Moral dilemma

[amorphousplasma]

Hypothetical situation:

You are looking for real estate.  In your search, you have contacted an agent but of course you are searching on your own.  You found the property that you decided to get on your own, but brought the agent into the deal in the hopes that he could help you get better terms.  The agent has proven absolutely worthless.  In fact

Comments

[albert_gator]

I say screw the agent. There's no sense in letting them continue to "help" you on something important and expensive if they're just screwing things up. If it will make things simpler/easier/cheaper for you then that's the only motivation you need. It's their job to help you. If they can't do it, then that's that.

[djedi]

Oooo, toughie. From my small experience and those I've talked to, agents don't often help you get a better deal *once you've already found the house*. We did all the negotiation for ours, she was just a ...messenger woman for us.

If you found the house on your own, I don't think you're legally obligated to pay the agent...look at the paper you probably signed for the agent about this. Ours said explicitly that we were obligated to pay her only in the case that we bought one of the houses she showed us within 6 months of when we discontinued her services.

That said, he/she's already done some work on your behalf, although less than you had hoped and the fees are rarely negotiable with agents, so I think this is indeed a sticky situation.

[anonymous]

Seems like the 2 questions to ask are do you really want this real estate? And then ask the agent why it now costs more after he became involved? What specifically have you gotten for this extra cost? Hopefully you can make him answer.

[grantreadsjenn]

Go ahead and pay the agent the value you think he's brought you. So be it if that is pretty close to zero.

[wildrice13]

Do a careful analysis to determine whether you think (3) is true or not. If it's not, (2).