my customer. No way.
For me Mike is very wrong. He is wrong because it is not BBA that protects customers/clients. It is how we, agents, act/operate. There is no Agreement in the world that makes you or me an honest man, and presenting it this way to a potential buyer is a huge stretch.
Look at it from the Buyer’s perspective.If I am told that if I do not sign this agreement, then the agent can and will screw me… do you think I would ever sign it? It is bullying me, plain and simple, and I am not going to accept bullying… even in its PC-est form.