It is not for those that think they can do it. It is for those that can do it

If dual representation is legal in your state, it's legal to do. I don't personally like being a personal dual agent--too much opportunity for conflict of interest.

Alex Stephens When it is legal in your state. Dual Agency when properly disclosed and agreed to by all parties is an acceptable practice.

You act in that manner more as a mediator between both parties.  

in my opinion, it's best to pick one side and stay there.... we are listing agents and always represent the seller....we represent the buyer when our sellers are buying....

You have to decide if this will be in your business model. Some say it's bad, others don't.

It is honestly rare doing both sides of a deal in my market.

It is OK if you follow your state laws. 

Personally, I'm in full avoidance mode.  You never know what is going to happen and how your two clients will interpret it and take it out on you later.  It only takes one person who feels jilted to waste your precious time in court.

It is okay if the agent is honorable and represents both parties ethically.

Listing agents who say a buyer can only get the property if they make the offer with them are operating only with themselves in mind.  Buyers should stay away for that type of agent. 

NEVER ok for the consumer, who does not have their own advocate.

ALWAYS preferred for the greedy agent that wants to double the commission.

Eve

Most of the time.

In California -- dual representation is "okay" when it is disclosed to all parties.  How "okay" is defined might be a better question.   

Being a dual agent is only ok when disclosed to all parties. It is best if you avoid it all together. 

 I often wonder how someone can do their due diligence to both parties.

It is legal and not uncommon here on Kauai. But inexperienced agents and any agent not skilled in maintaining neutrality should avoid dual agency.

I do close to 60% dual agency.  18+ years and never one complaint

Alex Stephens - I think as long as you disclose the relationship, Dual representation is NOT illegal in MA.

Depends on your state. It is ok in my area. But it does not happen often to me.

It is okay if it is legal in your state and you follow all their rules and if your broker approves. Learn your state's requirements and what your duties would be to both parties then decide for yourself if it is worth the risk.

Dual agency isn't allowed in CO, and I personally don't know how you can fairly represent both sides. 

My favorite question from students!  If your state allows it and you broker permits it, it is the greatest thing since oxygen!  If you can get it, why not?  Twice the commission, control over both sides of the deal, not having to wonder how a loan is progressing, not having to deal with an agent who won't return your calls or is dragging their feet...

In Indiana it is OK to represent both the buyer and seller, with both of their signatures allowing it.  We personally stay away from it, because each party would not be guaranteed to get fair representation, even though there is a contract.  If one of them claims the other was treated beter, then you're open for a lawsuit.  I have not had any lawsuits and don't want to start, so we give the other side to another agent.

Dual representation ceased to exist many years ago in my jurisdiction.  We now have multiple representation which allowed under our laws and regulations and which require that certain procedures be followed in order for multiple representation to be acceptable.

As many of the other comments already state, if it is legal to practice Dual Representation (we call it Intermediary here in Texas) then it is up to the agent to decide if they can provide full service to separate parties with no conflict of interest. 

In Florida, the agency is called "transaction broker" and it is quite common for an agent tot work with a buyer and a seller.  In Virginia, dual agency is something that most agents are not willing to do.  Agents do not want to put themselves in a position that could be seen as compromising by their clients.

I think it's better to avoid it altogether.  It's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

It is very difficult to deliver but some agents do it just fine. It is also a broker choice like in my company the broker does not allow it. 

I don't forbid in my office, but it must have broker approval and it's rare.  I do allow it when an investor (which lots of experience buying) is buying a bank owned property.

It's OK if allowed by state law, and, presumably, both parties to the transaction agree, AND you are willing to represent both parties. It can be risky, and may be hard to truly represent both parties' interests!

Alex, Totally depends on your state laws and what you and your clients are comfortable with.  It's not something I intentionally seek out and would prefer to just have one side of the deal and let the other agent deal with the issues of the other side.  Even if you do EVERYTHING exactly as you're supposed to, there's always the risk that one side or the other will think one side was favored by you. 

When the one who initially hired the agent is fully aware that their agent allegiance will change under dual representation. I.E. "You hired me to represent you, now I want to represent no-one and oversee the transaction and still get paid."

A significant number of my transactions are closed sales where I do represent both sides. You may imagine there is more happening behind the curtain that is the privilege of others to see. As long as this possibility is discussed, as well as consequences. at the very beginning, there will not be a problem.

Who are you loyal or represent ?  One can have one life partner not two at the same time!