Real Estate Articles & Blog - Don Dunning
Menu
  • Home
  • East Bay Realty Pro
  • Expert Witness
  • Hourly Consulting
  • About Don
  • Contact Don
  • Home
  • East Bay Realty Pro
  • Expert Witness
  • Hourly Consulting
  • About Don
  • Contact Don

Buyers: Make One Offer at a Time


By Don Dunning | July 10, 2009

Originally appeared in Bay Area News Group publications on July 10, 2009

In trying to get a leg up, some buyers, at conceivably great risk to themselves and the sellers, are submitting offers on a number of properties all at the same time. People are throwing out these simultaneous bids, predominantly on short sales and bank-owned homes, in the hopes one will stick. If they intended to purchase all of them, and had the ability to do so, this would not be an issue. Conversely, if they disclosed their gambit to each seller in writing, the sellers would then have received full disclosure; however, the offer might not be viewed as a serious one.

As a member of the California Association of Realtors (C.A.R.) Professional Standards Committee, I heard about this problem last month at the most recent gathering of C.A.R. It was highlighted as being widespread throughout the state.

“It’s just business”

Relying on the credo, “It is better to ask forgiveness than permission,” there are agents who encourage their buyers to submit as many as ten offers at a time on different, bank-owned properties or short sales. As the sharply priced ones will garner many bids and a response from the seller may not come for weeks or even months, these licensees convince themselves that this is “just business.”

Underlying a sense of misplaced confidence on the part of some agents is the belief that the buyer can always withdraw, without penalty, based on the inspection contingency or other contingencies, such as financing. This is not the case. According to knowledgeable C.A.R. staffers, if the offer was made in bad faith it is actionable. Translation: the buyer (and his agent) can be sued.

Code of ethics

One of the most important differences between Realtors and other real estate licensees is that members of the National Association of Realtors agree to adhere to a written Code of Ethics.

Article Two of the Code states, “Realtors shall avoid exaggeration, misrepresentation, or concealment of pertinent facts relating to the property or the transaction.” Article One specifies that Realtors “pledge themselves to protect and promote the interests of their client” and “treat all parties honestly.”

Clearly, allowing a buyer to write numerous, simultaneous offers without disclosing this in writing to the seller and without fully explaining risks to the buyer could be seen as a violation of these and, possibly, other articles of the Code.

Potential damages to sellers

Based on the seller assuming the contract was written in good faith, these are some ways in which the seller could be damaged:

  • If the seller is in financial trouble, additional marketing time due to reliance on the seriousness of the buyer’s offer (and subsequent failure to close escrow) could push the property into foreclosure.
  • If a buyer makes offers on five to ten homes at the same time, he, most likely, will not have enough funds to cover the earnest money deposit if he gets an accepted contract on more than one. At best, the buyer might delay the process to decide which to purchase. Note that the C.A.R. contract says that obtaining the deposit is not a contingency.
  • Although the seller does not accept the buyer’s (one-of-many) offer, he may, inappropriately, counter or reject a “real” bid from someone else because he thinks the buyer is offering only on his property.
  • A buyer making offers on so many different properties probably will not have completely reviewed all reports/disclosures on each and may have written his contract without enough information. This buyer might be selected and then drop out, causing the seller to lose other, more diligent buyers.
The worst scenario

Not long ago, I heard a local agent explaining how her buyer had accepted offers on two properties and had opened escrow on both. Apparently, pushing these limits is not beyond the capacity of some buyers and their representatives. Needless to say, unless the buyer intends to close on both, not what this buyer had in mind, this is the ultimate example of bad faith.

Repercussions for agents

Once reported, Realtors who have been found to violate the Code of Ethics are liable for disciplinary action from their Association of Realtors. They and their company may be sued for monetary damages by the seller(s). In addition, charges could be brought against them by the California Department of Real Estate. This is a serious matter.

Some agents may argue that the “many-bids-at-the-same-time” trick was the buyer’s idea – a bad excuse. Reputable agents do not operate this way.

Relationships with others in the business and one’s reputation are critically important. Real estate people do not like to deal with those who lack integrity.

Final Thoughts

The concurrent contract scenario applies mainly to distressed properties perceived as well-priced. As a seller, you would be wise to ask your listing agent to have the selling (buyer’s) agent confirm that the buyer does not have or plan to have other, simultaneous offers on different properties.

As a buyer, be aware of your potential liability to the seller if he is not informed of your other bids and lack of sufficient funds to cover the deposit on each. A real estate attorney can explain the possible consequences.

Related Articles:

Code of Ethics Distinguishes Realtors

 

 

Copyright 2009 Don Dunning (Bureau of Real Estate Lic. #00768985)
Permission is given to freely copy any or all articles for personal and
noncommercial use provided they are copied in full without
modification and that proper attribution is given.
These articles may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, nor linked to from another site.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Categories


  • Adding Value – Gardening/Landscaping/Renovations (29)
  • Alameda (2)
  • Around the House (20)
  • Carmel (1)
  • Community (43)
  • Condos (2)
  • Environment (27)
  • Events (13)
  • Expert Witness (7)
  • General Information (23)
  • Going Green (14)
  • History (13)
  • Home Maintenance (15)
  • Homeless (1)
  • Homes for Sale (8)
  • Hourly Consulting (10)
  • Local Attractions (24)
  • Mortgages-Loans (9)
  • New Orleans (1)
  • Oakland Neighborhoods (27)
  • Oh, Please (7)
  • Parks (1)
  • Pets (4)
  • Real Estate (285)
  • Real Estate Advice (109)
  • Real Estate in the News (77)
  • Real Estate Newspaper Articles (164)
  • Restaurants (3)
  • Rockridge (1)
  • Shops (6)
  • Technology (1)
  • The Economy (48)
  • Travel (3)

Tags


Buying Buying a home California unemployment Choosing an agent City Ordinance Cohousing Communal Housing construction data mining Dimond East Bay Events Expert Witness gardening green living Historical Sites home inspections Home Loans home maintenance lead paint legislation Mortgages multiple offers Newspaper article Oakland Oaktoberfest Oktoberfest Online real estate organic Pets Points of Interest Real Estate Advice Real Estate Law real estate news renovation Rockridge schools Selling a Home shopping social networking Tax Credit Technology termites The Economy Travel

Archives


  • May 2017
  • February 2017
  • November 2016
  • September 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • January 2016
  • October 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • May 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • August 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • January 2008
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • October 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003
  • November 2002
  • October 2002
  • September 2002
  • August 2002
  • July 2002
  • June 2002
  • May 2002
  • April 2002
  • January 2002
  • November 2001
  • October 2001
  • September 2001
  • August 2001
  • July 2001
  • June 2001
  • May 2001
  • April 2001
  • February 2001
  • January 2001
  • November 2000
  • October 2000
  • September 2000
  • August 2000
  • July 2000
  • June 2000
  • May 2000
  • March 2000
  • February 2000
  • January 2000
  • November 1999
  • August 1999
  • July 1999
  • May 1999
  • April 1999
  • March 1999
  • January 1999
  • October 1998
  • September 1998
  • July 1998
  • June 1998
  • February 1998
  • November 1997
  • October 1996
  • May 1996
  • August 1995
  • July 1995

Copyright © 2018 Don Dunning - Bureau of Real Estate Lic. #00768985

Theme created by PWT. Powered by WordPress.org