SteveK
Guru
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2019
- Messages
- 5,930
- Location
- Gulf Islands, BC Canada
- Vessel Name
- Sea Sanctuary
- Vessel Make
- Bayliner 4588
What a lovely profession.
All service jobs are a thankless profession.
What a lovely profession.
Correct, you don't see, you must have skipped over post #1I don't see all the uproar.
I've spoken with the brokerage about the section I quoted in post number one. They're trying to come up with wording that will mitigate my concern. Interestingly, they say they don't want to get into striking offending (to me) language, and they say they can't modify this boiler plate contract. They say they can only add clarifying language. I'm not clear why....maybe it has to do with copyright or some such as regards their use of the document. I'd prefer simply strike the subject section. But I'll take a look at what they propose.
Different subject: I asked about the language associated with what happens after the 365 day contract period (a one year claim to brokerage fee if the boat was sold to a party that had been contacted by their brokerage). I wondered if the tiime frame might be reduced to six months. The assigned broker said not to worry about that...just give us a call and we'll cancel the contract....hmmm....don't think so...
These are nice people, and it's a good company. They strive for happy buyer seller deals. I think they just purchased this contract off the internet and moved on. The culprit, if any, is the think tank that developed it.
I've spoken with the brokerage about the section I quoted in post number one. They're trying to come up with wording that will mitigate my concern. Interestingly, they say they don't want to get into striking offending (to me) language, and they say they can't modify this boiler plate contract. They say they can only add clarifying language. I'm not clear why....maybe it has to do with copyright or some such as regards their use of the document. I'd prefer simply strike the subject section. But I'll take a look at what they propose.
That aside, I perceive that they like this wording because it facilitates an income stream inside their maintenance/repair branch (it's a fairly big marina and maintenance/repair operation). It goes something like this: The brokerage uses the buyers agent aspect of the dual representation language to strongly recommend not only a survey (by one of two well-known surveyors in the area), but also highly recommends a complete mechanical/ electrical/hull inspection (by their in-house operation) prior to purchase. (Income for that side of the business). Then they offer to fix/repair anything they find. This is in addition to things the surveyor has on his/her list. The response by the brokerage is that the seller always has the last word on sell price... Well yes, but the buyer is predisposed to a lower offer because of the influence of the in-house buyers broker.
The prospective buyer in all probability then factors the cost of these items (including the full-blown inspection) into the offer. The inevitable net result is that the offer from the buyer goes down, and the maintenance/repair side of the brokerage has a fair chance of doing the work that started with the urging of the (in-house) buyers broker. In the end, the in-house buyers broker arrangement almost certainly works against the seller. The owner suggested splitting the seller/buyer function between two of his staff brokers, but I don't believe that would change a thing.
Another thing that leaves me uncomfortable is that the assigned staff broker has worked as an independent buyers broker in the past and is a bit defensive about my suggestion that the arrangement within this company could work against the seller.
Different subject: I asked about the language associated with what happens after the 365 day contract period (a one year claim to brokerage fee if the boat was sold to a party that had been contacted by their brokerage). I wondered if the tiime frame might be reduced to six months. The assigned broker said not to worry about that...just give us a call and we'll cancel the contract....hmmm....don't think so...
These are nice people, and it's a good company. They strive for happy buyer seller deals. I think they just purchased this contract off the internet and moved on. The culprit, if any, is the think tank that developed it.
"...The brokerage uses the buyers agent aspect of the dual representation language to strongly recommend not only a survey (by one of two well-known surveyors in the area), but also highly recommends a complete mechanical/ electrical/hull inspection (by their in-house operation) prior to purchase. (Income for that side of the business). Then they offer to fix/repair anything they find. This is in addition to things the surveyor has on his/her list. ..."
This raises a big red flag for me. If you need a surveyor, ask other boaters at your marina or post it on forums such as TF. The broker/yard/surveyor relationship that I am reading here sounds like you're going to get a big list of repair items. My paranoia antenna tells me they are not working in your best interest.
As a broker, I frequently have clients ask me to recommend surveyors. My first response is that I would rather they find their own, but if they can't do better than a Google search or yellow pages, then I will make recommendations. Furthermore, I only make recommendations to clients where there has been a relationship of trust already established. Trusting these guys? Sounds like you might be proceeding on emotions rather than smarts.
My wife and I are looking to purchase our first liveaboard and want to avoid as many mistakes as possible. We are hoping to find a broker to help us through the process, so your comment about how things worked out for you got my attention. I gather you were satisfied with the results and would recommend this broker to newbies like my wife and I. Is your broker able to assist people in the Washington state, BC area?
Thanks in advance.
Nick.
I'm considering listing our boat with a broker. They sent their standard contract language which has a paragraph:
"AGENCY. Broker may act as an agent for both the seller and the buyer. Owner consents to such and any related additional compensation payable to the broker from the other party..........."
There are some stipulations as to what may not be discussed with either party, but it seems like a built-in conflict of interest. ...a different spin on the buyer's broker routine? Thoughts?
I have always been uncomfortable with this approach, of one person representing two parties at the same time, they can't be an advocate for both.
I recently engaged a realtor to sell a property I own and I was required to read and sign a document explaining this from the sate in which the sale is tasking place, the first time I'd ever seen such a disclosure. What it explained clearly is that the broker or agent, if representing both partiers, can no longer negotiate price, so you are on your own, he or she can and is still expected to do everything else for you to facilitate the sale. Go into the process with your eyes open and ask that broker for his or her take on that language, ask them to explain and justify it, the answer will likely tell you a great deal about their character.
I've written about this and the related 'for sale by owner' subject a few times...
https://stevedmarineconsulting.com/...necessarily-early-death-from-this-phenomenon/
https://stevedmarineconsulting.com/the-importance-of-valve-adjustment/
This is pretty much the same wording as Real Estate listings here in Ontario, called dual agency. The listing Broker is the best one to persuade or explain the facts of life to a seller when an offer comes in.
With respect to crossing clause or changing wording, I tried to discuss that with Curtis Stokes. After they demanded I transfer my ownership from Canada to USA and pay the tax, they refused to list the boat, went with another broker who sold the boat. Would not even talk about the wording.
Real Estate. Locally they had, maybe still do have a disclosure form for a realtor who wants to personally buy your property.I have always been uncomfortable with this approach, of one person representing two parties at the same time, they can't be an advocate for both.
I recently engaged a realtor to sell a property I own and I was required to read and sign a document explaining this from the sate in which the sale is tasking place, the first time I'd ever seen such a disclosure. What it explained clearly is that the broker or agent, if representing both partiers, can no longer negotiate price, so you are on your own, he or she can and is still expected to do everything else for you to facilitate the sale. Go into the process with your eyes open and ask that broker for his or her take on that language, ask them to explain and justify it, the answer will likely tell you a great deal about their character.
I've written about this and the related 'for sale by owner' subject a few times...
https://stevedmarineconsulting.com/...necessarily-early-death-from-this-phenomenon/
https://stevedmarineconsulting.com/the-importance-of-valve-adjustment/
This is still "much a do about nothing". When anyone, a broker, a buyer, a dual broker brings an offer, you are the sole person to determine if you will accept or not. Don't like it, make a counter offer or if so outta line, reject it. Broker is bound to present it. Now if you're inclined to tell a broker working both sides that you really will accept $10k less, than guess what, he gonna tell the buyer that's what will buy the boat. You don't tell the broker what you really will take. This came from a broker who told me they were basically lazy ( not meant to insult an brokers out there) and want to use the least amount of effort to sell the boat. Nothing wrong with that. Just be aware you are your own best advocate. Never give that away to any broker or sale. If you are not interested in actively participating in the sale/negotiation then you need an advocate that is in your corner and only your corner. But realize his/her objectives are not always the same as yours. Boats are complicated sales, not like a car or a house. No 2 boats are the same. Buyer and seller need to be actively involved IMHO.