New to Real Estate · Boise, ID · Member since 2021 · 3 posts · 0 votes
Hi all! I'm based in Boise and am curious if anyone has had success purchasing properties using real estate attorneys instead of a buyers agent, or paying an agent per service.
For those who have done either, I'd like to hear:
Who wrote your offer?
What did you pay for that help, and was it a flat fee, hourly, or at closing?
What was the hardest part?
Would you do it the same way again, or hire someone for more of the process?
Were there legal issues?
Did you get a credit for the buyers agent amount at closing?
Investors and flippers who do this regularly, I'd love your take too. Comments or DMs both work!
A few things specific to Idaho that might help. Idaho closes through title/escrow companies, not attorneys, so an attorney isn't required at closing. Where one earns their fee is reviewing or drafting the purchase agreement and any addenda. Ask for a flat-fee quote up front so you know your cost per offer, because you may write several before one sticks.
On the agent side, since the 2024 NAR settlement you sign a written buyer agreement before touring with an agent, and the fee in it is negotiable. That makes à la carte deals much easier to get: a flat fee to write and submit the offer, or an hourly rate for showings only.
On the buyer-agent credit: if you go unrepresented and the seller was offering buyer-agent compensation, ask for it in the offer as a price reduction or seller credit. If you're financing, check your lender's cap on seller contributions first (on conventional loans it's 2% for investment properties, and 3% to 9% on a primary depending on down payment), or you'll leave part of it on the table.
The hardest part for most people doing this is access: getting into properties quickly without an agent's lockbox access, and getting listing agents to take an unrepresented offer seriously. A clean offer with proof of funds or a strong pre-approval goes a long way there.
Thank you, this is incredibly helpful info and gives me hope that this may be possible.
- Having a flat fee quote for offers is a good point, it may take a couple - I think a la carte deals will become more common, but surprised the current model hasn't changed faster. - I did not know there were caps on seller contributions! I'll look into this more
- Will agents take an unrepresented buyers offer seriously, probably still no, but maybe will take an attorney's offer... Hopefully...
everything is of course negotiable, just curious where the desire to work this way comes from? what problem are you trying to solve by running the deal yourself or being unrepresented as the buyer?
Of course agent commissions are technically negotiable, but in my experience, if you asked an agent for a bare-bones service at 1% (~$5,000 on the average house), they would laugh at you. That's even if you've already found the property, are paying cash or are pre-approved, know what you want to offer, and mainly just want help writing the offer.
I can't think of any other asset with such a high relative cost to transact. Stocks solved this decades ago (pioneered by Charles Schwab), and used cars did it with Facebook Marketplace. Now both transact for <1%. It seems odd that real estate has held on so tightly to the all-or-nothing model. The largest homebuilder in Idaho requires buyers to be represented, even though the price isn't negotiable. That's a ~$15,000 service that seems to provide minimal value in comparison. So I'm exploring other ways for buyers to get to closing for a fraction of the cost.
Brayden, there may actually be a pretty straightforward way to accomplish what you’re looking for in Idaho. Take a look at the RE-5 Prior to Showing Agreement.
It allows an agent to show properties without establishing a buyer agency relationship, and the agent can agree to show for no fee, an hourly fee, per-property fee, or flat fee.
You could find an agent willing to work this way, agree on what you think is fair for them to “open doors,” and then if you find something you want to purchase, negotiate a separate flat fee for them to write the contract and help get it to closing.
That seems like it may fit what you’re trying to accomplish better than trying to make the traditional full-service buyer representation model work for you.
I've seen investors successfully use both approaches. If you're experienced and know how to analyze deals, working with a real estate attorney and paying for specific services can work well. For newer investors, though, a good investor-friendly agent often brings value beyond writing the offer by helping with negotiations, inspections, local market knowledge, and identifying potential issues before closing.
Whether a buyer receives a credit for the buyer's agent compensation depends on how the transaction is negotiated and the terms of the purchase agreement. I'd compare the total cost and value of each approach rather than focusing only on the commission.
As you move forward, I'd also recommend getting your financing lined up early so you know exactly what you can offer and can move quickly when the right property comes along.
I use a lawyer to buy, and only a lawyer as a representation.
It's worth the cost; it's like an education. There are a ton of benefits to not having an agent beyond the 3% you can bring down, the most is the way they ******** you just to close. Most are sneaky and not trustworthy. Now if an agent brings me a deal; I'll compensate them directly if I close but they are sure as hell aren't representing me. If they gatekeep me out once they realize I am doing that-- it's why I have a lawyer.
And yes, there are consequences to being discriminatory.