- Find a Real Estate Professional
- Realtors®
- Mortgage Lenders
- Home Improvement Pros
- Other Real Estate Services
- Review an Agent, Lender or Pro
- Marketing on Zillow
- Real Estate Agent Advertising
- Join the Professional Directory
- Popular
- Real Estate Market Reports
- More
- Kim Nwachukwu, "Kim at Ebby.com"
- Contributions:50
No, they are not required to do so. A complete offer is full of terms and conditions to be met by both buyer and seller - a price is only part of an offer. Beyond that, the agent is only required to submit offers according the seller's instructions - if the seller says "only bring me offers that net me higher than x", then the agent doesn't need to bother to bring lower offers to the sellers attention. Your verbal offer isn't a valid offer - it's incomplete, so if I were the listing agent I wouldn't consider it an offer at all. So sorry!
- Guy Gimenez, "Broker and Investor"
- Contributions:58
Yes, they are required to submit all offers. Here is the relevent section of the Code of Ethics.
When acting as listing brokers, REALTORS shall continue to submit to the seller/landlord all offers and counter-offers until closing or execution of a lease unless the seller/landlord has waived this obligation in writing. REALTORS shall not be obligated to continue to market the property after an offer has been accepted by the seller/landlord. REALTORS shall recommend that sellers/landlords obtain the advice of legal counsel prior to acceptance of a subsequent offer except where the acceptance is contingent on the termination of the pre-existing purchase contract or lease. (Amended 1/93)
- Naima Sumner, "Dallas Ft. Worth PRO"
- Contributions:2847
A verbal offer has no force or effect. However, I would present all offers to the seller unless they instructed me otherwise.
Naima
Naima
- wetdawgs
- Contributions:26833
To the agents out there, what is an offer? Is a verbal statement "I want to buy that house at $xxxxx dollars" sufficient to meet the rules and regs about offers? If the seller only wants to see offers by qualified buyers, can the seller's request win over the "all offers" rules?
- Janeece Smith, "klickitatcountyland"
- Contributions:27
I dont think it should matter what state your in. I beleive you should present any and all offers, verbal included to sellers and replies to buyers. People changes their minds on things all the time and in the end it is thier choice not the agents.
- Guy Gimenez, "Broker and Investor"
- Contributions:58
An "offer" may have many different meanings to many different people, but agents don't typically get to decide what constitutes an offer and what doesn't, and for very good reason. TAR's position is that any offer, verbal or 0written on a napkin, must be presented to the client unless the client has directed their agent to do otherwise.
No offer, verbal or written, has any "force and effect" (a phrase that Black's Law Dictionary now terms redundant) until it meets the elements of a contract, at which time it is no longer an offer.
No offer, verbal or written, has any "force and effect" (a phrase that Black's Law Dictionary now terms redundant) until it meets the elements of a contract, at which time it is no longer an offer.
- breadd
- Contributions:15
Kim, I am not talking about picking apart the question with exceptions to the rule, just a general question that would apply in most cases. As my question was general, the response should be general. As such, isn't the correct answer along the lines of, "Yes, the agent must present any and all offers, however submitted, verbal, written or by email, etc, UNLESS the seller has expressed they dont want certain offers, for example, specifying such as below X price, then those offers should not be submitted.
If the general rule applies, then even if a buyer made a ridiculous offer for 1 cent, wouldnt the agent be required to pass on the 1 cent offer, assuming they are following the rules? I agree such an offer would be a waste of time, but no matter, if its made, doesnt the agent have a duty to pass it on? The point is, the offer must be passed on unless its specifically singled out ahead of time, correct? If the seller has not stated any offers that should be excluded, then all offers, no matter how "crazy" should be dutifully submitted? The point isn't for the agent to decide if the offer is legitimate or unlikely to be accepted. The point is, that if an offer is made, if the agent is doing their job properly, they must pass it on. I'm using the extreme 1 cent example to illustrate that the content of the offer shouldn't matter. The issue is if an offer of made, the agent must pass it on to the seller. Otherwise, it puts the agent in the position of deciding, when it is NOT their decision to decide. Only the seller has that right to decide on all offers, no matter how "low" or ridiculous. If agents are allowed to decide what is a "good" or "reasonable" offer, then they might hide or fail to submit offers which they think are unacceptable, but in some cases the seller might find acceptable.
If the general rule applies, then even if a buyer made a ridiculous offer for 1 cent, wouldnt the agent be required to pass on the 1 cent offer, assuming they are following the rules? I agree such an offer would be a waste of time, but no matter, if its made, doesnt the agent have a duty to pass it on? The point is, the offer must be passed on unless its specifically singled out ahead of time, correct? If the seller has not stated any offers that should be excluded, then all offers, no matter how "crazy" should be dutifully submitted? The point isn't for the agent to decide if the offer is legitimate or unlikely to be accepted. The point is, that if an offer is made, if the agent is doing their job properly, they must pass it on. I'm using the extreme 1 cent example to illustrate that the content of the offer shouldn't matter. The issue is if an offer of made, the agent must pass it on to the seller. Otherwise, it puts the agent in the position of deciding, when it is NOT their decision to decide. Only the seller has that right to decide on all offers, no matter how "low" or ridiculous. If agents are allowed to decide what is a "good" or "reasonable" offer, then they might hide or fail to submit offers which they think are unacceptable, but in some cases the seller might find acceptable.
- Mack McCoy
- Contributions:1117
In Washington State, the duty of a licensee is to present all WRITTEN offers (RCW 18.86.030 c). The Realtor® obligation, as Guy points out, is to "submit offers and counter-offers objectively and as quickly as possible."
Personally, if someone came to me and said, "tell the seller I'd pay $xxx," I'd call the seller and tell them, "this person said they'd pay $xxx, and I strongly suggest you request that they write it up." Which leaves the offeror, where, exactly?
Personally, if someone came to me and said, "tell the seller I'd pay $xxx," I'd call the seller and tell them, "this person said they'd pay $xxx, and I strongly suggest you request that they write it up." Which leaves the offeror, where, exactly?
- breadd
- Contributions:15
Mack McCoy,
My question pertains solely to a verbal offer.
In general, if a verbal offer is made in Texas, doesnt the selling agent have a DUTY to pass it on, without interference, restriction, excuses, or roadblocks? Otherwise, they risk being in violation of a complaint to the state?
My situation is that the agent and property are 2 hours away. I dont want to go there to make a written offer at the agent's office as the agent requested if this can be avoided. Of course, if my verbal cash offer is provisionally accepted, I understand it would need to be formalized in writing to become officially binding. At that point I can either go to the office 2 hours away or notarize it locally and mail it, if that is possible by mail. However, whether I lived next door to the agent or the farthest point away in the world, isnt that irrelevant if the agent is required to submit ALL offers, even verbal?
My question pertains solely to a verbal offer.
In general, if a verbal offer is made in Texas, doesnt the selling agent have a DUTY to pass it on, without interference, restriction, excuses, or roadblocks? Otherwise, they risk being in violation of a complaint to the state?
My situation is that the agent and property are 2 hours away. I dont want to go there to make a written offer at the agent's office as the agent requested if this can be avoided. Of course, if my verbal cash offer is provisionally accepted, I understand it would need to be formalized in writing to become officially binding. At that point I can either go to the office 2 hours away or notarize it locally and mail it, if that is possible by mail. However, whether I lived next door to the agent or the farthest point away in the world, isnt that irrelevant if the agent is required to submit ALL offers, even verbal?
- Kim Nwachukwu, "Kim at Ebby.com"
- Contributions:50
I disagree - the price tossed out verbally is not an offer - an offer contains the complete terms of the transaction, the price is just a piece of it.
- Gary Bell, "Gary Bell"
- Contributions:45
I know in New Mexico it has to be in writing. It is probably the same for most states. You could call the real estate commission in Texas to be sure.
- Guy Gimenez, "Broker and Investor"
- Contributions:58
Gary, in Texas offers do not have to be in writing...contracts for the sale/purchase of real property must be in writing to be enforceable, but not offers. TAR is more than clear on this matter. An offer does not have to contain ALL the elements of a legally binding contract because it is after all just an offer, so the two should not be confused.
breadd, you're absolutely correct. All one needs to do is review the Code of Ethics which is NOT even remotely ambiguous on this matter.
breadd, you're absolutely correct. All one needs to do is review the Code of Ethics which is NOT even remotely ambiguous on this matter.
- Colorado Expert Jeff Hansen, Realtor, "jeffhansencolorado"
- Contributions:105
Technically no, but it is good practice to present any and all offers, written or oral. Written is just a better way to go. If a buyer asks me to make a verbal offer, I suggest that we at least put a Letter of Intent together to show the seller.
NAR standard of practice 1-8 REQUIRES that all offers be submitted. Funny that the two 'five star' agents on this thread are the ones with the wrong answers...This question frequently comes up both in real estate license training and continuing ed, do you guys sleep through it all?
For an offer to be BINDING i.e. to lead to a contract, it generally must meet the statute of frauds, which requires that it be in writing. However, that doesn't change the duty of the agent in any way.
For an offer to be BINDING i.e. to lead to a contract, it generally must meet the statute of frauds, which requires that it be in writing. However, that doesn't change the duty of the agent in any way.
- Kim Nwachukwu, "Kim at Ebby.com"
- Contributions:50
A lot of catty replies here, how unfortunate that some take valuable time from their days to take picky digs at the way others do business. That aside, it sounds like you have no agent, that's ok, and it sounds like you have a problem with the listing agent. If a buyer is serious they want their intent captured on paper - easiest way to start a negotiation off on the right foot. Why can't the offer be transmitted by email or fax to the listing agent? Why didn't the listing agent suggest that?
A phone call with a price isn't an offer. It might be the beginning of one, and any good agent following the law would certainly tell the seller about the call, most likely to talk about asking the buyer to put it on paper. Some here actually thought I suggested hiding the call from the seller - there are some agents on these forums that routinely feel they have to pick apart the fine details with other agents - that's ok, and that's about them, not me. I don't hide anything from those I work with in spite of what other catty comments attempt to infer.
I stand behind what I said - there is no offer to present. May be semantics - I get it. Write up an offer, sign it, email or fax it to the listing agent - no need to drive 2 hours away to present it. Problem solved.
A phone call with a price isn't an offer. It might be the beginning of one, and any good agent following the law would certainly tell the seller about the call, most likely to talk about asking the buyer to put it on paper. Some here actually thought I suggested hiding the call from the seller - there are some agents on these forums that routinely feel they have to pick apart the fine details with other agents - that's ok, and that's about them, not me. I don't hide anything from those I work with in spite of what other catty comments attempt to infer.
I stand behind what I said - there is no offer to present. May be semantics - I get it. Write up an offer, sign it, email or fax it to the listing agent - no need to drive 2 hours away to present it. Problem solved.
- breadd
- Contributions:15
Lots of debate, interesting discussion, but no consensus yet.
While some chime in as to the rules for their states outside of Texas, while informative, its not necessarily applicable to Texas. I appreciate the comments however.
Can someone supply a link or cite what the State of Texas real estate regulatory body has to say about verbal or emailed offers? Actually I misspoke before, in that my offer was emailed, not verbal, but I dont think that changes my original question in that its still a very informal offer. I suppose that an emailed is in writing, although I agree its not very official and not binding, and I agree it doesnt have much more weight than a true properly executed written offer would have.
I agree that to close the deal, all the official paperwork must be signed. However, Im not at that stage. I just want to make an informal verbal offer, and have it be passed on. Is there any harm in that? Generally its good to have options in life, even if you dont want to do your grocery shopping at 3 am or online banking at 3 am, isn't it better to have the option for whatever reason. Similarly, giving the seller an option to sell by passing on all offers seems to be the most appropriate IF the agent is properly doing their job. If I'm wrong, please correct me.
Yes I could even fax bank statements and a "written" offer, but that still doesn't answer the original question. I dont even know if that would be sufficient since the selling agent never suggested it, but instead requested going in person to their office to make the written offer. I do appreciate that suggestion; however, it doesn't answer my original question without qualifiers or hoops to jump through.
If the rule of law, ethics, or responsibility for real estate agents in Texas is to submit ANY AND ALL offers, which would include verbal, its not incumbent upon ME to have to drive 2 hours, or send a fax or anything else. If the rule according to the STATE OF TEXAS is that it must be in writing, thats fine too, Id just like to know with clarity and certainty, if nothing else to have solved the original question.
I would like a consensus with supporting links. Is it incumbent upon me to do more than my emailed offer, or is it incumbent upon the selling agent to submit my offer without excuse, delay, or further hoops? Thats really my question.
Finally, this discussion shouldn't be a who is smart or dumb, right or wrong, but instead coming to the correct conclusion for the benefit of all. I think even if some made a mistake in what they wrote, it could still be useful at coming to the solution by presenting inaccurate info and then having someone else move the ball forward with a correction or clarification. Let this be a learning exercise, not a blaming or belittling one please. Thanks
While some chime in as to the rules for their states outside of Texas, while informative, its not necessarily applicable to Texas. I appreciate the comments however.
Can someone supply a link or cite what the State of Texas real estate regulatory body has to say about verbal or emailed offers? Actually I misspoke before, in that my offer was emailed, not verbal, but I dont think that changes my original question in that its still a very informal offer. I suppose that an emailed is in writing, although I agree its not very official and not binding, and I agree it doesnt have much more weight than a true properly executed written offer would have.
I agree that to close the deal, all the official paperwork must be signed. However, Im not at that stage. I just want to make an informal verbal offer, and have it be passed on. Is there any harm in that? Generally its good to have options in life, even if you dont want to do your grocery shopping at 3 am or online banking at 3 am, isn't it better to have the option for whatever reason. Similarly, giving the seller an option to sell by passing on all offers seems to be the most appropriate IF the agent is properly doing their job. If I'm wrong, please correct me.
Yes I could even fax bank statements and a "written" offer, but that still doesn't answer the original question. I dont even know if that would be sufficient since the selling agent never suggested it, but instead requested going in person to their office to make the written offer. I do appreciate that suggestion; however, it doesn't answer my original question without qualifiers or hoops to jump through.
If the rule of law, ethics, or responsibility for real estate agents in Texas is to submit ANY AND ALL offers, which would include verbal, its not incumbent upon ME to have to drive 2 hours, or send a fax or anything else. If the rule according to the STATE OF TEXAS is that it must be in writing, thats fine too, Id just like to know with clarity and certainty, if nothing else to have solved the original question.
I would like a consensus with supporting links. Is it incumbent upon me to do more than my emailed offer, or is it incumbent upon the selling agent to submit my offer without excuse, delay, or further hoops? Thats really my question.
Finally, this discussion shouldn't be a who is smart or dumb, right or wrong, but instead coming to the correct conclusion for the benefit of all. I think even if some made a mistake in what they wrote, it could still be useful at coming to the solution by presenting inaccurate info and then having someone else move the ball forward with a correction or clarification. Let this be a learning exercise, not a blaming or belittling one please. Thanks
Breadd:
There are two separate issues which the agents who answered wrongly are confusing:
1. Statute of frauds. For a real estate sales contract, or a lease over a year to be enforceable (i.e. you can sue if the other party doesn't perform) it has to be in writing. here is a link that explains this. linky
[note, that even this is not a 100% defense, a party can't induce someone to take action based on a verbal contract, then later assert the statue of frauds]
2. NAR (National Association of Realtors) ethical standard of practice 1-8 REQUIRES that ALL offers (not just enforceable ones) be presented to the client, unless the client has stipulated in writing otherwise. NAR CODE LINKY
So, all have offers have to be presented. PERIOD. The "you aren't in texas, I am" refrain means nothing, because she/they are almost certainly members of NAR and must therefor follow the code of practice.
Nevertheless, you are basically wasting your time with your strategy. If you search back several years ago on zillow, a crackpot named longislandhousingbubble argued the same thing for pages... that he could get a better deal by writing "letters of intent" rather than submitting regular offers, but it simply isn't true. Though your offer will/should be presented, it will be presented as "some joker called and said he might pay this much..." I would advise my sellers to tell you to write it up if you are serious, and to ignore you otherwise. You can write it, scan it and email it without ever leaving your home, so it isn't really too much to ask.
There are two separate issues which the agents who answered wrongly are confusing:
1. Statute of frauds. For a real estate sales contract, or a lease over a year to be enforceable (i.e. you can sue if the other party doesn't perform) it has to be in writing. here is a link that explains this. linky
[note, that even this is not a 100% defense, a party can't induce someone to take action based on a verbal contract, then later assert the statue of frauds]
2. NAR (National Association of Realtors) ethical standard of practice 1-8 REQUIRES that ALL offers (not just enforceable ones) be presented to the client, unless the client has stipulated in writing otherwise. NAR CODE LINKY
So, all have offers have to be presented. PERIOD. The "you aren't in texas, I am" refrain means nothing, because she/they are almost certainly members of NAR and must therefor follow the code of practice.
Nevertheless, you are basically wasting your time with your strategy. If you search back several years ago on zillow, a crackpot named longislandhousingbubble argued the same thing for pages... that he could get a better deal by writing "letters of intent" rather than submitting regular offers, but it simply isn't true. Though your offer will/should be presented, it will be presented as "some joker called and said he might pay this much..." I would advise my sellers to tell you to write it up if you are serious, and to ignore you otherwise. You can write it, scan it and email it without ever leaving your home, so it isn't really too much to ask.
- Mack McCoy
- Contributions:1117
I think that you should either write it up or call an attorney to see if your verbal offer is required to be transmitted.
- Guy Gimenez, "Broker and Investor"
- Contributions:58
breadd,
keep in mind that while you now have your answer in clear and unequivocal terms, it still doesn't mean the agent on the other end of the transaction will know the rules or even play by them. If you have read the ethics cases I have you would see that far too many agents attempt to justify their actions even when that behavior is so clearly in violation of the Code of Ethics.
With that said, you are presumably not an agent or REALTOR and therefore not subject to the same rules. Consumers can make direct contact with buyers and sellers if they so choose. It may not make you any friends, but it is sometimes the only way to get an agent's attention and let them know you don't intend to have your offers ignored, despite how the agent may choose to define said offer.
keep in mind that while you now have your answer in clear and unequivocal terms, it still doesn't mean the agent on the other end of the transaction will know the rules or even play by them. If you have read the ethics cases I have you would see that far too many agents attempt to justify their actions even when that behavior is so clearly in violation of the Code of Ethics.
With that said, you are presumably not an agent or REALTOR and therefore not subject to the same rules. Consumers can make direct contact with buyers and sellers if they so choose. It may not make you any friends, but it is sometimes the only way to get an agent's attention and let them know you don't intend to have your offers ignored, despite how the agent may choose to define said offer.
- Mack McCoy
- Contributions:1117
The parsing of this is interesting, an infinite number of angels can stand on the head of a pin.
At the end of the story, if our buyer is sincere about buying the property but unwilling to write first, they run the risk that their offer is not transmitted; the attorneys can get involved, but the property may also sell to another buyer in the meantime.
With an attorney's advice to proceed without writing, that attorney can also represent breadd against the brokerage if the listing agent does not transmit that offer.
At the end of the story, if our buyer is sincere about buying the property but unwilling to write first, they run the risk that their offer is not transmitted; the attorneys can get involved, but the property may also sell to another buyer in the meantime.
With an attorney's advice to proceed without writing, that attorney can also represent breadd against the brokerage if the listing agent does not transmit that offer.
- breadd
- Contributions:15
Good points and good discussion.
For the sake of argument, lets say Im a "crackpot" or "joker," but the seller still finds my offer suitable. Is it necessary or proper to be name-calling me by implication with such an inherent negative bias? Furthermore, if the seller accepts my offer, they get paid, the agent(s) get paid, I get the house I want, and everybody wins, so is that a fair characterization to use disparaging names or labels? As far as me "wasting my time" by making a verbal or emailed offer which the selling agent says wants in writing, isn't that agent the one wasting MY time? I think its more fruitful to add insight or make the points without the harsh or inflammatory language.
Clearly with some of the opposing viewpoints discussed by the many contributors, some are correct and some incorrect. It's most helpful if everyone uses this as a learning exercise, not a blame or belittle exercise.
Agents should not be usurping the sellers' rights by filtering, hiding, or restricting offers. Not only to follow the ethical rules, but also to protect themselves, all offers of any type should be submitted. A verbal offer and email offer are both TYPES of offers. I dont know how any reasonable person can say an offer of whatever type is not an offer. They might not be the most formal, legal, or official, but they are still offers. Besides, what's going to happen to the agent's reputation when it's discovered they've been hiding offers from the seller? If I were a seller, I'd be upset to learn my agent was not referring ALL offers unless I specifically listed ones I didn't want to hear ahead of time. I might be insulted to hear a low offer was made, but at least it gives a point of reference that sets a minimum floor price.
By all means, if I'm mistaken, feel free to correct me, but please do so in a respectful manner.
For the sake of argument, lets say Im a "crackpot" or "joker," but the seller still finds my offer suitable. Is it necessary or proper to be name-calling me by implication with such an inherent negative bias? Furthermore, if the seller accepts my offer, they get paid, the agent(s) get paid, I get the house I want, and everybody wins, so is that a fair characterization to use disparaging names or labels? As far as me "wasting my time" by making a verbal or emailed offer which the selling agent says wants in writing, isn't that agent the one wasting MY time? I think its more fruitful to add insight or make the points without the harsh or inflammatory language.
Clearly with some of the opposing viewpoints discussed by the many contributors, some are correct and some incorrect. It's most helpful if everyone uses this as a learning exercise, not a blame or belittle exercise.
Agents should not be usurping the sellers' rights by filtering, hiding, or restricting offers. Not only to follow the ethical rules, but also to protect themselves, all offers of any type should be submitted. A verbal offer and email offer are both TYPES of offers. I dont know how any reasonable person can say an offer of whatever type is not an offer. They might not be the most formal, legal, or official, but they are still offers. Besides, what's going to happen to the agent's reputation when it's discovered they've been hiding offers from the seller? If I were a seller, I'd be upset to learn my agent was not referring ALL offers unless I specifically listed ones I didn't want to hear ahead of time. I might be insulted to hear a low offer was made, but at least it gives a point of reference that sets a minimum floor price.
By all means, if I'm mistaken, feel free to correct me, but please do so in a respectful manner.
- Mack McCoy
- Contributions:1117
Well, you're mistaken.
An offer isn't really an offer unless it is ratifiable. We can parse the letter of the law until we've finished counting the number of angels on the pin, but until we have a written proposal, then all we have is fishing on the price and perhaps the terms "ask the Seller if they'd take one eighty if I put fifty down and they carried the rest." That's not enough to establish a binding contract.
Because real estate licensees are not attorneys, a good practice is to pass the verbal offer on to the seller, and I suggest that the agent advises to the seller to respond to the "offeror" by saying, "We'd like to see it in writing, if you please.""
An offer isn't really an offer unless it is ratifiable. We can parse the letter of the law until we've finished counting the number of angels on the pin, but until we have a written proposal, then all we have is fishing on the price and perhaps the terms "ask the Seller if they'd take one eighty if I put fifty down and they carried the rest." That's not enough to establish a binding contract.
Because real estate licensees are not attorneys, a good practice is to pass the verbal offer on to the seller, and I suggest that the agent advises to the seller to respond to the "offeror" by saying, "We'd like to see it in writing, if you please.""
- Guy Gimenez, "Broker and Investor"
- Contributions:58
Breadd, you're absolutely correct and there are ethics cases that back up your assertion that ALL offers, verbal or otherwise, must be relayed to the client. Perhaps things are done differently in other states but to my knowledge our discussion pertains only to Texas.
An offer in Texas does not have to meet the burden of a contract...period... end of discussion and I would challenge anyone to provide such evidence. In TEXAS, our state association has made it very clear (as does the Code of Ethics) that ALL offers are to be transmitted to the client absent instructions to the contrary from the client. Sure, I can choose to believe that an offer must meet all the elements of a contract but that is simply not based upon anything other than my desire to believe such, andI would still be guilty of failing in my fiduciary duties to my client.
If I tell you that I will pay you $100K cash for a $200K home and close in 8 days, that is an offer pure and simple and even though it doesn't meet the burden of a contract and yet the agent (in TEXAS) does not have the option to disregard the offer because he / she doesn't think it's worthy of presenting it or because it isn't in writing. Will the agent always present it. Absolutely not. As I said previously, agents can always attempt to justify their unethical behavior either due to a lack of knowledge, laziness or just pure stupidity, none of which will change the facts of what should be the proper course of action based on the COE and an agent's fiduciary status.
- breadd
- Contributions:15
Mack,
Thanks for taking the opposing viewpoint to Guy for the sake of discussion. Based on what is logical, what Guy is saying makes more sense to me. Yet, I have an open mind and am not opposed to changing my way of thinking if I can be convinced my thoughts are incorrect.
My question wasn't if an informal offer, for example a verbal or emailed offer is enough to be legally binding for a real estate offer in Texas. Why put qualifications or restrictions on ME or burden ME to do more? I agree such an informal offer is not formal. I agree it doesn't have much legal weight since it's informal. However, because it's informal, are you suggesting that gives the agent the right to ignore it or refuse to submit it to the seller? I agree the selling agent and the seller would prefer a more formalized written offer; however, that was not my question. The question was if an informal offer excuses the selling agent from submitting the informal offer to the seller.
As applies in the state of Texas, do you have evidence in the code of ethics or regulatory guidelines that permit the selling agent the authority to ignore or refuse submitting an informal offer, whether verbal or emailed, to the seller? It would seem logical to me, absent such an excusing rule, that the selling agent would be overstepping their authority by ignoring the idea of submitting "any and all" offers for the seller to decide upon. What gives a selling agent the right or authority to decide an offer is not an offer, such that they don't have to submit it to the seller? I think there needs to be language explicity stating this right from the TREC or NAR, otherwise selling agents seem to be magically appointing this right upon themselves when they don't deserve it.
Thanks for taking the opposing viewpoint to Guy for the sake of discussion. Based on what is logical, what Guy is saying makes more sense to me. Yet, I have an open mind and am not opposed to changing my way of thinking if I can be convinced my thoughts are incorrect.
My question wasn't if an informal offer, for example a verbal or emailed offer is enough to be legally binding for a real estate offer in Texas. Why put qualifications or restrictions on ME or burden ME to do more? I agree such an informal offer is not formal. I agree it doesn't have much legal weight since it's informal. However, because it's informal, are you suggesting that gives the agent the right to ignore it or refuse to submit it to the seller? I agree the selling agent and the seller would prefer a more formalized written offer; however, that was not my question. The question was if an informal offer excuses the selling agent from submitting the informal offer to the seller.
As applies in the state of Texas, do you have evidence in the code of ethics or regulatory guidelines that permit the selling agent the authority to ignore or refuse submitting an informal offer, whether verbal or emailed, to the seller? It would seem logical to me, absent such an excusing rule, that the selling agent would be overstepping their authority by ignoring the idea of submitting "any and all" offers for the seller to decide upon. What gives a selling agent the right or authority to decide an offer is not an offer, such that they don't have to submit it to the seller? I think there needs to be language explicity stating this right from the TREC or NAR, otherwise selling agents seem to be magically appointing this right upon themselves when they don't deserve it.
- breadd
- Contributions:15
My question is strictly if a verbal or emailed offer is REQUIRED to be passed on by the selling agent IF they are following the rules of ethics and TREC rules. It seems that putting qualifiers on the offer or the offeror is a way for the selling agent to make excuses or justify to not submit the offer when they should be submitting the offer.
"It's not formal enough to be legally binding, an offer isn't an offer unless it's ratifiable, it doesn't meet the burden of a contract, it might be from a crackpot, it might be from a joker, a verbal offer isn't an offer, a phone call offer is not an offer, the offer is too low, I don't think they would accept it," etc. Aren't these simply excuses that the selling agent fabricated in an attempt to justify not doing a proper job, that are contrary to the guidelines of submitting any and all offers? What gives the selling agent the right to take the power to decide away from the seller? My question wasn't if a verbal or emailed offer is legally binding or not. The question was if the selling agent is in violation of TREC or NAR rules by failing to submit the offer to the seller. Absent their being any written language in the Texas Real Estate Commission Code, NAR guidelines, or from the seller, it seems to be wishful thinking and therefore incorrect for a selling agent to think they are entitled to refuse submitting certain offers.
Again, if I am wrong, please correct me, and cite language to me, from the TREC or NAR, that gives selling agents the right to hide or withhold certain offers. If none can be provided, I would have to continue thinking that what Guy is saying is more correct, that selling agents are duty bound to pass on any and all offers, as verbal offers or emailed offers ARE type of offers. That they aren't formal or legally binding is irrelevant. As they are types of offers, they should be submitted to the seller. Therefore an agent refusing to submit a verbal or emailed offer or insisting it be in writing, is in violation of TREC and NAR rules.
- breadd
- Contributions:15
http://www.realtor.org/mempolweb.nsf/pages/code
"Standard of Practice 1-6
REALTORS
shall submit offers and counter-offers objectively and as quickly as possible. (Adopted 1/93, Amended 1/95)
Standard of Practice 1-7
When acting as listing brokers, REALTORS
shall continue to submit to the seller/landlord all offers and counter-offers until closing or execution of a lease unless the seller/landlord has waived this obligation in writing. REALTORS®shall not be obligated to continue to market the property after an offer has been accepted by the seller/landlord. REALTORS® shall recommend that sellers/landlords obtain the advice of legal counsel prior to acceptance of a subsequent offer except where the acceptance is contingent on the termination of the pre-existing purchase contract or lease. (Amended 1/93) "
- Mack McCoy
- Contributions:1117
I don't oppose Guy, actually. There's another dimension to the gamut, and that is - what DOES constitute an offer? Is it someone at an open house asking what the list price is? "Four eighty? I'd pay three seventy for it." Does the listing agent have an obligation to "present" that "offer?"
The statute isn't clear on what constitutes an Offer, which means that it may be up to a judge or ethics board to decide. But you, as a prospective buyer, really didn't have time for all of that. What you really wanted to do was to get an agreement in principle before you took the time and effort to put it in writing, which is fine, and you wanted to ensure that one or both agents were obligated to make that happen, which is where it gets dodgy.
As a broker, I would advise my client to not consider it an offer unless it was in writing. If you told me, "Tell your seller I'll pay three-seventy if they agree," I suppose I might tell them that somebody's considering writing an offer up at 370 and in my opinion, you should have me demand that they put it in writing before we proceed. And, in the meantime, maybe we get a better offer!
The statute isn't clear on what constitutes an Offer, which means that it may be up to a judge or ethics board to decide. But you, as a prospective buyer, really didn't have time for all of that. What you really wanted to do was to get an agreement in principle before you took the time and effort to put it in writing, which is fine, and you wanted to ensure that one or both agents were obligated to make that happen, which is where it gets dodgy.
As a broker, I would advise my client to not consider it an offer unless it was in writing. If you told me, "Tell your seller I'll pay three-seventy if they agree," I suppose I might tell them that somebody's considering writing an offer up at 370 and in my opinion, you should have me demand that they put it in writing before we proceed. And, in the meantime, maybe we get a better offer!
- breadd
- Contributions:15
Mack,
I think you are saying the biggest question in this discussion is what is an offer. As the guidelines say "all offers," at least the meaning of "all" is very clear and this preceding word is completely unambiguous. The selling agent shouldn't be making excuses, or debating if the verbal or emailed offer is an offer or not, or is legally sound, or contractually binding or whatever. If something is offered in exchange for the home for sale then you have an offer of undefined type, but it is still an offer. We heard from some contributors here claiming certain offers were not offers. "All" means excluding none. All means each and every one. As such, following the language of the guidelines, it puts the selling agent in an indefensible position if they are hiding or refusing ANY offers because they are going to unilaterally elect themselves the arbiter of "offer" giving them the undeserved authority to exclude SOME offers because in their opinion it was not an offer. Therefore, I'd even say someone verbally offering 100 head of live cattle for a home is, while a highly unusual offer, as it is something the prospect is offering, it should still most certainly be relayed to the seller. The selling agent shouldn't be restricting, hiding, withholding any offers because the guidelines don't give the agent authority to decide what is an offer but instead clearly say "all" offers.
So yes, in your example, if someone told you they'd pay 370 for it, that is what they are offering, and therefore you should submit it. I don't know if it's a joke offer or a casual remark type of offer such as IF they were in the market, that is what they would offer. If there is any doubt as to if its an offer or not, the selling agent should either submit it anyway or ask the offeror to clarify if they are making an offer they want submitted. That's the only sensible way for a selling agent to protect themselves by following the rules. Why risk going before a judge or ethics panel instead of erring on the side of caution? The is absolutely no ambiguity in the word all.
"As a broker, I would advise my client to not consider it an offer unless it was in writing." With your statement it shows you shared the offer with the client and therefore you did your job of submitting the offer, no matter how serious or real an offer it may in fact be.
I think you are saying the biggest question in this discussion is what is an offer. As the guidelines say "all offers," at least the meaning of "all" is very clear and this preceding word is completely unambiguous. The selling agent shouldn't be making excuses, or debating if the verbal or emailed offer is an offer or not, or is legally sound, or contractually binding or whatever. If something is offered in exchange for the home for sale then you have an offer of undefined type, but it is still an offer. We heard from some contributors here claiming certain offers were not offers. "All" means excluding none. All means each and every one. As such, following the language of the guidelines, it puts the selling agent in an indefensible position if they are hiding or refusing ANY offers because they are going to unilaterally elect themselves the arbiter of "offer" giving them the undeserved authority to exclude SOME offers because in their opinion it was not an offer. Therefore, I'd even say someone verbally offering 100 head of live cattle for a home is, while a highly unusual offer, as it is something the prospect is offering, it should still most certainly be relayed to the seller. The selling agent shouldn't be restricting, hiding, withholding any offers because the guidelines don't give the agent authority to decide what is an offer but instead clearly say "all" offers.
So yes, in your example, if someone told you they'd pay 370 for it, that is what they are offering, and therefore you should submit it. I don't know if it's a joke offer or a casual remark type of offer such as IF they were in the market, that is what they would offer. If there is any doubt as to if its an offer or not, the selling agent should either submit it anyway or ask the offeror to clarify if they are making an offer they want submitted. That's the only sensible way for a selling agent to protect themselves by following the rules. Why risk going before a judge or ethics panel instead of erring on the side of caution? The is absolutely no ambiguity in the word all.
"As a broker, I would advise my client to not consider it an offer unless it was in writing." With your statement it shows you shared the offer with the client and therefore you did your job of submitting the offer, no matter how serious or real an offer it may in fact be.
- Mack McCoy
- Contributions:1117
You can say that, but I will keep my own counsel, if that's all right with you.
You asked our opinions, and they vary, but if your objective was to begin negotiations on the property, the best course of action would have been to write a detailed offer that stated the terms and conditions.
As I said, I "might" pass that conversational fluff on, but, some other agent might not. You have to determine what your goal is - to establish a precedent in case law, or purchase real estate.
All the best,
You asked our opinions, and they vary, but if your objective was to begin negotiations on the property, the best course of action would have been to write a detailed offer that stated the terms and conditions.
As I said, I "might" pass that conversational fluff on, but, some other agent might not. You have to determine what your goal is - to establish a precedent in case law, or purchase real estate.
All the best,
- Hamp Yonce, "Zilluminati"
- Contributions:3463
I would tell the seller that "some @$%#&%$! keeps insisting I submit a verbal offer to you, you want to hear it"? There's about a 99% chance they wouldn't want to hear it, after I gave them my opinion of how ridiculous it would be to deal with someone who wouldn't bother to write their offer down. There would be a 100% chance that we would execute a written offers only document if we hadn't already. The gist is that real offers aren't verbal. Verbal offers may be legal but they aren't real.
In Texas, if the buyer makes a verbal offer is the selling agent REQUIRED to submit it to the seller
Stating a discriminatory preference in an advertisement for housing is illegal. If you think this content is discriminatory or otherwise inappropriate and feel it should be removed from Zillow, please let us know by completing the information above.
We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.