|
Post by ray51 on Jan 29, 2009 8:27:30 GMT 1
Maybe in the U.K., or wherever else ...but , in many countries ( Canada , South Africa , others ) once the conditions of the selling mandate have been fullfilled ( i.e. price offered in writing and no unsavoury terms or conditions ) , then the commission ( as per mandate ) would become payable , whether there was a sale , or not ; if the sale proceeded , by transfer from the seller to the buyer , then the transferring attorney would pay agents' commission , often straight upon conclusion of any suspensive conditions ( mortgage grant ) , straight out of buyer's deposit , or any other funds held . In rare cases that the vendor withdrew from the transaction , the commission would be strictly his responsibility and , in most cases , the agent would get paid , for procuring the valid offer , in terms of the selling mandate !
|
|
|
Post by Carol on Jan 29, 2009 9:20:55 GMT 1
Ray ... what happens when the buyer withdraws their offer either before or after signing a contract to commit to the sale. Or is the signed offer binding?
|
|
|
Post by darcy on Jan 29, 2009 10:01:59 GMT 1
Maybe in the U.K., or wherever else ...but , in many countries ( Canada , South Africa , others ) once the conditions of the selling mandate have been fullfilled ( i.e. price offered in writing and no unsavoury terms or conditions ) , then the commission ( as per mandate ) would become payable , whether there was a sale , or not ; if the sale proceeded , by transfer from the seller to the buyer , then the transferring attorney would pay agents' commission , often straight upon conclusion of any suspensive conditions ( mortgage grant ) , straight out of buyer's deposit , or any other funds held . In rare cases that the vendor withdrew from the transaction , the commission would be strictly his responsibility and , in most cases , the agent would get paid , for procuring the valid offer , in terms of the selling mandate ! Ray, Please stop making up. No money in the bank - no commision. If buyer leaves the deposit (what is very rate or the buyer is stupid), the seller will get the lion share and agent will get something to cover the costs... and agent will be happy, because the seller will be happy and house is agin on the market - easy money. Set of minds in Croatia is, from my perspective, looks very sick and bad for business. Let us roll the money and move on, do not always put an emphasis on your "rights" and trying to make a quick buck, because every quick buck end up in a ... mess. Ask people on The Wall Street.
|
|
|
Post by darcy on Jan 29, 2009 10:09:15 GMT 1
Maybe in the U.K., or wherever else ...but , in many countries ( Canada , South Africa , others ) once the conditions of the selling mandate have been fullfilled ( i.e. price offered in writing and no unsavoury terms or conditions ) , then the commission ( as per mandate ) would become payable , whether there was a sale , or not ; if the sale proceeded , by transfer from the seller to the buyer , then the transferring attorney would pay agents' commission , often straight upon conclusion of any suspensive conditions ( mortgage grant ) , straight out of buyer's deposit , or any other funds held . In rare cases that the vendor withdrew from the transaction , the commission would be strictly his responsibility and , in most cases , the agent would get paid , for procuring the valid offer , in terms of the selling mandate ! And if you think that real estate will get the deposit, because in Canada you pay to the agent deposit instead to the seller (like in Croatia) - forget about it. Real estate agents can collect the deposit, because they collect rent and take care of other people money and property, so all of them have "Trust Accounts" - this is not agent's money - it is a TRUST. As you do not know what does it mean, just imagine somebody in Croatia depositing 40K EUR on REAL ESTATE BANK'S ACCOUNT! - You must be joking. It is amasing how Croats easily make a claim without having ANY knowledge. And other Croats trust them.
|
|
|
Post by Ribaric on Jan 29, 2009 10:49:30 GMT 1
Maybe in the U.K., or wherever else ...but , in many countries ( Canada , South Africa , others ) once the conditions of the selling mandate have been fullfilled ( i.e. price offered in writing and no unsavoury terms or conditions ) , then the commission ( as per mandate ) would become payable , whether there was a sale , or not ; if the sale proceeded , by transfer from the seller to the buyer , then the transferring attorney would pay agents' commission , often straight upon conclusion of any suspensive conditions ( mortgage grant ) , straight out of buyer's deposit , or any other funds held . In rare cases that the vendor withdrew from the transaction , the commission would be strictly his responsibility and , in most cases , the agent would get paid , for procuring the valid offer , in terms of the selling mandate ! I believe this is also the case in Scotland. For some reason unknown to me, England does not follow what seems to be a sensible system.
|
|
|
Post by ray51 on Jan 29, 2009 11:01:43 GMT 1
To cut a long story short : the mandate ( in writing ) is in itself a Contract , between a seller and the agent , for specified period of time ; if/when the agent has fulfilled the requirements , the commission becomes due and payable ; the deposit is paid to the transferring solicitor ; the solicitor can ( usually does ) pay the commision , from the deposit , to the agent , upon fullfillment of any suspensive conditions ; if there's no deposit , or it arises from the completion of sale of another property , then the commission is paid at the time of registration of transfer ; if the buyer defaults , in theory the seller still owes the commission but is entitled to recover it , from the buyer who defaulted - in practice , the solicitor would normally attempt ( usually : with success ) to get the same commission direct from the defaulting buyer , there's no problems with that , once all the ( relatively simple ) paperwork is in place . The sistem works well , for all the parties concerned ! I understand it is pretty much the same in most of the U.S. , Canada , DownUnda and many other places...
|
|
|
Post by darcy on Jan 29, 2009 11:14:02 GMT 1
To cut a long story short : the mandate ( in writing ) is in itself a Contract , between a seller and the agent , for specified period of time ; if/when the agent has fulfilled the requirements , the commission becomes due and payable ; the deposit is paid to the transferring solicitor ; the solicitor can ( usually does ) pay the commision , from the deposit , to the agent , upon fullfillment of any suspensive conditions ; if there's no deposit , or it arises from the completion of sale of another property , then the commission is paid at the time of registration of transfer ; if the buyer defaults , in theory the seller still owes the commission but is entitled to recover it , from the buyer who defaulted - in practice , the solicitor would normally attempt ( usually : with success ) to get the same commission direct from the defaulting buyer , there's no problems with that , once all the ( relatively simple ) paperwork is in place . The sistem works well , for all the parties concerned ! I understand it is pretty much the same in most of the U.S. , Canada , DownUnda and many other places... Do not worry, it would not be any better in Croatia then it is now, a new law does not change the people ...
|
|
|
Post by ray51 on Jan 29, 2009 13:12:48 GMT 1
Believe U me , I wrote not a word of a lie ; and the system looked after me well , for over 10 years ; maybe Riki and A. and any other SAffers on this Forum can confirm this , to all ?
|
|
|
Post by Madgolfer on Jan 29, 2009 17:59:28 GMT 1
Darcy
The new laws are designed to protect "all" parties involved and set some degree of standard bench mark for the industry as a whole. At the moment the industry is virtually unchecked and agencies and so called agents go about their business in a very hap hazard and sometimes unfair way.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a free market and less red tape, but out of all the agencies in Croatia, these new laws will probably affect my business more than others. Even so i would rather see a professional regulated industry than what we have now.
Just a thought, but perhaps you might consider reading the new law before commenting any further.
|
|
zoran
Junior Member
Posts: 23
|
Post by zoran on Feb 1, 2009 11:37:07 GMT 1
The prices are going down and I think that from now on there will be no rising prices at all. The market is dead at the moment because all sides are waiting for another to make a movie. In next few months only the sellers who will reduce a price (10-20 % at least) will have a chance to sell.The others (majority) will just put their funny ads and complaining that there are not buyers for their property.
|
|
|
Post by darcy on Feb 1, 2009 12:35:06 GMT 1
Darcy The new laws are designed to protect "all" parties involved and set some degree of standard bench mark for the industry as a whole. At the moment the industry is virtually unchecked and agencies and so called agents go about their business in a very hap hazard and sometimes unfair way. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a free market and less red tape, but out of all the agencies in Croatia, these new laws will probably affect my business more than others. Even so i would rather see a professional regulated industry than what we have now. Just a thought, but perhaps you might consider reading the new law before commenting any further. I would like to believe a good law can make a difference, but fewer laws are proven better in a form of "self-regulated industry". The laws are too "heavy" and hard to implement - you need to go to court and prove your claim. Self-regulated industry can make a body that can effectively resolve disputes and enforce decisions. (By controlling the licensing process.) I used to read Croatian laws in different languages, but I think it is just waste of time. The laws are good commercial laws from 50-s, 60s or early 70s, but they are out of touch with the 21st century. In general, Croatia needs more business initiative, as I said earlier, they are locked in a kind of funny bolshevism, I can't describe it in any other way. I expect to read in the law eg. how many times the seller needs to go to toilet as an important measure to ensure the agent can sell his or her house. (I personally always feel relaxed walking out of the toilet, I am sure that will help.)
|
|
|
Post by dalmatino on Feb 1, 2009 23:59:50 GMT 1
yes we can all now see how total deregulation and free market now pushes you towards new age of som where tax payers bail out banksters and banks are being nationalized, with tax payers money again.
|
|
|
Post by darcy on Feb 2, 2009 1:45:52 GMT 1
Any liberal capitalism is better then any form of totalitarian Stalinist communism. So, what, few bankers wanted to make a quick buck? They will come and go, but Party officials are there to stay for generations…
|
|
|
Post by justapixel on Feb 2, 2009 2:05:05 GMT 1
It's communism that has come and gone, but banks and bankers are here to stay, as have been in the previous millennia. The problem is that only now they have reached their full destructive potential, and it's impressive indeed. God help us, but "laissez faire" now sounds like an advice given to the herd being dragged to slaughter.
.
|
|
|
Post by darcy on Feb 2, 2009 6:05:36 GMT 1
The communism is very much alive in Croatia. You can see it everywhere - no initiative, rigid economic environment, state all over the place and people, too many laws and too little common sense ...
|
|