Dangers of Dual Agency: Representing the Seller, and Angling to Represent the Buyer, Too
[Editor’s Note: The views expressed here are solely those of Ross Kaplan, and do not represent Edina Realty, Berkshire Hathaway, or any other entity referenced.]
I just went through a “For Sale” home on high-profile France Avenue near Minneapolis’ Cedar Lake, whose open house today was trumpeted by a slew 
of signs in front of the home and scattered around the neighborhood.
Conspicuously missing?
Any mention of the home on MLS.
Dual Agency (aka “Hogging”)
What do you suppose is going on?
The listing agent (representing the Seller) isn’t interested in marketing the home to Buyers who are represented by agents.
Rather, they’re trolling for Buyers who aren’t already working with a Realtor.
Then, assuming the Buyer and Seller consent, they can represent both sides of the transaction — a practice formally known as “dual agency,” but commonly referred to as “hogging” by Realtors.
Represented by a “Hog”
Does that serve the agent’s interests?
You betcha!
The clients’?
At least in my experience, not so much . . .
P.S.: Nor, in my opinion, does hogging serve the industry’s interests, once the public understands the implications.
Which is why it’s surprising that Minnesota is amongst a minority of states that allow the practice, albeit with full disclosure and the parties’ consent.
See also, “How Come There’s a ‘For Sale’ Sign in Front — But It’s Not on MLS??”; “Seller’s Market Side Effects: More Would-Be Realtor “Hogs‘”; “Perils of Dual Agency, Exhibit A”; “Awkward Dual Agent Moment #24“; “Dual Agent” vs. “Double Agent“; and “Pocket Listings: Good for Agents, Bad for Clients.”
