I don't think so. However, look at your contract and see if it has any restrictions on "negotiations" prior to the end of the 90 days. If you just let the buyer know that there will be a price reduction to $xxxxx in 90 days, not having seen your contract, I think you should be ok.

If he showed the house only once, how would he know who else looked at the house, unless he has names from the other realtors. You might spend a few dollars to get a legal opinion from a RE lawyer. If you have to wait 90 days, the money spent on payments could be more than a lawyers fees.

I wouldn't do it. The reason there is a restriction in place is because of your scenario. An agent comes in and shows your house to Mr.A. Listing expires. Now Mr. A comes back and says hey, you don't have to pay a real estate commission so how about we deal now. Well that's not fair to the real estate agent no matter how slothful you think he or she was. He brought that sale to you and it is not fair to go behind his back and cheat him out of the sale.
And he will know your house is sold and can find out to whome it was sold because all that is public record. Many times it is posted in the local newspaper.

Wait the 90 days or whatever the restriction is in your contract. Stay out of trouble. You can spend thousands more defending your breach of contract action plus paying the agent's fee than this is worth.

The realtor would probably ask you nicely for the money before spending thousands of their own money to chase after you for it or to take you to court. I suggest disconnecting your phone line and not leaving a public record forwarding address to your new home and strike while the iron is hot.

"..and strike while the iron is hot."
and be a slut? quirkyquercus shame on you, your true nature is showing.

Contact your lawyer. If they say wait 90 days - wait!

I had a such a clause a few years ago. My house didn't sell, so I read the contract carefully. My contract said that the 90 day clause was void if the house was listed with another real estate broker. I realized that listing and selling through the flat fee agency would have voided the clause in my old contract and cut my costs significantly had the been any lingering interest (there wasn't). You may want to read your contract carefully, and consider whether a discount agent might be willing and able to help you complete this sale. I'm not it is ethical to list with a discounter to void the clause, but it's probably better than telling the buyers to wait 90 days.

could you negotiate with the realtor? maybe say that you think Mr. and Mrs. Lowball might come back after the 90 day period and if they do, you'll accept their offer and realtor will get nothing--but, if he's willing to slash his commission, then you'd be willing to do the deal now so he can get something out of this. maybe tell him you'll do all the work from this point on, so he doesn't spend any more time on this, just gets the check. Of course, if the Lowballs were represented by an agent, too, that complicates things.

I dunno--just a thought.

Ruby

I just found this info on the internet.my realtor did not comply with the 2nd and 3rd criteria.I do not remember being told about it and my realtor has not provided me with a list of names. I would like a comment from someone in the business about these criteria.

"Most association listing contracts include a "safety" clause for you that could protect you beyond the listing expiration. C.A.R. California residential listing agreements have this "safety" clause in section 4. A(2)

I think that most of us know this but, I have seen quite a few where the listing agent claimed yet, did not do what was needed to have protection.

To be able to claim any protection you must:

Enter the number of days that you are seeking protection beyond the listing period.
Advise your client, at the time of the listing, about the "safety" clause.
Within 3 calendar days after expiration, you MUST submit to the client, in writing, a list of all prospective buyers."

Are you remaining in the area or moving away? Do you care how you are perceived in the community? We had a condo listed with an agent and it did not move so we took it off the market. Almost a year later we received a call from a different agent with someone looking. They did not want the condo we had listed, but were interested in the one we owned directly above it. We sold. We called agent #1 to offer her a small sum because we knew that agent #2 might not have called had they not seen the other condo listed months earlier. By the time agent #1 was done ripping us in two (she felt she should have received a full commission even though we sold a different condo), we decided we would just keep our money. But we also lost a client out of that deal. We are a good sized town in a remote location. Our name and honesty is important to us. We've certainly lost any referrals from this woman. As well as just feeling we need to avoid her. But I'm not sure what we would have done differently. Had we sold the condo she listed, we would have paid her the full commission even a year later since it was directly related to her efforts, but since it was a different one....Just trying to say that hard feelings can result and may not be worth the $$$ savings.

The buyer found your home because of the actions of the agent. I believe the fair thing to do would be to also honor the intent of the contract and that covers this situation. I would not cut out the agent.

Gloria

"Are you remaining in the area or moving away? Do you care how you are perceived in the community?"
we are moving away and no i dont care what people think but i want to do what i am legally obligated to do. there is another agent involved because it was not shown by the listing agent.

"The buyer found your home because of the actions of the agent. I believe the fair thing to do would be to also honor the intent of the contract and that covers this situation. I would not cut out the agent."
Actually the agent was just lucky. The buyers turned out to be friend of friends of our neighbors. Even so i want to honor the contract but contracts work both ways.That is why i would like to hear fome someone who is a realtor.

From the looks of the excerpt you posted above, it seems like your agent, to be eligible to receive a commission for sales made to people who looked at the home during the contract, should have given you a list of those people and informed you that any purchase offers by them during the next 90 days would require paying him a commission? But he didn't?

If that is indeed the law, then it seems like you might be off the hook. If i were you i'd make sure that is the law before doing anything. Cornell keeps a database of state laws on its website; your state may also have its code published on its own website.

If, in addition, this buyer came to you as a result of networking and not any effort on your agent's part, I'd think your case for not giving a commission improves. But, make sure of all the facts before taking action.

Here is a link that might be useful: Cornell's legal info institute

"That is why i would like to hear fome someone who is a realtor."
Speaking. The "holdover period" in the contract is 90 days. Since there was an offer, the listing agent/company know the name and have a possible claim to a commission.
As suggested, you could approach your agent to make a deal, or wait 90 days. If the buyer is willing to wait, I'd use that approach, if not try to make a deal with your agent.
As a seller, I'd do what's right and ethical.

The agent showed the property to someone who wrote an offer.

You rejected the offer.

The potential buyer now wants you to accept the offer & not pay the agent who showed him/her the property.

You know that there's a 90 day protection clause,
& you just want advice on how to circumvent it.

Think about what you're doing,
& about the kind of person you're dealing with.

People are consistent:
If they'll do it to your representative, what makes you think they won't do it to you?

Betcha if you accept the "offer", there'll be "issues" that arise, & the offer will be reduced again, probably after you've packed & loaded a moving van but before you get to closing.

First off, you have a minor misconception of what your realtor is supposed to do for you. They are supposed to market homes to other agents and potential buyers. The fact that your agent actually showed it 1 out of the 15 times is quite good. How many agents didn't show it? Second, you said that this potential buyers offer was far too low. You need to cut to the chase and decide if the offer is worth it or move on. If you knowingly circumvent the agent within the period, you have to deal with it. If the buyer made an offer on the house then you have already been provided in writing information that shows this person had interest in the house. You wil be liable. At least in my opinion.

Let me post an experience I had as a realtor. This explains why realtors have to protect themselves the best they can.

I took a listing on a home from a man who took my suggested list price and added $15,000 to it. As I showed the property (over 50 times) through the listing period I had 2 offers. One of them was low even for my suggested list price and was rejected outright. The other was within $5,000 of my original suggested price.

The second offer was rejected outright, no counter not even a thank you. When I told the buyers that they came back and offered $5,000 more. They are now at what I had suggested the seller list for.

The seller rejected that offer .... no counter, no thank you. My 90 day 'protection' period expired then the seller contacted the last offer I had (I still have the Earnest Money check and contract) and told them he would sell to them for their last offer.

When I confronted the sellers about this they told me I was UNABLE to sell their home so they did it themselves. I told them they would not ALLOW me to sell their home. They simply shrugged their shoulders and walked off.

That little instance cost me $6,000 and a LOT of time.

So, does your story resemble that at all? Did you use your realtor to advertise your home to find someone who would buy it then do everything to get out of the commission? Realtors get used like this all the time and I will promise if you went to work and did your job without getting paid you would be upset over it.

KC

so if i sign on with a bad realtor should i be obligated for anyone who may have looked at it at forever?
this realtor cost me a lot of money too. 5 months carrying costs. he did nothing more than list in the mls, run a few small adds in the paper with his normal list of advertising and showed it once personally.
i have decided to wait the 90 days but this is a warning for others. read the contract. make sure you know how long they are tying you up for. if you sign with a dud they are hard to get out from under.

"As a seller, I'd do what's right and ethical. "

No as a realtor, you'd do that.
As a seller you'd do what you can to get out of paying the agent for doing didley squat over 3 months. Shame on you, your true nature is showing.

amen, qc.

sorry about that.

..."amen, qq." (quirkyquercus)

sorry about that.

Couple of questions...how do you really know what was done? Just because they only showed it once doesn't mean they weren't doing anything. There were very few buyers in some areas. Print advertising is great but it doesn't generate as many buyers as online. Did the agent list it on multiple websites, hold any open houses, or any negotiations? Do you know if they advertised verbally to other agents? Did they give you feedback from showings? Did they schedule the showings? Did they give you any advice on how to sell your home faster? Did they communicate with you well and frequently?

You know, there's just no way to make a person believe that they should pay you if that person *doesn't want to pay you*.

"Not working hard enough" just doesn't apply to the task involved in marketing a property:

The agent wasn't hired on an hourly basis to, say, answer phones or file paperwork or dig ditches.

He was hired to market the property.

& he did that.

He produced a buyer, & now the sellers don't want to pay him for it.

This is true. But in this sue happy world, I wouldn't try to get myself in court.

In order to enforce the protection period, the Realtor doesn't have to submit a list of names if he can show that the seller knew who the prospective buyer was/is.

If the buyer made an offer, the seller knows.

Couple of questions...how do you really know what was done? Just because they only showed it once doesn't mean they weren't doing anything. There were very few buyers in some areas. Print advertising is great but it doesn't generate as many buyers as online.
Did the agent list it on multiple websites, no just theirs and realtor.com. all of the showings came through the mls.

hold any open houses, no open houses.the realtor said they dont work on country homes. i suggested several times that he do an agents tour because there are 600 realtors in in this area but he said they dont work because realtors will not show up.

or any negotiations? none that i heard about.the one offer that we got was through mls so he never talked to the potential buyer.

Do you know if they advertised verbally to other agents?probably.

Did they give you feedback from showings?yes

Did they schedule the showings? no

Did they give you any advice on how to sell your home faster? yes.mostly he said just be patient.

Did they communicate with you well and frequently?no.we had to call and ask for details.

lets face it. he was in it for the listing. the dirty little secret in the real estate business thanks to the mls is that if an agent can generate enough listings they never have to do much actual selling. they still get their 3% no matter how much work they do.

We don't know. OP is unresponsive & the natives are getting restless. Time to move on to the next topic.

quirkyquercus said:
"As a seller, I'd do what's right and ethical. "
No as a realtor, you'd do that.
As a seller you'd do what you can to get out of paying the agent for doing didley squat over 3 months. Shame on you, your true nature is showing."
When a seller signs a contract and agrees to it, there are no ethical obligations? (maybe you are right, and speak for many sellers)

Hi,

What price range are we talking? What was your asking price and what was the low ball offer?

I'm curious if you listed your home at the price the agent suggested or did you list it at a price you thought it was worth? Did the agent send you regular reports as to what was selling in your subdivision? Did you receive CMA's?

This is a slower than usual market but if a home is in a good location, has good appeal to buyers and is priced right, it will move--maybe taking a couple months more, but it should sell.

How many times was your house shown in the first 30 days? Once the showings slowed down, did you and your agent put your heads together and try to figure out why the house wasn't selling?

Was the low ball offer in line with what other homes in your area sold for in the last year?

How long after the home was listed, did you receive the low ball offer?

If you had 15 showings and no offers, perhaps your agent should have come to you and said the home is listed too high or feedback tells us this or that is wrong with the home.

I tend to think if the home was shown 15 times, no matter who showed the home, it was possibly priced high and possibly had a few issues.

I would sit down with the agent and work out something. Maybe the selling agent, the listing agent and you all three make a price adjustment. The agent is there to protect you the seller. Let the agent deal with the buyer, i.e., making sure they are pre-approved by legitimate mortgage lender who will make closing, make sure the agent assists you with inspections, etc., etc.

If you still want to get out of paying the agent for his/her efforts, you might also consider calling the agent and at least offering to pay for those few ads s/he ran. Ads are expensive. MLS is expensive. Who paid for the photos that were ran in MLS? Was there a Virtual Tour completed? If so, who paid for that?

If you were unhappy with your agent, did you go to the agent and ask to be released from your contract at any point? S/he probably would have released you if you were unhappy.

I would not even consider circumventing the agent's efforts.

Right is right and wrong is wrong.

KCF

Berniek,
My understanding of the situation is not so clear. If the prospective buyers were a lead generated from the agent then the agent should be compensated to a certain extent. More on that in a sec. Otherwise if the seller, now FSBO, has generated the lead themselves, they are stuck on a technicality. According to the terms of the contract they are obligated to pay. The likelihood of the agent enforcing those terms are slim. I don't see what the seller has to lose. You either take a chance and sell to the buyer while they're hot to trot (my personal preference) or you wait until the 90 days are up. Is that any more ethical??!?!?! Afterall if the lead was generated by the agent, the seller is still screwing the agent. Forgive my coarse language. And the big question is will the agent still have the paperwork or remember who the people are and will they be paying attention to the activity and who sold the house and would they pay to hire a lawyer or take the seller to court, provided they could FIND the seller in which case the seller would lose and pay the commission anyway. At least this case you don't lose the lead and you got a good chance of not having to pay the commission. If you're the type of person who gets $2.50 in change back from the cashier when you were only supposed to get $1.75 and you run back to the store to alert them of the error then yeah this is not the approach to take. If you're looking out for number 1 and don't believe the contract is fair and didn't envision being in this predicament when you sign the contract then it doesn't seem so unethical. Like I said, waiting til the 90 days is up isn't any more ethical. It does however eliminate the risk of getting sued... possibly for more than the commission and legal fees plues their own legal expenses.

A fair solution to these predicaments is a small fee paid to the agent that generated the lead, not a full blown commission since they aren't doing the other work. Or maybe half commission.

So then, I wouldn't take the chance of losing the buyer at the risk of breaching the contract and getting caught doing so.

"lets face it. he was in it for the listing. the dirty little secret in the real estate business thanks to the mls is that if an agent can generate enough listings they never have to do much actual selling. they still get their 3% no matter how much work they do."
that may be true in a seller's market. But in a buyer's market, if you take too many listings, you run the risk of a majority expiring. I don't know about you, but if they have 90% expire, I wouldn't use them. Also it would get around that they just like to list. Trust me, there are agents out there that do this. I agree with you, that he should have held an open house for other real estate professionals. If the buyer's came through the mls, the agent most likely negotiated with the other agent. I just wanted to point out that there can be alot an agent is doing behind the scenes. It's not an easy job like some people think. There is alot involved.

"A fair solution to these predicaments is a small fee paid to the agent that generated the lead, not a full blown commission since they aren't doing the other work. Or maybe half commission."
That was my suggestion, try to work something out with the listing agent.
I agree, depending on the amount of the commission, it might not be worth to sue (IMO). But then again, because it would be a slam dunk, a managing broker might go for it.