by Scott Bertoglio - PHX Home Investors by Spark Asset Group
Delegating Authority
I had a professor who used to say you could summarize a manager's most important job role in two words: "making decisions." We often delegate our decision making authority to others, either directly or indirectly.
For example:
"Which restaurant should we go to?" | "I don't know. You decide"
Who among us has not been on either (or both) sides of that exchange? Perhaps you were being polite and wanted to avoid conflict. Perhaps you didn't know the local options. Or perhaps you genuinely didn't mind because you just wanted to eat something in the next hour for under $20.
When buying or selling a home, most buyers hire an agent to represent them. Part of this representation is delegating decision making authority. This includes an inherent conflict of interest, and the stakes are usually much higher than a $20 lunch.
The Principal-Agent Problem
Also known as the agency problem, the principal-agent problem refers to a situation in which a person or entity (the principal) delegates decision-making authority to another person or entity (the agent) to act on their behalf. The challenge arises when the agent's interests may not align with those of the principal, potentially leading to suboptimal outcomes for the principal.
Note that real estate professionals owe a duty of care towards their clients to behave legally and ethically. Even if an agent believes they are acting in a client's best interest (and indeed, if it cannot be proven otherwise), they may still not be reaching the best outcomes. This problem can be observed in real estate transactions in three ways.
1. Dual Agency
Dual agency occurs when a real estate agent represents both the buyer and the seller in a transaction. The agent is expected to negotiate the best deal for their client, but in dual agency, the agent may face challenges in impartially advocating for the best interests of both parties. For instance, an agent may be inclined to prioritize closing the deal quickly to earn the full commission from both the buyer and the seller, potentially compromising the negotiation process or failing to disclose pertinent information to one party.
This practice is not legal in several jurisdictions due to the inherent conflict of interest and inherent risk to consumers. If properly disclosed, dual agency real estate representation is legal in Arizona. I recommend consumers either avoid or treat such transactions with the appropriate caution.
2. Overpricing or Underpricing
In some cases, agents may be tempted to overprice or underprice a property. Overpricing may occur if an agent believes that setting a higher listing price will result in a higher commission. While this strategy may attract the seller initially, an overpriced property can languish on the market and may result in a lower eventual sale price. On the other hand, an agent may underprice a property to facilitate a quick sale and earn a commission faster, but this may not be in the best interest of the seller who may have received a higher price with adequate marketing and negotiation.
Studies show that real estate agents selling their own homes tend to have their properties listed for longer durations and receive higher sales prices. They probably aren't taking the first decent offer that comes along. This suggests that many agents do not put the same effort into selling homes for others as they do for their own.
3. Steering and Kickbacks
Agents may be influenced by incentives offered by third parties, such as lenders, inspectors, or contractors, which can compromise their loyalty to the buyer or seller. For example, an agent may steer a buyer toward a particular mortgage lender in exchange for a referral fee, even if that lender may not offer the best terms for the buyer. Similarly, an agent may recommend specific contractors or inspectors who provide kickbacks or commission to the agent, even if there might be more qualified or cost-effective options available.
If you are hearing this and thinking that it oughta be illegal, I have good news for you: It already is! Kickbacks and compensation of value have very proscriptive law/policy and the penalties have real teeth. Thankfully, a consumer is unlikely to encounter that violation from an agent. They are instead much more likely to instead encounter the non-monetary version of this, recommendations based on speed and convenience.
An unscrupulous application of this to the lender example might be an agent recommending a lender because that lender happens to work in the same office complex and they're easy for the agent to get in touch with. Maybe the same unscrupulous agent recommends a home inspector who they suspect may not be thorough because they tend to rubber stamp all the homes they inspect.
Ask Why!
To mitigate the principal/agent problem in real estate transactions and other contexts, it is crucial for principals to carefully select agents, establish clear expectations, and maintain open lines of communication. Regulatory bodies and industry associations establish guidelines and standards of conduct to address potential conflicts of interest and protect the interests of consumers. Ask your real estate agent about them! Ask them why they are recommending the price they are. Ask them why they recommended that specific lender! Ask them why they like working with that specific home inspector!
You are the principal. It is your money. You have the right to know.