Many moons ago, in conversation with a real estate agent, we talked about why it should be important for buyers to use an estate agent acting for them, not the sellers agent to negotiate on a purchase. It makes perfect sense. Yet it rarely happens.
It is the role of an estate agent to act for the seller. There is a contract between the estate agent and seller that states payment will be made on the sale of the property. As such, the estate agent has the interests of the seller first. The estate agent will know from discussions with the seller about price tolerances. Is it possible that knowing price tolerance, they might seek to understand the purchaser’s price tolerances? If there is a cross over, the chance of a sale becomes viable.
My real estate friend said to me, that information on tolerances in the wrong hands is not fair. Without integrity, there is less motivation to seek the best price and instead, the goal is a price that secures the sale.
He believed it would be better if someone else did the negotiating for the buyer. The buyers agent uses their skill and knowledge to negotiate. It brings greater fairness to the transaction. It is a way to ensure that one party does not have too much information that may be used without integrity.
In the world of wealth management, the majority of providers simply want to encourage you to invest your money with them. The scales are tipped heavily in their favour by persuading you how they are the best fit for you. However, who acts for you? How do you make the process fair? So often, consumers don’t really know what questions to ask, let alone the answers to expect. In fact, the FCA, has said “Firms earn higher margins from consumers who are less aware”. It clearly makes sense to have what we call, a financial bodyguard. Someone to help you make the right decisions. Someone whose goal is not geared to manage your money.