All Forum Posts by: Irene Nash

I've used Ron West from RW West Consultants for 15 years, I think he's excellent. http://www.rwwestinspections.com/ He has other inspectors who work for him that I'm not as familiar with.

Can't speak for all states but in WA state it's legal as long as you disclose it in writing in the contract. If you buy a bank-owned home or a short sale best to check to make sure they're OK with the buyer as the agent getting the buyer's agent commission, or maybe it's when you're getting financing yourself - I honestly can't remember which scenario it was but somewhere along the line I heard about a snag with a lender in one of those circumstances, so just know that it might be worth checking in certain situations. Normally not an issue and just disclose it in the contract, unless your state has different rules - for those check with your state licensing board.

The question is, are you willing to pay someone who does some work for you, and if so, how much?

On the one hand - speaking as an agent - I'm not crazy about buyer agency agreements because they often rope buyers into working exclusively - and for a long time - with someone they know little about, who sometimes turns out to not be as competent as they have the right to expect them to be. I've seen this quite a bit.

On the other hand, it takes a lot of work to be a good (emphasis 'good') buyer's agent, find you properties, vet them before sending them to you, do research on them when necessary, and then show them to you.

It's actually really hard to be a good 'half' buyer's agent, as in, "my client is pretty sure they know what they need to know" (sometimes true but sometimes not), "so I'm just acting like an upgraded Zillow and sending them stuff, but in order to really do my job correctly I need to vet the properties and give my opinion, but that takes a lot of time and this person is totally happy to ditch me and buy without me so really, why spend all that time doing that."  Not fun, not fulfilling.

Investors especially, in my experience, tend to take a more hardline view of things and it seems more of them have read the same books (basic theme, "do what it takes to get the deal and agents are fat cats who don't really deserve to get paid anyway - also thank you for the book royalties which I would never have gotten if I had just written a book about how it's fair to pay people for the work they do").

So... if someone spends weeks or months finding and researching properties for you and then you happen to find a FSBO or something else that works out for you without them, do you owe them nothing? The time they spent for you is work spent away from other clients, away from their family and/or dog, and/or time spent not sitting on the side of a river sipping a beverage of choice. It is valuable (aka, worth money) time.

At the same time, I would be pretty hesitant about signing a multi-month agreement with an agent before I had gotten a chance to see what they were like to work with. Plenty of buyers end up with crappy agents this way.

In my opinion, a reasonable approach is to sign a much shorter agreement, i.e., one or two weeks, to see what it's like to work together. If you like the agent, great, sign on for longer and understand there's a lot more to buying a good investment property than just finding it. If that doesn't seem reasonable to you then it's likely you're the kind of investor who's going to feel better not working with an agent at all. Either is totally fair as long as all parties are in the know, IMO.

In terms of the different areas, I would recommend just telling each agent (DE and PA) about your concerns and needs for expertise. You can modify a buyer agency agreement (which usually includes huge search areas) to the areas you feel you need area-specific expertise in. You might get a little less 'oomph' from each agent, but probably still enough to serve your needs. I believe it is fair for you to expect to be able to work with an expert in each area. Good luck.

I can't speak to requirements in your state, but the things that come to mind are a) having another agent or your managing broker be part of the transaction so there's no question of the seller not being adequately represented if you end up buying it, and b) making sure the question of what he would have been likely to get on the open market be adequately addressed, so there's no issue of whether or not he got less for it by selling it to you if you do end up offering to buy it before it gets listed. From a seller's standpoint, as long as the seller gets a trouble-free sale and is confident he got market value for the property then I don't see any drawback in him selling it to you, so if you have a decent relationship with the guy it may not be a big issue to just talk to him about it and be completely clear about wanting to deal with those issues up front so everyone ends up happy in the long run. But seeing as your brokerage is technically at risk for anything you do, probably a good idea to run it by your broker first. Good luck.

Hi Himanshu,

It depends in part on what you think the Atlanta real estate market will do in the next few years.

If you believe that home prices will go up significantly, that would increase the potential value of renting it out and putting up with the inconvenience of having a long-distance rental for a while. If you think home prices will stay the same, not increase much, or possibly go down, then there would be far less benefit to renting it out if the goal were just to bide time until you could sell it at a higher price.

I'm sorry, I don't have experience with long distance rentals, but many people on this site will have good insight on that. I realize that was your main question, but the issue of where you think home prices may be heading in Atlanta is, in my opinion, an important part of the decision scenario. Another part is how renting vs. selling may affect your home purchase/life plans in CA.

Best wishes, and congrats on your move, I'm a huge fan of the West coast. :)

It will be interesting to see what the final 'sold' price is when it closes. Based on the information provided here, it seems likely the seller could have gotten more than list price for it.

A helpful question for sellers is "If someone paid you $10K to tour your home at a time when it caused you a moderate inconvenience, would you say 'yes' or 'no'? 

(I'm not talking about 2 a.m., I mean helping the seller realistically evaluate what allowing a little more market time would mean to them - often it's far more than $10K, and usually their expectations are set for days of showings anyway).

Allowing the market to set the price by giving the home at least a day or two on the market (more depending on the listing strategy, i.e. when there's an offer review date 3 to 6 days is usually better, but I understand that's not appropriate for all markets) is what allows the market to do what it does best, set the price.

If the seller decides to not do that it's just important for them to truly understand what that may mean to them so it's an informed decision.  I work primarily with non-investor sellers and I can't think of one who hasn't been willing to go through some inconvenience for a higher sales price.

The extra $10K  (or $5K, or $50K) that the seller gets if the price escalates often translates to a big percentage of their net, i.e. if the house sells for $400K instead of $375K - so just under 7% higher - and the seller pays $250K in mortgage payoff and selling expense, the seller actually walks away with 20% more cash.

To be clear, I don't recommend toying with buyers and alienating a good offer needlessly by dragging things out - some times that first offer is the best one, or it may come in significantly higher than list price. But if it's not and other agents are beating the door down trying to show the house that tells you a lot about what might happen price-wise. 

Hi Victor,

I'm not a wholesaler but have been a real estate agent for a long time, so if your question includes what kind of higher education will help you be successful in RE as a profession, my personal opinion is that a college degree is not at all necessary and is actually not likely to teach you much that relates to doing the job well. 

I am not anti-higher education, I just think that from a very practical point of view it is probably not what is going to make the difference between success or not, certainly as an agent and very possibly in other areas of real estate investing, especially when there's a lot of info available from hands-on investors on sites like this - so if you have the option to spend your time and money on something that doesn't delay your earning potential for that long, I believe it would be worth looking into. I hope this helps, good luck.

P.S. For what it's worth, I didn't know beans when I started.

@LaDamien Brewton Ha, glad it was helpful, good luck! :) 

Knowing how to evaluate market price correctly is crucial. This is not just a question of looking at comparable sold homes, it includes evaluating current pending and active homes  so you can catch trends as they are happening, and also understanding seasonal market trends so that you don't price on the higher side in June/July when you may be at the tail end of a rising spring market, or under-price in February because you're looking at comps that sold in December and January, etc.

And it includes understanding the home features that are going to add or detract value compared to the comps, i.e. great house but unusually small master bedroom/or backs to busy street/or missing that one extra rec room or flex space that will keep 3 or 4 people from piling up on each other.  Vs. the opposite situation, a nice home similar to the others, but with an amazing back yard that will cause first time home buyers moving from apartments to get emotional immediately.

Pricing accurately and being a good listing agent also means seeing the potential in the property that may not currently  be obvious, and working with the sellers to maximize the value of what they are selling before it ever goes on market. I can't stress enough how important that is.  This includes interior and exterior preparation, staging (even if it's just de-cluttering and improving flow by removing/changing furniture), and professional grade photography - which can be done by the agent but takes skill. 

Everything leads up to the seller's one shot to sell their home, their home is a huge investment of funds and often time and emotion, and the listing agent's job is to manage things so their home enters the market at its peak point of market value (assuming the sellers can see the big picture, and working within the guidelines of what they're able to do). And when I say market value I mean the price the home is actually worth and is likely to sell at at in that market.

I understand this may come across as preachy, but I really believe these things are crucial and sometimes when I look at MLS photos, in my mind I see a vision of the listing agent being led away in handcuffs. :) (We all make mistakes, but systemic malpractice is something else.) These skills take some time to learn, but it's totally worth it. Good luck!

RE the listing remarks, I agree that some are very poor, however there so much information in them that is very specific to that one home's features and the market we know it is most likely to appeal to, as well as information from conversations with the seller (remodels, maintenance, what they loved about the house when they bought it, etc.) ... it's one of those things that I think would be harder to delegate. I don't mean to sound unreasonably negative. If writing articles appeals to you, I do think there's a need for that kind of thing. And if you have knowledge of SEO and power page structure that would add value, although you'd have to explain to people why. :) (Anything from Brian Dean's Backlinko site is excellent in regards to SEO - https://backlinko.com/blog.) Good luck!