Real estate agent

Maybe you could discuss it with her broker. See if they approve of this behavior.

You can never tell if the realtor sides with the Grantor or the Grantee.
You can be damned sure they side for themselves.
Since they think less acres will prevail, they don't want to loose money.
Unless this is a cash sale, the bank or title company will catch the deed not closing and will not use it in their deal.
I don't waste my time trying to convince an idiot unless my client asks me to do so and my client is either the Grantor or the Grantee or other party that is paying for the survey.
Ask yourself, who is paying me and have a sit down and explain the real facts with them.
:gammon:

Bottom Line:

The average buyer has little idea what it is they are buying without a land survey. They don't know where the boundary lines are and the real estate agent is neither qualified nor legally authorized to tell anyone where the boundary line is.

Ask your client,

"Do you really want to pay for an unknown quantity of land?"

"Do you really want to pay for land that you cannot positively identify?"

"Do you really want to pay for property without knowing where the boundary lines really are?"

"Who is looking after your interests, a professional with a public and primary duty to report facts, or an agent with a primary duty to make a profit?"

I'm far from being an expert, but I believe that, in most jurisdictions, the real estate agent represents the seller and has minimal, if any, responsibility to the buyer. In North Carolina, a buyer can hire a realtor to represent him, and that's very often a good thing to do. Otherwise, it's caveat emptor; let the buyer beware.

Ask the agent specifically who she represents.

Realtors are primarily concerned about the closing of the transaction. Surveyors can only get in the way of that. All that matters to them is getting their commission.

MathTeacher, post: 341625, member: 7674 wrote: I'm far from being an expert, but I believe that, in most jurisdictions, the real estate agent represents the seller and has minimal, if any, responsibility to the buyer. In North Carolina, a buyer can hire a realtor to represent him, and that's very often a good thing to do. Otherwise, it's caveat emptor; let the buyer beware.

Ask the agent specifically who she represents.

That's my understanding as well.

If you call a real estate agent and get them to find and show you houses, unless you sign a separate contract with them and compensate them independently from the sales commission, then BOTH the agent working with you and the listing agent have a fiduciary duty to the seller.

That is right on, from my understanding. I think it is unethical to have the realty agent tell the buyer not to have a survey but I doubt that you can ever get that kind of thing proven in court. One thing you can do for sure, is have the buyer ask the realtor if they are working for him (the buyer) and/or are representing their best interest. The realty agent knows better than to make that claim and will have to back down (I think). (I know they'll have some dancing around the confession like "no, we technically represent the seller, but don't worry about it my ethics will prevent me from doing you wrong' that kind of thing. Reator.com loves to advertise that they got themselves ethics.)

Things vary from State to State. In Kansas, there are three options as described in this link. Kansas Real Estate Commission

The seller's agent is solely responsible to the seller. The buyer's agent is solely responsible to the buyer. The standard contract, though, in the vast number of listings, is to serve as a transaction broker. In that role the agent facilitates the overall transaction but must not hold the interest of one party higher than that of the other. The link explains this quite clearly.

There will be cases where the listing agent is working as a transaction broker. The buyer may have a buyer's agent working on his behalf. Therefore, two or more agents may be directly involved in a single transaction. The buyer's agent approaches the transaction broker who has the listing for the information on the listing sheet. The buyer's agent then makes the direct contact rather than the actual buyer. This is a very common practice when the buyer is a corporation.

Tell a used car salesman that you want to have a mechanic check out the car. He'll tell you that you don't need to worry about it that they already checked it out for you. (They do a sixteen point check on all their cars or some hooey).

Now tell a realtor that you would like to have the property surveyed that you want to buy. Gee...same answer in essence; We've already went over the deed with the title company. And don't worry your title is insured...

Who you going to believe, a mechanic who has no reason to hide anything from you and will get paid either way, or a realtor car salesman who will make money if you buy (and nothing if the mechanic finds anything major wrong).

Many times the opposing agents will work with each other more than they will with their respective clients. Having recently gone through both a selling and a buying process, I found that the agents were more interested in getting the sale accomplished than they were with representing me. Only when I got out of the contract with the real estate agent and sold my house myself did I feel any satisfaction.

John,
I wouldn't have communicated with the agent any opinion until you have arrived at the conclusion of the survey. At that point they would get my information from my client. The agents responsibility is to the buyer or seller and themselves and not the same as yours; the public. If you have a contract with your client for a specific scope, then you may make periodic progress reports if asked. I however ask that those reports be held in confidence until completion of the survey. Nothing worse than disturbing a hornets nest unnecessarily.
I have on occasion confronted a real estate agent with the fact that they are not experts on title, property descriptions or measurements. I also don't tell clients, homeowners or Realtor's how much a property is worth or if it is marketable. Once you set those boundaries, the professions can get along. I guess in my old age I am picky about whom I work for and how I conduct business. My health, lawyer and insurance company are happy about this.
Regards

Also, there is no incentive for a seller's agent to keep pushing to get the owner the best price. They will press sellers to drop the price by $5000 to make a quick sale since 4% of $195,000= $7800 and 4% of $200,000= $8000. Realtors know that they only get an extra $200 so its not worth the effort to actually perform their duty of representing the buyer.

Consumer fraud?
Is the agent not trying to withold substantial informtion that may affect the sale and possibly deceive the buyer?
Not seeking the truth may not be against the law but it may end the sale if the buyer is aware of the agents actions.
And by the description not closing for 3000' (!) who can say what your final acreage may be.

Most residential and small time cookie realtors I have dealt with prey on the fact most folks haven't ever gone through the process before of purchasing real estate. Sadly, everyone usually trusts their opinions and actions. And as stated above, most of them couldn't care less about anything other than shoving a closing down someone's throat and cashing their check.

That said, I have dealt with some very professional commercial brokers and couldn't work for a better group of professionals.

I kind of had a little fun with during last encounter with the unprofessional variety. I was selling Momma Cash's old homestead. During the "cleanup" of the property I was approached by a young couple and their real estate agent before I had even thought about getting the property "on the market". Although I agreed to have the property "listed", we hammered out a deal among ourselves within a day or two. One of the stips of the contract was all inspections would be paid by the buyer.

On the day of the closing I was pouring over all the paperwork and noticed I had been charged $250 for a "survey". I asked for a copy of the survey. Of course it WAS NOT a survey, but what we call a "mortgage inspection" around here. One of our State Board's requirements on a "mortgage inspection" is to plainly state on the document "this is NOT a survey"...and the MI did have the proper cert upon it. I refused to pay for it because it was an inspection, not a survey. They squirmed and try to tell me it was OK for me to go ahead and pay for it, because it really wasn't the "kind of inspection" that was meant in the contract. (WTF?) My opinion was the wording "ALL INSPECTIONS" was pretty cut and dried. I stuck by my guns. Of course, I told them if they could get the surveyor to change his MI to state it was a survey, I would pay for it. The realtor was a little pissed and told me she couldn't believe I would let such a paltry sum blow the whole deal. I told her if it was that paltry a sum, she ought to pay for it herself.....guess what?

After a couple of phone calls, the realtor decided to write the $250 check herself just to get the deal to close.

final score:

Paden 1, Realtor 0...and I took the big check to the bank. B-)

They aren't withholding substantial information because they don't have any substantial information. That is exactly why they don't want it surveyed. If they don't know anything, there is nothing to disclose.

I bet when you tell them that it doesn't close by 3000', they hold their fingers in their ears and scream la la la, I can't hear you. In fact, there might indeed be an underlying good ploy, tell the owner by email and cc the realtor that it doesn't close and that you would recommend a survey. That nonclosure might be a nonclosure for them if they don't respond.

paden cash, post: 341663, member: 20 wrote: Most residential and small time cookie realtors I have dealt with prey on the fact most folks haven't ever gone through the process before of purchasing real estate. Sadly, everyone usually trusts their opinions and actions. And as stated above, most of them couldn't care less about anything other than shoving a closing down someone's throat and cashing their check.

That said, I have dealt with some very professional commercial brokers and couldn't work for a better group of professionals.

I kind of had a little fun with during last encounter with the unprofessional variety. I was selling Momma Cash's old homestead. During the "cleanup" of the property I was approached by a young couple and their real estate agent before I had even thought about getting the property "on the market". Although I agreed to have the property "listed", we hammered out a deal among ourselves within a day or two. One of the stips of the contract was all inspections would be paid by the buyer.

On the day of the closing I was pouring over all the paperwork and noticed I had been charged $250 for a "survey". I asked for a copy of the survey. Of course it WAS NOT a survey, but what we call a "mortgage inspection" around here. One of our State Board's requirements on a "mortgage inspection" is to plainly state on the document "this is NOT a survey"...and the MI did have the proper cert upon it. I refused to pay for it because it was an inspection, not a survey. They squirmed and try to tell me it was OK for me to go ahead and pay for it, because it really wasn't the "kind of inspection" that was meant in the contract. (WTF?) My opinion was the wording "ALL INSPECTIONS" was pretty cut and dried. I stuck by my guns. Of course, I told them if they could get the surveyor to change his MI to state it was a survey, I would pay for it. The realtor was a little pissed and told me she couldn't believe I would let such a paltry sum blow the whole deal. I told her if it was that paltry a sum, she ought to pay for it herself.....guess what?

After a couple of phone calls, the realtor decided to write the $250 check herself just to get the deal to close.

final score:

Paden 1, Realtor 0...and I took the big check to the bank. B-)

They need to learn this lesson big time. Not only does every innocent buyer "think" they have a survey, they also come to the mindset that surveys only cost $200. It is doing a disservice to all of the survey community. It doesn't just send the message to the buyers that a survey only costs a couple-hundred, all the realtors tend to refer to them as surveys and they have convinced themselves that is what a survey is worth.

I was surveying an adjoining right-of-way to a private property, and the homeowner came out as I was measuring up all his encroaching outbuildings. I told him that according to my survey his outbuilding were well outside his deeded line. He responded "not according to my survey'. I asked to see it and he came out with an ILC (Mortgage Survey). I pointed out that the map clearly states that it is not a land survey plat and that a statement by the surveyor on the drawing that he highly recommends a land survey. Also that the "ILC" showed the same outbuildings encroaching. these guys don't know what they have and don't know what it's worth.

After reading this thread, I now see why Realtors HATE surveyors, and ALWAYS try to get the fast and cheap one. It's because we mess up deals, especially ones that are "delicate" to get to go through. And, they have car payments.

I can now hear this conversation: "Hi, this is Patti Oates with Century 21, I need a survey of lot 47, Crooket heights subdivision. I need it FAST, Cheap, and to find NO problems! Can you accommodate me?"

Hmmmm And, I give them my competitors number.

N

I did a survey in a 1946 subdivision a few days ago, and the property line turned out to be about 15 feet from where the client expected. Of course, her response was "That's impossible, I have been told by the neighbors, the utility company, and my REAL ESTATE AGENT that the line of over here". I explained to her that none of those people are surveyors, and they shouldn't be making such statements. I think I finally convinced her, but it's still frustrating.

I've been doing this for almost 19 years and can easily say most realtors are descendants of Satan.