If I were a Buyer I would find a form, or hire an attorney to write one, that spells out the broker/agents fiduciary responsibility in a way that the broker/agent could be held responsible for properly representing me Fred Griffin 

Definitely not #1 and #2 doesn't spell out the duties that I would like to see the my Realtor® has a Fiduciary relationship with me. It needs to be spelled out in my opinion.

Sadly most buyers don't read what they're signing. I forcefully make my clients read what they're signing before they sign it. But I think the majority of people signing something like this will assume that by signing it representation is occurring, which in their mind may include fiduciary duties even though it doesn't say that and specifically says transaction broker on it. I think the board misrepresents the representation by the title of the document too. But your question was if I were the buyer, and the answer to that is no. I would read it and know what it says. And it says transaction broker and spells out the specific duties with no mention of fiduciary that I can see in the snippet I read.

In AZ, unequivocal yes. It can also be implied by simply the actions of a licensee. But of course, this varies by state...

If you look like a duck, smell like a duck, act like a duck in a professional dealing, with then you must be a duck.

Agree with you, Fred.

The rule #1 to explain what documents our prospective buyers'd sign. 

Will check tomorrow the forms. 

Thank you.

Most will assume an Implied Representation relationship exists unless specifically told otherwise.

Personally, as soon as you talk buying or selling there is a fiduciary duty.

Also, my feeling is if you take care of the client you will not need either form. 

No, I wouldn't. Then again, I'll be the first to admit I don't quite "get" the transaction broker arrangement.

What a great question. 

Bookmarked and subscribed to answers. Will check tomorrow. 

Thank you, Fred.

No "Transaction Brokerage" in California. If you act like an agent you have a fiduciary duty to your client whether you have signed paperwork or not. Best to get the disclosures and/or agreements signed to cover yourself as well as the client.

Ditto to what Francine Viola ....she's a smart cookie....

No, I don’t see by these forms that they expect the agent to have a fiduciary duty to them. 

The first one, no. It references transaction brokerage and there's no fiduciary to either party with that, correct?
The second one, it's exclusive permission to assist but it doesn't reference representation or any fiduciary obligations directly. At least not what I can see.

If i were a buyer i'd choose to work with someone who knows what they are doing and who I trust, and if they suggest to sign an agency, i would. This form just suggests that we now work as a team. 

Most folks don't really care.  They need to be informed about what this really means.

Sorry but I can't even read it well enough to comment.

The public, absent a full disclosure of the duties of a transaction broker, might assume some additional duties on the part of the agent. Like the bold transaction disclosure but the font could be larger and possibly explained.

Not that I can see.  

I echo John Juarez comment. 

No.

Maybe, they are tough to read.  I need to see the entire form.

Florida is a 'buyer beware' state. Nothing is as it appears.

And beware means it is all about protecting the broker's reveue and abandoning the agent.

Have I mentioned the source of most of the 'bad' in real estate?

From what I can see it appears yes ( I saw the word exclusive on both forms)

Is this a trick question. On the surface, one may assume the relationship exists

Yes, isn't that what signing these forms is all about? How would a buyer ever understand any of this?

No.

Pretty sure it's specific. 

If I were "an average buyer" I would assume so and that I was locked in to using that agent.  As a professional, I know that these forms are not enforced and that unless there is fiduciary duties wording, none is created.

In the world of ethics YES to your question. However remember that Americans like to solve a multitude of problems in courts of law. We must remind ourselves that character drives life not intellect. Intent or motives can be manipulated or painted but the heart of the matter says otherwise. If people want their own lives to go well, use more heart!

I can't say I like either one, and I would have to agree with Roy Kelley on this one & say no. Also agree with Bob "RealMan" Timm and say let's get something more constructive to spell out what we are doing here.

It states buyer broker agreement, so most people would assume it is a buyer broker agreement

The printing was too small so I could not read it very well... but I know the Buyer Representation Agreement I use, is a two page document  and once a Buyer signes it (after I explain FULLY what it means) they become my "client" and I owe my Fiducirary Responsibility to them... just like when a Seller signs a Listing Agreement... 

Maybe. Buyers need to be told that they can enter any expiration date they want on these forms. Maybe they want to see only 1 house, and can have form expire in one day, or maybe they want to test an agent out for a week or 2.

Fred, I was thinking Florida had forms very similar to ours in CO.   Things must have changed.   Your buyer agency forms are nothing like ours.

Anything official looking could make one think they were represented

"Exclusive right" I think are the key words here, so the answer is yes, would expect all the loyalties. 

I have "A potential" customer, I'm working with "A potential buyer" - it's all so shady Fred Griffin  - the slip of a simple word and WAM - fine :(