From: egreen@east.sun.com (Ed Green - Pixel Cruncher)
Newsgroups: misc.consumers.house
Subject: Re: Getting Ready to Sell House: How to Ma
Date: 18 Nov 92 15:15:35 GMT
Reply-To: egreen@east.sun.com
Organization: Sun Microsystems, RTP, NC
NNTP-Posting-Host: laser.east.sun.com

In article 17v@magpie.nycenet.edu, manes@magpie.nycenet.edu (Steve Manes) writes:
>Ed Green - Pixel Cruncher (egreen@east.sun.com) wrote:
>: 
>: For a well maintained house in a desirable location, there is seldom
>: any compelling reason to list the house through an agent.
>
>For well-maintained house in a desirable location, and a seller who
>has years to make the sale. 

Simply not true.  The sale may take somewhat longer, simply due to the
sheer number of people who know about it via MLS, but "years" is
ridiculous.  You think overpriced listed houses don't sit on the market
for months and months?  How about otherwise reasonably priced houses
whose asking price is artifically inflated 6% to cover agents' fees?
For a well-maintained house in a desirable location, the *single* most
important factor in rapidity of sale is price, regardless of whether it
is listed or not.

BTW - many computer listings services are cropping up in direct
competition to the RE industry's exclusive MLS.  As that one tool loses
its exclusivity, the only real reason for listing with an agent will
disappear.

>The problem in all cases was that
>the owners had a difficult time discussing their homes with the
>degree of detachment I required to get an honest impression of the
>home's condition.  Maybe it was just my reluctance to insult the
>owner but, as a buyer, I feel like I can more aggressively inspect
>the property and demand candid answers from a broker than with an
>owner.

If you expect more honest answers about a house from an agent looking
to close the sale ASAP, with legal obligations to the seller (as has
been discussed), than from the people who live there, you are living in
a fantasy, IMHO.  What makes you think that (a) the agent *knows*
anything about the house, or (b) is not going to tell you exactly what
you want to hear?  I find the premise that a RE agent is more "honest"
than a seller laughable.

>In one owner-represented case, I saw a nice house with a new
>addition that, although well-executed, looked suspiciously
>home-made (no access to crawl space, no soffet vents, no ridge
>vent).  The owner was less than informative in his response to my
>questions about who did the work, which left my only recourse being
>a time-consuming search of building permits and inspections at city
>hall to make sure that I was looking at something insurable. 

1. Tell the owner you are interested, but you need to see said
documentation before putting down any money.  If he wants to sell the
house, he will provide it.

2. Hire a professional to inspect the house and the addition, and
certify that it conforms to the local building code (something I would
do with *any* house I was serious about buying, anyway).

3. Do what you did, and look it up yourself.

I don't see that an agent would have helped a bit, other than to save
you some time at city hall.  As a buyer, you are paying the agent's fee
in an inflated price on the house.  Was your research time worth
several thousand dollars?


---
Ed Green, former Ninjaite |I was drinking last night with a biker,
  Ed.Green@East.Sun.COM   |and I showed him a picture of you.  I said,
DoD #0111  (919)460-8302  |"Go on, get to know her, you'll like her!"
 (The Grateful Dead) -->  |It seemed like the least I could do...