I wouldn't be saving anything by using her to buy another listed house since as we are now the buyers so her commission would be coming from potential sellers not us."; it depends.

If you go to the listing agent directly, you may be able to get the commission down from standard commission rate (for example from 6% to 4%), the listing agent still would receive more amount than after splitting with another agent, and pass the 2 percent savings to you.

If you go to a FSBO, you should save even more, may be the entire 6%. There are many FSBO transactions happen daily, it is really not hard to do and it is beneficial to sellers and buyers, otherwise, why people want to FSBO?

We work in engineering without any real estate related training. We are good at numbers, analysis and negotiation. We tend to handle things logically instead of emotionally. With real estate lawyers' help, we sold and bought twice without going through agents.

When we sold, we netted more, when we purchased, we paid less than the comparable houses in the neighborhoods.

Don't waste any energy on the realtor. You have plenty to do, such as finding an excellent lawyer, loan office, title company, home inspector, mover...and the potential houses.

I'm not a realtor. I'm just an outsider looking in. Based on the information given, I don't think your realtor was necessarily being unfair to you.

Remove the fact that her son was the other client. Now he is just another client looking for a house in the same neighborhood. It is completely possible that the houses were not a fit for your family and were a better fit for the son. You haven't been inside the houses. Technically, the houses are not listed and are; therefore, not on the market yet. You were not ready to be a buyer until August 15th when you closed on the sale of your last house and had the money in hand to buy a new house. Not sure when you moved into the rental and don't know anything about the terms of the lease. I probably woundn't consider someone who had just moved in the last month or so, had just started a lease, and and was still unpacking as someone immediately ready to buy. The other client may possibly have less restrictions than you do and is in an immediate position to buy. The realtor is in a position where she has a client ready to move on a private deal and you walk in. If the realtor starts showing up, it changes the stakes of the deal because there was more competition. Both clients potentially get hurt.

As an outsider, I think it is possible that the realtor was representing her clients in the best way she could. You may not have technically been able to purchase the houses when they came to her attention. The realtor juggled the demands of both clients in a manner that was fair to both clients. Yes, her son is her son and will always come first in her life. I don't think the fact that her son is also buying a house in the area has hurt you. It is quite possible that the realtor viewed you as not really in a position to buy at that time.

If feel uncomfortable with the realtor now, drop her. I do think it is possible that she is fulfilling her duty to you and her other client in the best manner she could.

okay- so, comments have ranged from .... "she has done nothing unethical ...to ....fire her / conflict of interest." I guess I feel somewhere in between. I cannot speak highly enough for her during the selling process. So, I guess it just stings a little more that this house that her son is now under contract with would have been the perfect combo of location and price for us. Which for the area, I know could be a once every two years occurrence.

Adellabella- I see your points, but we were more than ready to buy while she was negotiating this deal. My point is, she has worked with us for years, and knows exactly what we are looking for. This house matches perfectly.

The rental has nothing to do with it as we are paying more for a month to month. Our realtor knows that 80% of our belongings are in storage. That we are ready to move on the first right house that comes up. Unfortunately, it went to her son.

She is also very territorial when it comes to potential FSBO's....saying that she should show them to us. I don't see the benefit from our side on that.

It appears you are emotionally attached to this agent. Remember this is a business relationship. The agent is emotional about relatives, not you. Doesn't mean the agent is bad or unethical, just life.
Personally, I would contact the two houses directly to see if you can work out a deal, if they are listed wouldn't you already know about them?
I wouldn't find out about a house on my own, then call an agent to followup. Keep control of this search.

Is there a conflict of interest if a realtor represents two buyers with similar wants and needs? That situation must happen all the time.

cmarlin- neither of the houses are listed. Otherwise, we wouldn't be in this position. The one house is already under contract with her son and the other is well out of our price range.

I would never find a FSBO on my own and then call her to follow up. As far as I'm concerned the only reason to stick with her is if we are interested in a listed house. Otherwise, there is no benefit to us.

cmarlin- Not emotionally attached at all. Do I feel like our best interest as her client took a backseat to family.... absolutely! I get business... however, I do feel it was a bit sneaky. Technically unethical....probably not.... a gray area... absolutely.

suburbanmd- Yes, i would imagine that this situation does happen all the time, but I think the right thing to do is to alert both clients of the opportunity and let the best bid win.

Here is the gray area, if it were just any other client it would behoove her to let both of her clients bid. She was protecting one client over another. How can she have our best interest?

Letting both clients bid would make sense. But what if it turned into a bidding war? An agent orchestrating a bidding war between two of her clients doesn't sound so great either.

As far as I'm concerned the only reason to stick with her is if we are interested in a listed house.
Then why is the house the son is buying a problem for you? You said it was not a listed house. If it wasn't listed, there was no listing she could show you. Perhaps it is a FSBO and she is just helping her son negotiate by using her expertise as a realtor.

dekeoboe- maybe I'm mistaken here, but if we are using her to buy after we just used her to sell two properties and rent another, shouldn't she be showing us any property she knows is available MLS or otherwise. When I said the only reason for us to stick with her is if we are buying a listed house is for the future, because we obviously aren't going to go out of our way to include her in a house we find on our own.

shouldn't she be showing us any property she knows is available MLS or otherwise

No, I don't believe she is. Perhaps, as stated above, her son found the house on his own. Why would she be obligated to show it to you? Perhaps it is a FBSO and the sellers are not willing to pay realtor fees.

dekeoboe- Not sure, why you are assuming the son found this on his own. In this very particular competitive market, realtors and builders are still competing for properties.

"Perhaps it is a FBSO and the sellers are not willing to pay realtor fees." Okay, so I know of a great house, pocket listing, your price, your neighborhood, but I'm not going to mention it because I want it for my son. Again, I get it....it's family....My point is how can she possibly have my interest and allow this to go on?

Isn't it human nature to protect ones own kids' interest first? I am not sure how I would view a person who does it the other way around.

"the only reason for us to stick with her is if we are buying a listed house is for the future", why? You have choices.

It makes me wonder if a realtor needs to disclose if she/he is also actively looking, or for his/her immediate family, for similar property as his/her clients?

What if all your legwork, talking to the neighbors, sending out letters, etc. leads you to a house that you want to purchase. You ask her to handle the sale. Since she now knows about this house, would you feel that she had to make other buyers she is working with aware of the house so they can also put in offers? I am not saying that is definitely the case with her son, but how do you know it is not the situation?

As far as her obligation to you and having your interests in mind - do you have a contract? If so, what does it say? If not, I'm not sure what to say except perhaps you need to speak with her broker about the situation. You can ask the broker how she came to know about the listing. How did you find out about the two houses that aren't listed? And, if they aren't listed, how do you know about the asking prices, conditions, etc. of the two houses?

At any rate, I suggest you find another realtor. From what you have posting, including not believing that she has been negotiating on behalf of her son for months, you have lost confidence in her. If you do not have a contract with her, you should just walk away. If you have a contract, speak with her broker about being released from the contract.

Dekeoboe put my thoughts up there too. If you reverse the situation: suppose the realtor had found YOU a great, perfect property that wasn't listed, had negotiated and you were in the bidding process...and then she put another client into the mix to bid against you. How would you feel? This is a serious question, not a gotcha, really. I suspect that the anger you are feeling now would be equally as fierce if the above scenario played out. You might be posting asking 'how could she do this when she is working for US?'.

I honestly don't think the family relationship is relevant, except that in your mind she is putting family first etc. As others have pointed out, she is working with another client, one for whom she is negotiating a deal.

However if you now do not have confidence in this realtor, it is your right and privilege as a buyer to use someone else. It IS a business transaction but it is also a service model, and if for whatever reason you do not feel this person can provide adequate service-you can find someone else who will.

I do think however that any realtor would probably do the same thing in the circumstances you describe, unless you somehow find a realtor for whom you are the only client.

Some people have an every man for himself mentality, which is their choice. I think occasionally putting your own needs second to other's needs is the right thing to do.

Of course I'm not suggesting that the realtor should have dropped her son. To me, the right thing to do would have been to be upfront about the situation with mccarthy3 and let her decide if she wanted to be secondary to the son's needs.

The realtor wanted to find a house for her son, keep mccarthy3 in the dark about it and then look for a similar house for mccarthy3. To me, that wasn't the right thing to do.

I should add that you can substitute "son" for "primary client" and I think the same scenario applies.

dekeoboe and runninginplace, bring up a good point. If the table was turned, I would be just as livid.

For any realtors....How would you handle a situation where you have two clients looking in the same small town in the same (tough to find price range) and one house comes up?

I guess knowing the house went to her son got me pretty defensive and angry. I haven't made a big deal about it to her, because he's under contract.

Everyone has made really good points that definitely got me thinking. I wouldn't stop working with her over this. She has proved to be a very hardworking realtor. This was a sticky situation. I do think that if she was upfront from the beginning, I would not be so mad.

I would appreciate any realtors out there to chime in how they would handle the above mentioned scenario. Not that it would change anything...I'm just curious. Thanks!

"Is there a conflict of interest if a realtor represents two buyers with similar wants and needs? "

When one of them is her relative, yes.

Just another buyer? No.

In my office, we can't avoid representing people who have the same criteria. However, once they want to bid on the same house, one of them has to be referred to another agent.

What would you do in her place?

In your shoes, I would fire her:

1) She did not put your interests first by notifying you that the property was available.

2) If you are comfortable identifying houses for sale that meet your criteria (and it sounds like you are), she will likely add little value to your search and purchase.

In fact, you may be better off using the selling agent for any house you wish to offer on in a dual representation capacity - the promise of double commission will likely cause the selling agent to advocate for you as a buyer to the seller over singly represented buyers! (Also unethical on the part of the realtor, but often reality.)

I think that the person who lost the most was the seller of the home that is under contract. If they had listed the house, then both you and the realtor's son could have competed for the property and the seller's would have gotten a potentially better deal and you could then have used the services of another agent in the negotiating process.

I also think that a good realtor is worth the expense and if you are pleased with her knowledge base and business acumen, I would absolutely use her during the negotiations on a house you are intending to buy, even if it is a FSBO. Somebody who knows the ropes and can act as an intermediary is certainly worth their commission.

tishtoshnm's point is why I have always found the pocket listing process baffling. It seems like walking away from good money if you have a valuable listing like that. It's worth a few intrusive pictures and a few showings to get a bidding war started, at least to me!

I think that the person who lost the most was the seller of the home that is under contract. If they had listed the house, then both you and the realtor's son could have competed for the property and the seller's would have gotten a potentially better deal and you could then have used the services of another agent in the negotiating process.

You are absolutely right, but there is no doubt that the seller of this home feels they are ahead of the game because they probably are paying "a reduced commission".

Isn't that the definition of a good deal? When both sides feel they have come out the winner?

WHile I understand your anger imagine her position. What if she put you in a bidding war with her son? As angry as you are her son would probably be 10x's more at his own mother for not putting her family first. She has a long term relationship with him and with you it is just business. It's not fair but I think it makes sense. Wouldn't you do the same for your child and grandchildren?

gaonmymind- yes, I would understand, but if I did this to a client I just made two commissions off of....I wouldn't be surprised if they dropped me like a hot potato ;)

"She has a long term relationship with him and with you it is just business. "

In this case it is called a conflict of interest.

While it is possible the realtor was looking out for her son over the OP and may potentially have had a conflict of interest, I don't think it is necessarily a fact of this situation. There are several variables including how the realtor came into knowledge of the house and OP's ability to purchase at that particular point in time. If the son found the house or the house was brought to the attention of the realtor on behalf of the son, she does not have a conflict of interest. Even if the realtor found the house herself, she has possible justifications for not showing it to the OP. The house was not officially on the market. Even if the other potential buyer had not been the son, someone had to see the house first. If the realtor brought the other buyer to the see the house and the other buyer decided to make an offer, the OP was still out of a house. The realtor had a duty to the other buyer that would have taken precedence over the OP. The realtor would not have contacted another realtor in the office to say hey can you show my other buyer this house so she can bid against my buyer.

There is a lot of emotion here. I understand being upset because there was something highly valued that not obtained. I think the situation may have been unavoidable and not really forseeable. Even so, some of the trust has been lost. Maybe it is just better to move on.

"While it is possible the realtor was looking out for her son over the OP and may potentially have had a conflict of interest"

Never had to deal with COI have you?

The APPEARANCE is enough to be a problem since it is often very hard to prove bias occurred.

I have dealt with Conflict of Interest in other situations.

In this particular case, I don't see where the situation is obvious. The son and realtor had a right to privacy also. When the OP notified the realtor of the house, the realtor disclosed relevant info to the OP. I think the realtor possibly had an unavoidable situation in that she couldn't go to the OP and say I know about this house for sale. This particular situation most likely would not be considered forseeable since it would be an uncommon situation.

I can see where it would potentially have the "appearane of conflict". Since the scenerio is possibly unavoidable and unforseeable, I'm not sure what else the realtor could have done.

On this site, I have seen realtors discussing showing to their clients FSBO. All of them said that they would not show a FSBO until it was listed with a realtor. Too many problems have occurred otherwise in their experience.

I would appreciate any realtors out there to chime in how they would handle the above mentioned scenario. Not that it would change anything...I'm just curious. Thanks!

I would show it to one of my clients first. If that client decided to purchase, then thats it. If he decided not to, I would show it to my second client. There is no way I would show it to both clients and potentially set up a bidding war between both of my clients. THAT is a conflict of interest in my opinion. How would you feel in that case if you found out her son was on the other end of the bidding war and you lost? YOu would then feel that he had inside information on your bid. This was a no win situation for the realtor. Someone had to be first. It wasnt you this time. To answer your original question, yes, I think you are being irrational.

" The son and realtor had a right to privacy also."

The privacy is not the issue.

The privacy due the son is PART of the COI with the other other buyer.

You cannot fairly represent two parties going after the same house.

You have agreed to give each of them your best effort to secure the property for them.

I feel sorry for you if you cannot see the COI present in such a situation.

"It's worth a few intrusive pictures and a few showings to get a bidding war started, at least to me!"

The realtor knew you were looking for a house in this area and chose to keep you out of the loop so her son could have first dibs.

Clearly a conflict of interest and a sign that she is probably not being forthcoming in other areas.

I would not trust or use her again. In fact, I would hire another realtor (or just use a real estate lawyer) and try to find out which house she is negotiating on and make an offer.

What have you got to lose?

'This particular situation most likely would not be considered forseeable (sic) since it would be an uncommon situation.'

I'm sorry, but two buyers going after the same type of house in a 'tiny town with a top notch school system... with a very low inventory' is uncommon and unforeseeable? Really?

'I can see where it would potentially have the 'appearane (sic) of conflict'. Since the scenerio (sic) is possibly unavoidable and unforseeable (sic), I'm not sure what else the realtor could have done.'

The realtor could have(and should have) recused herself from representing one of the buyers or at least notified both parties of the competing interests (see link for legal opinion from the CT Association of Realtors stating the same). No doubt the possibility of two commissions and the hope of getting her son a deal kept her from doing the right thing.

It is possible you have legal recourse against this realtor, but unlikely worth your while to pursue.

Here is a link that might be useful: CT_Realtor legal opinion on conflicts of representing two competing buyers

What Linda says makes sense, but what I'm wondering who do you decide to show it to first?

The one that has been looking the longest? It is about the only fair thing I can think of.

The big question is how the agent came to find out the house was for sale. Without this information, all this guessing is pointless. For all we know, the son is the one that found out. There are too many unknowns.

OP, A realtor is not your friend or your relative - it is purely a business relationship. She was doing nothing unethical, AND you might want to get another agent if either of these two houses interest you. That would not be unethical either, although if you have a contract saying she's your exclusive agent you might have to pay her some $$$ for her cut. I

If the house her son wants also happens to be a house you truly love and want, just go for it anyway. I'm not saying get in a bidding war just to be vindictive, but only if it makes sense for you to do it.

This is the reality in certain high demand areas with limited stock - you're competing with other people many who are nice people you wouldnt ordinarily want to antagonize! It's stressful and you have to act decisively.

I've noticed that the selling and buying of both houses and cars really brings out the competitiveness and outright greed in even people who are normally nice and considerate - if you can't beat em you just may have to join them!

In reference to the two competing buyers link above, you have the condition of what contract a buyer has signed with a realtor. According to the link, "An agent does not breach his duty by acting for competitors if the parties have reason to know that the agent believes he may do so. Essentially, then, no Dual Agency consent is required and a firm can represent both clients so long as the buyers were notified that the firm has the right to represent competing interests. Such a notice could be placed in a Buyer Representation Agreement or a Listing Agreement." If there is some sort of language in the buyer's agreement regarding other potential buyers, the realtor is covered and does not have a conflict of interest because the OP knew another buyer was a possibility.

The above link goes on to say the following. "Additionally, the firm should advise both buyers that they should each submit their best offer and that the seller would make the ultimate decision." We don't have enough info to know if this part would have been an issue. Was the OP even legally considered an actual 'competing buyer' for that house? 1.) We do not know how or under what terms the house came to the attention of the realtor. 2.) The house was not actually on the market for public sale. And 3.)the OP didn't have knowledge of the house and contact the realtor until apparent negotiations had begun and were almost finalized.

Regarding the issue of foreseeability mentioned above... "I'm sorry, but two buyers going after the same type of house in a 'tiny town with a top notch school system... with a very low inventory' is uncommon and unforeseeable? Really? " Two buyers going after the same house is common. What wasn't expected or foreseeable was another represented buyer walking into a basically negotiated deal for a house that wasn't out for open sale to everyone. It was the awkward sequence of events. If the OP had come into the process earlier, a bidding war using the same realtor or a referral to another realtor may have been more obvious choices. By coming in at the time the OP did, there wasn�t an obvious procedure for the realtor to follow. She notified the OP of the conflict.

"Two buyers going after the same house is common. "

Yes it is, but having one of them being the son of the agent representing one of the buyers (the represented persons) and the son are competing) is a COI.

It is more likely to damage the seller through a lower price, without even considering if mom is going to 'help' son using the commission she received.

Even representing close relatives is an area fraught with issues.
But only if you really want to be considered a professional.

"It is more likely to damage the seller through a lower price, without even considering if mom is going to 'help' son using the commission she received."

If I were in this situation I might contact the seller directly (tax records) and let them know their realtor is working hard to keep the listing out of view so her son can get it for a steal.

If I were selling, I'd demand that my telephone number be made available on the flyers in the info box so I could see how many 'buyer's' my agent is willing to tell me about.

If I were in this situation I might contact the seller directly (tax records) and let them know their realtor is working hard to keep the listing out of view so her son can get it for a steal.

The house isnt even listed. The sellers "dont have a realtor".

WOW!

Linda - If OP wanted to contact the homeowners and make a bid, why shouldn't she?

Dreamgarden is making some assumptions about the son getting a house for a "steal" and I would't suggest that OP bad mouth the realtor. But, you have to admit the son is probably paying less than if the house was on the MLS and open to all potential buyers.

To be honest, I don't understand why OP didn't contact the homeowner after she realized the realtor wasn't going to assist her. A neighbor told OP the house was for sale. She wouldn't have been doing anything underhanded.

"The house isnt even listed. The sellers "dont have a realtor". WOW!"

It looks like somebody has a problem with a buyer contacting an UNrepresented seller.

How wouldn't this be fair? Especially when YOUR OWN agent is working AGAINST you? Sheesh.

"Dreamgarden is making some assumptions about the son getting a house for a "steal" and I would't suggest that OP bad mouth the realtor. But, you have to admit the son is probably paying less than if the house was on the MLS and open to all potential buyers."

I am not suggesting the OP bad mouth anyone, but I would not hesitate to mention to sellers that my agent didn't even want me to know the house was available.

If the seller knew how tight the inventory in this small town was, do you think they'd let the house go to a private sale for much less than they might be able to get through a bidding war?

I doubt it.

"If the seller knew how tight the inventory in this small town was, do you think they'd let the house go to a private sale for much less than they might be able to get through a bidding war?"

There are plenty of reasons not wanting to go through with a bidding war if you are a seller. If you have a solid buyer and you're getting the price you want, why go through the stress? How much extra will a bidding war bring in? Can the highest bidder actually show up to closing with the money? How fast do you want to move onto your next life? The seller is doing business. There are plenty of people here on this forums who do FSBOs. There are risks whether you FSBO or go through a realtor. It is up to the seller to decide how to procede and which risks to take.

I'd be careful about saying anything about what you think of the realtor to anybody. It is a small town. If you knew of the house before it was on the market then there there is a nice line of communication between the seller, the neighbors you want and the realtor.

I also suggest being careful, some of the proposed conversations with the seller insult them, not directly but is indirectly telling them they made a poor decision. Usually this makes the person defensive about their decision, not more willing to discuss a sale with you.
I also agree the seller may not be stupid, but want to do a private sale for their own reason, no reason to believe they are just uniformed.

linda117's point was another poster said the OP's agent is blocking the "listing" from other's viewing it, it is not a "listing" it is private. She is not suggesting not to contact an unrepresented seller, read her post again.

It looks like somebody has a problem with a buyer contacting an UNrepresented seller.

Dreamgarden, the buyer can contact whomever they want. What in my posts leads you to believe I would disagree with that?

My comment is in reference to this statement:

"If I were in this situation I might contact the seller directly (tax records) and let them know their realtor is working hard to keep the listing out of view so her son can get it for a steal.

The "seller" doesnt have a realtor. She is not working hard to keep the "listing" out of view. There is no "listing".

....So her son can get it for a steal. How do you know he's getting a steal? Perhaps he's paying asking price and because there is no commission or a reduced commission, the seller is happy with that?

You are making alot of assumptions without any information.