Roberta Murphy

• San Diego Real Estate

• Manage |RSSReal Estate Bloggers
• Manage |RSSReal Estate Trends

Rob, I am an agent--an extension of our seller. Of course, I present all offers as mandated to do so by law. But our clients also understand that an integral part of our job is risk management. We routinely check licensure status of agents representing buyers (and we have ours' checked by agents representing sellers). In answer to your good question: Yes. We present all offers to sellers and are ethically bound to disclose any potntial issues we see with any of the offers, be it credit, loan apporval, contingencies...and even unrepresented buyers whom I may be forced to repersent at some level. If there is another offer on the table without these potential issues, and everything else was marginally equal, it would likely be the one chosen by sellers. Can't say the idea or technology of BuyerCurious is flawed. Perhaps its entry into the real estate arena is simply ill-timed for a market that is flush with qualified and represented buyers. It's a Curious tchnology in more ways than one.

As a listing agent, I am supposed to take on the burden of unintended dual agency with an unrepresented buyer? A big chunk of my job is risk management--and advising clients on how to avoid legal entangements. And should we see a BuyerCurious client submit an offer, we shall ask for evidence of errors and omission coverage and evidence of agency representation. More and more, though, we are discovering listings not in MLS--and of price reductions--through a network of agents we have worked with over the years. This entrusted information just isn't available to the listing aggregators and online shortcuts. After some consideration, glad I wasn't an investor in this venture.

Beware: RealEstate.com once operated as a brokerage here in San Diego. They might do so again, but imagine they make more money selling sidebars to agents.