Tag Archives: Singapore Accredited Estate Agencies

Sellers can try mystery caller test to check on their property agents

WE THANK Ms Kwok Yoke Pui for her Forum Online letter yesterday, ‘Commissions and property agents’.

The Singapore Accredited Estate Agencies’ (SAEA) position expressed in an earlier letter last Friday (’1 agent for buyer, seller: OK, but get written consent’) was that if sellers and buyers wish to appoint estate agents to assist them in their HDB resale transactions, they should be separately represented by estate agents of their choice to avoid a situation of conflict of interest.

An estate agent should act and collect commission only from one party to the transaction, who could either be the seller or the buyer. We had then suggested an exception to permit dual agency if the sellers and buyers are both aware and consent to the appointment of the same agent, preferably in writing. Such a practice, including separate agents of the same agency acting in the same transaction, for example, can be found in some states of the real estate industry in the United States. Continue reading

Commissions and property agents

I AM writing in response to last Friday’s letter, ‘1 agent for buyer, seller: OK, but get written consent‘, by Singapore Accredited Estate Agencies (SAEA), in reply to my letter on Thursday, ‘Agents shouldn’t take on dual roles’.

I would like to thank SAEA for the prompt response. I also noted an online debate on my letter in The Straits Times discussion board and I am glad the public is taking note of this issue.

First, I would like to clarify that I am not referring to an isolated incident, but a rampant practice or ‘open secret’. My focus is not solely on the agent who acted for me, but rather all the agents I have contacted so far.

I met at least 15 of them (from different property firms) during viewings and spoke to many more on the phone. They would first establish if I am an agent or a buyer, and the tone usually becomes much friendlier when I say I am a buyer. They all have the same message: that I must pay them 1 per cent commission because they need to represent me. Continue reading