nwListingAgent.com

08/14/2019

Thinking of Buying? There are some down payment assistance programs out there

https://www.workforce-resource.com/dpr/pmt/NWMLS/PATRICK_BERINGER

04/26/2019

If you have a senior family member downsizing or you're managing their estate, I partner with estate sale and downsizing pros who can take care of everything to get the property ready for market. If repairs are needed we can also arrange it. Please make a note of it.

04/20/2019

12/07/2018

Freddie Mac reports the following national averages with mortgage rates for the week ending Dec. 6:
• 30-year fixed-rate mortgages: averaged 4.75 percent, with an average 0.5 point, down from last week’s 4.81 percent average. Last year at his time, 30-year rates averaged 3.94 percent.
• 15-year fixed-rate mortgages: averaged 4.21 percent, with an average 0.4 point, falling from last week’s 4.25 percent average. A year ago, 15-year rates averaged 3.36 percent.
• 5-year hybrid adjustable-rate mortgages: averaged 4.07 percent, with an average 0.3 point, a decrease from last week’s 4.12 percent average. A year ago, 5-year ARMs averaged 3.36 percent.

12/06/2018

Someone called me today and said “Hey I’m not ready to list the house but if you have a buyer I’ll sell it to them for $1.5m. Don’t worry, I’ll pay you 3%.”

I’ll tell you what I told him cause if you ever try to sell your home this way, you’re prolly gonna be sorry.

1. NWMLS rules prohibit “pocket listings” (when mls members market properties that aren’t listed for sale on the mls.) This can lead to losing your real estate license at worst, yuge fines at best. If an agent does this, you’re dealing with a con artist. I cannot market your property this way-It’s against the rules. Other states allow it, but those states tend to have other problems too, mmkurrr? That’s some trump university s**t right there and I won’t go near it.

2. By not exposing your property to the market you’re going to lose the benefit of competition. Example: if I bring him my buyer at $1.5, how will he ever know my buyer was willing to pay $1.7? How will he know if someone else out there sitting in their office perusing Zillow would have paid $1.8 if only they had a chance to even see it?

3. The commission angle: He offered me 3, but thinks he’s saving 3 by not paying 2 agents. If I could have gotten him 10% more, isn’t that worth paying out another 2-3 to a buyer’s agent?

4. By dictating my commission he’s taking away the opportunity for me to bring him a buyer and discount that commission on my own. Meaning that buyer won’t have the benefit of my helping them with some costs in order to get the transaction closed.

5. Also—it doesn’t work that way. You can’t call random agents and offer them this “deal” to bring their buyers. We aren’t keeping buyers in our pocket, we are actively marketing to them the properties that are listed, regardless of who listed it, and in some cases buyers that we are already working with will surprise us by wanting to see stuff that is the opposite of what they said they wanted.

6. Some agents refuse to act as a dual agent and some brokerages don’t allow it for the simple reason that it’s not conducive to earnest representation or negotiation if one person is working both sides of the deal.

So...Be best!!! 😂

10/16/2018

I was thinking of doing some ads to get some new clients. So I checked my stats. For 2018 I’m selling about $1M per month. Lots of agents are listing more than me, but they’re not actually selling more than me. How best to express this on a mailer?

09/22/2018

Yikes

07/19/2018

https://www.facebook.com/1141107525/posts/10215664245896120/

Stunning view home features multiple indoor & outdoor living spaces. A soaring two-story entry, bathed in light, leads to versatile spaces perfect for your family, including massive chef's kitchen w/huge center island; multiple living rooms & office/flex rooms. Dazzling hardwoods & designer finishes...

06/07/2018

https://www.scribd.com/document/381230225/The-Seller-Book

04/10/2018

Are you a Seattle Landlord?

On Wednesday March 28th, King County Superior Court ruled that Seattle’s First in Time ordinance is void and Seattle landlords are no longer required to comply with its requirements.

The lawsuit, filed by Pacific Legal Foundation and which included RHAWA members as plaintiffs, successfully argued against the Seattle law as a violation of state constitutional protections for property rights found under Article 1, section 16 of the Washington State Constitution - “no private property shall be taken…for public or private use without just compensation.”

In her ruling, Judge Suzanne Parisien agreed with this argument ruling that First in Time violates the “private use” requirement” and noted that “the FIT rule is also an unreasonable means of pursuing anti-discrimination because of its sweeping overbreadth.”

Judge Parisien also stated that “choosing a tenant is a fundamental attribute of property ownership,” and that the few concessions granted to landlords in the law did not “substitute for the discretion to choose a specific tenant.” Judge Parisien noted that “the ability to negotiate, for instance – a key element of the right to freely dispose of property – was extinguished by the FIT rule.