Probably keeps everyone on the same page, wouldn’t expect a reduction in fees. Sounds like a good idea.
Doubtful you would save fees. 1031 companies to hold funds the good ones have adequate insurance policies and other safeguards which cost money to maintain.
My criteria is more the experience of the 1031 company and how credible versus shaving 100 dollars off of a typical fee multi-thousand fee etc. The more lower the fee with volume typically the less they will be focused on your transaction and when you can have depreciation recapture, capital gains taxes, and possibly state income tax from a failed exchange you could lose a lot.
I don't like stepping over dollars to save pennies.
With 1031 exchanges with my client commercial buyers we ask if the seller is making finding a suitable replacement 1031 property part of the sale? Usually they say they are doing an exchange but they will not make it a requirement. This is important for the buyer because if the seller did not find a suitable replacement property and my buyer selected them for a replacement property and spent tens of thousands in legal fees and costs they could lose big.
@Chris Coleman , The documentation is different on each side of the transaction. Your buyer has already sold and started his exchange. Money has to flow through the escrow so there's no savings there either.
That being said, one company vs two is probably not much of an issue. As @Wayne Brooks said, one company keeps the data flow tighter. Two companies ensures that one company is looking out solely for you.
Thanks Joel and Dave. Very helpful.