Jay, making an exception for a short sale isn't a good idea depending on the state. If the seller is facing a deficiency, then the listing agent should be trying to get the highest price possible, not the lowest. You cant do that and represent the buyer adequately in that scenario.

I dont have a problem with dual agency as it applies to the broker as long as one agent isnt representing both sides. I know that flies in the face of JD's point, but that means that brokers need to hire better with regard to both agents and management.

Agency and fiduciary are not that difficult to get right. Its simply a choice to do so.

I think one possible solution is for all clients to be the broker's clients. So for example, what you wrote would be more or less impossible: “If one of my agents had a buyer and another had the seller in the same transaction, I am *completely* confident that each of their clients would be fully represented. How a broker with 2000 agents could have that same confidence is beyond me.”

That would be rewritten as, “I have XX clients, with 18 agents to assist me, and I have to avoid conflict of interest.” I know for a fact that you take your responsibility very seriously, and that you tend to be on the side of brokers who are in the real estate business, rather than the recruiting business. But that has consequences.

The megabrokerages could find a way. They could, for example, simply refuse to do buyer *agency* deals altogether; their buyer agents should be considered as 'salespeople' in much the same way that when you walk into a Mercedes dealership, those helpful people are not representing your interests. Customer service still matters to those salespeople who are trying to convince you to make a very large purchase. In fact, you could show houses, advise buyers, and so on, without taking on the *agency* relationship that results in fiduciary responsibility. As long as the buyer knows that, I don't see a problem. If the buyer wanted professional representation, he can always go hire a buyer's agent out of pocket.

-rsh

Because of the Broker's dual representation in such a transaction, Buyer understands that Buyer and the seller have the responsibility of making their own decisions as to what terms are to be included in any purchase agreement. Buyer should be aware of the implications of Broker's dual representation, including the limitation on Broker's ability to represent the seller or Buyer fully and exclusively. Buyer understands that Buyer may seek independent legal counsel in order to assist with any matter relating to a purchase agreement or to the transaction that is the subject matter of a purchase agreement. Provided Broker has acted in accordance with its obligations under this Agreement, Broker shall not be liable for any claims, damages, losses, expenses or liabilities arising from Broker's role as dual representative. Buyer shall have a duty to protect its own interests and should read any purchase agreement carefully to insure that it accurately sets forth terms Buyer wants included in the purchase agreement.