Only 6,600 Out Of 30,000 Agents Applied For Licence

[Ramseth]

Ramseth, I don't think you understand what is happening in this industry.

Let's say Ramseth wants to sell an HDB flat and appoints someone dishonest, let's say Krafty as his agent. He expects Krafty to get the best possible price for the flat.

Then moonlightaffairs comes into the picture. He is prepared to buy a flat and maybe even willing to pay a higher price. But Krafty, because H_o K_um H_ean screwed his life, won't take moonlightaffairs' deal to Ramseth unless the former also appoints Krafty as the agent. In the end, Rameth lugi because he sold the flat at a lower price to someone who was prepared to appoint Krafty as his agent. Moonlightaffairs also lugi because he didn't need an agent in the first place and lost the chance to buy the flat.

In the end, only Krafty wins. But we will al never understand how much he suffered

You've already qualified your argument it's if someone's dishonest. If Ramseth appoints someone dishonest, got to blame ownself got eyes but no eyeballs, got head but no brains. So does anybody else. Back to the question, what happens if it's someone honest?

 

[busdriver111]

Yes, of cux.

I think you are quite mistaken. The same lawyer cannot represent both husband and wife in divorce proceedings. It puts the lawyer in a position of conflict of interest.

At most, a lawyer represents one party (usually the Plaintiff), and the other party is not represented.

However, the lawyer representing the Plaintiff can file the Memorandum of Appearance and the Draft Consent Order For Hearing on behalf of the Defendant.

The Draft Consent Order For Hearing, because it contains terms of agreement on matters such as division of matrimonial property, custody of children and maintenance, is in practice signed by the unrepresented party in the presence of a Commissioner For Oaths. The Commissioner ensures that the unrepresented party understands the contents and signs willingly.

 

[moolightaffairs]

I mentioned more than once I support regulation and education. I only support thinking for oneself with commonsense more.

no, you did not. not till i mentioned that. checkmate 3 time liao.

 

[jixiaolan]

I think you are quite mistaken. The same lawyer cannot represent both husband and wife in divorce proceedings. It puts the lawyer in a position of conflict of interest.

At most, a lawyer represents one party (usually the Plaintiff), and the other party is not represented.

However, the lawyer representing the Plaintiff can file the Memorandum of Appearance and the Draft Consent Order For Hearing on behalf of the Defendant.

The Draft Consent Order For Hearing, because it contains terms of agreement on matters such as division of matrimonial property, custody of children and maintenance, is in practice signed by the unrepresented party in the presence of a Commissioner For Oaths. The Commissioner ensures that the unrepresented party understands the contents and signs willingly.

Of cux, that is the case. Do you seriously mean that they nid to hire 2 property agents to represent both parties in a divorce to safeguard their interest?

 

[jixiaolan]

Is it right to collect a commission from a buyer? Let me answer this qn since i am a property agent. Technically, it is alright if this is made known to the seller as in most hdb transaction, the sellers are aware that the agent is collecting a commission from the buyers. In a private deal, a buyer come direct to buy from us, we do not charge commission because he will need to get a lawyer to handle the purchase and the technicality of eligibility / procedure is so much easier.

However when we market hdb unit, we do charge a 1% comm. from direct buyer because there is alot of more jobs involved. We need to apply HLE for them, screen their eligibility and do up a financial planning for them. Can you imagine the amount of work required if we handle 10 direct viewers for a unit?

Dun get me wrong, I am not aiming at getting maximum commission from a deal. My opinion is a hdb buyer should always hire a trusted agent to help them in buying. As a selling agent, i am quite uncomfortable dealing with an unrepresented buyer becos instead of focusing on selling the benefits and features of the property, i have to divert much of my focus to screening the buyers and advising them on procedure / financing.

I dun insist on (or hoping to) dealing with direct buyer. Many of my record breaking deals are done thru cobroke. Whether I get 2% comm. or 2+1% comm. does not matters to me. As a seller's agent, I owe a fiduiciary duty to the seller. That's to secure the highest possible price in the shortest possible time.

Ramseth bought up a very valid point, the worst thing is to hire an inept or dishonest agent. A corrupted agent can always ask for an additional of 1-2% commission from the buyer even though he can be represented by an agent, meaning that effectively the buyer got to pay up to 3% comm. (1% for his own agent). How can such a deal be possible without compromising seller's position?

 

[scroobal]

1) The reason no commission is charged for private properties is that people are less ignorant, have money and people will laugh at the seller's agent if he ask for one.

2) There is no country in the world where buyers pay commission to a seller's agent except in Singapore and only for HDB.

3) It is common knowledge that seller's agent will not reveal higher offers to his client (the seller) if the buyer does not agree to the agent's commission.

If you guys got more brains, you should not call it a commission but a HDB processing fee and make it clear what it entails and it definately cannot amount to 1%.

It is also common knowledge that resolute buyers have refused the commission and have contacted the seller and have done the transaction. Yet no agent has dare to sue. Why? No leg to stand on. There has also been cases where sellers have sued when they realised that their agent had not revealed the higher offer and these agents quietly forgo their commission or pay compensation.

Maybe Ramseth and you should throw another novel idea why girls in the skin trade should pay you rather than them.

Is it right to collect a commission from a buyer? Let me answer this qn since i am a property agent. Technically, it is alright if this is made known to the seller as in most hdb transaction, the sellers are aware that the agent is collecting a commission from the buyers. In a private deal, a buyer come direct to buy from us, we do not charge commission because he will need to get a lawyer to handle the purchase and the technicality of eligibility / procedure is so much easier.

However when we market hdb unit, we do charge a 1% comm. from direct buyer because there is alot of more jobs involved. We need to apply HLE for them, screen their eligibility and do up a financial planning for them. Can you imagine the amount of work required if we handle 10 direct viewers for a unit?

Dun get me wrong, I am not aiming at getting maximum commission from a deal. My opinion is a hdb buyer should always hire a trusted agent to help them in buying. As a selling agent, i am quite uncomfortable dealing with an unrepresented buyer becos instead of focusing on selling the benefits and features of the property, i have to divert much of my focus to screening the buyers and advising them on procedure / financing.

I dun insist on (or hoping to) dealing with direct buyer. Many of my record breaking deals are done thru cobroke. Whether I get 2% comm. or 2+1% comm. does not matters to me. As a seller's agent, I owe a fiduiciary duty to the seller. That's to secure the highest possible price in the shortest possible time.

Ramseth bought up a very valid point, the worst thing is to hire an inept or dishonest agent. A corrupted agent can always ask for an additional of 1-2% commission from the buyer even though he can be represented by an agent, meaning that effectively the buyer got to pay up to 3% comm. (1% for his own agent). How can such a deal be possible without compromising seller's position?

 

[cass888]

You've already qualified your argument it's if someone's dishonest. If Ramseth appoints someone dishonest, got to blame ownself got eyes but no eyeballs, got head but no brains. So does anybody else. Back to the question, what happens if it's someone honest?

Problem is, at the moment, most agents think it is their god given right to be appointed the agent by the buyer if the buyer doesn't have an agent. Quite blatantly tells the buyer he must have an agent.

 

[cass888]

2) There is no country in the world where buyers pay commission to a seller's agent except in Singapore and only for HDB.

That is not true. Assuming you didn't want to read the papers and asked the agent to find a property for you, he would charge you a fee.

IMHO the buyer's agent's fees should not be 1% of the property price because the agent gets rewarded more for a higher price. Buyer and agent should agree on a reserve price and a small fixed commission for the trouble. The variable commission should instead be a percentage of the difference between the reserve price and the actual price. So the agent is incentivised correcly.

 

[scroobal]

Can you read properly. For someone working in a law firm you need to get the details right.

That is not true. Assuming you didn't want to read the papers and asked the agent to find a property for you, he would charge you a fee.

 

[busdriver111]

Of cux, that is the case. Do you seriously mean that they nid to hire 2 property agents to represent both parties in a divorce to safeguard their interest?

I never said that. I said the same lawyer cannot represent both the husband and wife in a divorce.

 

[busdriver111]

I know Ramseth and Jixiaolan have been emphasizing that the key issue is whether your property agent is honest. But the big picture here is about setting the rules.

I am sure you will agree with me that not every single property agent out there, in the past, now and forever, is honest. There must be rules to prevent or punish any monkey business that they may be up to.

Just as other types of wrongful conduct. Perhaps only 0.0001% of the population has the tendency to commit murder. Does it mean there is no need to have rules to make murder illegal?

 

[scroobal]

They both don't understand the principle behind the need to avoid conflict of interest and the need to have appropriate rules and regulations to protect the ignorant and the meek.

For them, anything that is not expressly prohibited by law is ethical. For some reason they seem to think that ethics is be based on law.

I never said that. I said the same lawyer cannot represent both the husband and wife in a divorce.

 

[silverfox@]

The focus should be why HDB flats need to collect commission from both sides. Buyer and Seller. Because in the past HDB resale transaction prices are low. If its $120K transaction price, 2% only $2400 and this commission after deducting all the advertisement costs may not even be enough to cover what the agent has spent in marketing that unit. That was why last time there was this recommended guideline of 2%+1%.

Now market different already, rules must be changed. Commission should only be getting from Seller. Not buyer anymore. A $450K 5 rm flat can get the agent $9K in commission 2%. If he gets another 1% from buyer, total is $13.5K of commission to just sell a 5 room flat.

In recent times, there has been too many disputes over this conflict of interest from both sellers and buyers. In fact there is. (later I will relate in another posting as to why.)

With rising HDB prices, commission should only come from seller. If the HDB transacted price goes down, then the guideline for seller should re-adjust to 3% or 2.5%. Buyer pay 0% comm. Same like pte property transactions. Less disputes with regards to commission and no conflict of interests.

However, if commission guideline is 3%, then the selling price of a HDB flat will also go up to cover this commission. There is always a cause and effect:o

 

[silverfox@]

On conflict of interests regarding commission paying.

There was once this property I like very much, but the seller has an agent who is marketing for him. So I make an offer which was like 200K below what the owner wanted. But I know the owner is desperate to sell and there other interested parties are offering about the same price as me. Even banks value the price of the property at 200K above what I offered.

From another agent who told me the owner is giving 2% commission if can hit his target price. If not anything less is 1%.

So I asked the seller's agent to come out and ask him again. I told him very simple, (I didn't tell him how I knew about his comm agreement with seller), but i told him that I am still making the same offer but if he can get me the price I want, I will pay him $10K out of my own pocket. His 1% is only $10K based on what I offered to seller.

Immediately you see the agent's eye pupil dilate. He say give him 2 days he will work on it. Eventually the deal was set at $200K below what seller wanted. Instead of spending more money to advertise again and again doing more viewings, this agent can just take his commission and move on to another job. I get the property I wanted, 200K less, 10K more for agent, agent happy, I happy, I don't know seller happy or not.

This kind of arrangement is unethical, because its a conflict of interest. This kind of agent I also will not use to sell my property. But eventually its still business. If i didn't pay this $10K more, I may have to pay much more to get the property.

 

[boring]

On conflict of interests regarding commission paying.

There was once this property I like very much, but the seller has an agent who is marketing for him. So I make an offer which was like 200K below what the owner wanted. But I know the owner is desperate to sell and there other interested parties are offering about the same price as me. Even banks value the price of the property at 200K above what I offered.

From another agent who told me the owner is giving 2% commission if can hit his target price. If not anything less is 1%.

So I asked the seller's agent to come out and ask him again. I told him very simple, (I didn't tell him how I knew about his comm agreement with seller), but i told him that I am still making the same offer but if he can get me the price I want, I will pay him $10K out of my own pocket. His 1% is only $10K based on what I offered to seller.

Immediately you see the agent's eye pupil dilate. He say give him 2 days he will work on it. Eventually the deal was set at $200K below what seller wanted. Instead of spending more money to advertise again and again doing more viewings, this agent can just take his commission and move on to another job. I get the property I wanted, 200K less, 10K more for agent, agent happy, I happy, I don't know seller happy or not.

This kind of arrangement is unethical, because its a conflict of interest. This kind of agent I also will not use to sell my property. But eventually its still business. If i didn't pay this $10K more, I may have to pay much more to get the property.

u fucker, just like after bonking a WL with a right price u wanted and bad mouth her after session saying her jiby smelly... :oIo:

 

[silverfox@]

u fucker, just like after bonking a WL with a right price u wanted and bad mouth her after session saying her jiby smelly... :oIo:

My 1st offer and last offer is the same price offered. Why did the seller accept the last offer and not the 1st offer?

If you are me and you can save $190,000 , you would do the same.

Anyway I didn't say he is a bad agent. I only said I will not use this agent to sell my property. Because if he can be bought over by 10K, one day he can be bought over by others.

 

[Forvendet]

I heard under new system, agents must pay annual licence fee. True?

 

[busdriver111]

I have another example which may make it easier to understand. Something closer to my own job :

If you have 2 drivers operating the same MRT train in the opposite direction, obviously the train's gonna be damaged, to say the least.

Then you have train drivers hitching a ride in the driver's cabin at the tail end. Most of them are safe, cautious and completely sober. But if one takes a hitches a ride in an inebriated state, what's there to stop him from creating a disaster? Don't you think there should be rules or other mechanisms to prevent such a cataclysmic scenario?

When you allow a conflict of interest to pervade, surely something's gotta give.

 

[jixiaolan]

I am a ceha-certified realtor. Therefore, I have no doubt that there may be a conflict of interests when an agent collect a commission from both the seller and buyer. Absolutely no doubt abt it.

Scroobal's view is that a direct buyer should not be paying commission to a seller's agent but however for HDB, it is justifiable to charge a processing fee not amounting to 1%. However, the conflict of interests factor will still exist because a realtor commission is only chargeable upon successfully brokeraging a deal. Most if not all agents will be contended to work with a buyer as long as he is willing to pay the lowest acceptable price of the seller.

Many of the market practices have already long exist before I joined the real estate and will continue to exist after i choose to leave the scene. I will still emphasise on the agent's professionalism, integrity and skills because no matter how the law is changed, most agents guided by their veterans will still be able to go around and beat the rules.

Whenever an agent serve both the buyer and seller at the same time, the conflict of interests element may still exist whether or not the direct buyer is paying a commission or not. This is where busdriver111's point come in. Can an agent be representing both parties?

Given a choice, I would rather not serve direct buyers so that as a lister i can focus my effort on marketing the unit at the highest possible price that i could rather than wasting alot of time on explaining to prospective buyers abt hdb rules and regulations, procedure and doing the required paperwork.

There is no need to prove whether that I am in the wrong, i am just purely SHARING.

 

[jixiaolan]

This kind of arrangement is unethical, because its a conflict of interest. This kind of agent I also will not use to sell my property. But eventually its still business. If i didn't pay this $10K more, I may have to pay much more to get the property.

This is not only unethical, it is a corruption! I will never accept such an offer because unlike a typical biz setting, i dun own a factory and i dun have inventory. The last 2 things i cannot afford not to have is integrity and credibility. That is why alot of my buyers eventually become my sellers. They came to view my listings, like the way i market the house. Hence, they appoint me to sell their properties.