In my area, dual agency does not apply if the agents are both affiliated with the same office.  That would be considered "designated" agency.

Dual agency, in my area, would only be if a single-agent represented both buyer and seller.

Hella M. Rothwell, Broker/Realtor® I don't see a question in here but I've never wavered on the fact that I've always enjoyed and approve of dual agency. When you live in a market as small as mine it helps a lot in the battle to survive. I've never had a complaint from a client or anyone else with my dual agency transactions.

I like being small.   Clients like me anyway.

Hella there is still room for us little brokers! We all have our niche and do it well.

As John Juarez stated, in California dual agency means both "two agents of the same Brokerage (regardless of if they are from the same physical office if that Broker oversees more than one office)" and "the same agent representing both the buyer and seller."

The typical interpretation of dual agency is the second one, however NAR's proposed "if you market it, you must list it" rule does allow for office exclusives, which may make the first version of dual agency far more common.

Yet there are still many different business models in real estate.  

What does buying out all the little guys have to do with dual agency? BTW, someone has to to sell to those big box places. Gee, maybe it was the money?

I'm often sorry I did not open my own office decades ago.... it would have been my last name and never with a franchise....

Dual agency in one firm with two agents is handled here through a designated agency agreement... each agent is designated to represent their party's best interest. My problem with dual agency is when one agent "represents" both parties.

That is happening here too, Hella.

Here, we have Designated Agency to cover those agents in the same brokerage transacting together. I can honestly say that when someone in my brokerage brings me a buyer on one of my listings, I have very rarely ever spoken to them before - muchless shared information about my client or the property with them!

Its the single agent, dual agency that I disagree with and that happens in big box brokerages, boutique brokerages and one-man/woman-shops alike.

The Jungle is what it is...

Like Alan May we have the same here. We're dual agency and clients/agents can elect designated dual agency. When you're in a large firm like mine, it can work the same as exclusive agency. I don't know all the agents in my office and I know agents from other firms just as well as agents in my office. I never share client info with anyone. I would think there would be more opportunities of issues in a smaller firm since it is more intimate. Either way, it comes down to the agent and protecting their clients info. In regards to coming soon. how may issues really arrise from coming soon doing dual agency? As I've mentioned in other post, I'm sure there are some agents who use it to get both side. They probably worked their listing to get both sides before coming soon was available. But, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. We're not all like that. As a matter of fact, designated dual agency is the only dual agency I work. It's a personal choice. So, my coming soon is just that, advertising a listing to get the most eyes on it. That's what it is meant for.

Here in the magickal land of AZ, any agents under the DB are dual if they are on sides of a transaction. 1 agent on both sides or 2 agents under a broker with hundreds of agents. Never mind that in big box land they've never met. Theoretically they could have access. It's dumb.

Consumers always have the choice of agency type. It is disclosed and signed off on. RARELY does a consumer absolutely not want dual agency. Many do want it, feeling that it will streamline the deal. And they can be right.

Many of the biggest offices here ARE indies.

I remember growing up, the biggest real estate offices were family businesses. THEY were the 'name'. Not a franchise name.

Hella,

It is that time of the season, gobble, gobble, and then we will be back to independents once again.  What is funny about the big boxes is that they are involved in lawsuits against each otber, instead of taking care of business.  A

Whether they actively seek it or not, big brokerages have more occasion to be dual agents because, in California, a dual agency exists if the brokerage represents both the buyer and seller even though there may be a different specific agent representing the buyer and seller.

In my opinion, holding a listing off the mls just to try to double-end it is a disservice to the seller and shows a lack of fiduciary responsibility.

Is there a question or call to action in there such as,

"What is the best way to show an Independent Brokerage does not possess the cookie cutter mentality of those who have been assimilated?"

I work at a independent agency with about 20+ agents in the Connecticut office. Small businesses matter.

I respectfully disagree that dual agency is bad. Like I've said before, your job is to sell the property. If your on both sides you've done twice as good a job as those who have 1 side. 

Dual agency is not allowed in Texas

I live in a place where Independence is Appreciated.

I really appreciate it too!  There are only independent real estate offices in Homer. Its a good thing!

In a dual agency, the managing broker is representing both sides.  I am an independent as well and have no desire to be part of a big box brokerage.

Gobble. Gobble. That is the name of the game.  

Let the Big Box be a big box.  

There is an advantage to being a team inside of one of those big boxes.

If both parties want me to represent me I get another agent representing me.

Hmm, I used to work for a big brokerage and if I worked a transaction where another agent was part of the company, I didn't really consider it as true dual agency, since there was someone different representing each party.  Even though that is indeed dual agency.

Hope you stay independent!

In CT a dual agent is one individual on both sides of the transaction. It is legal with written approvals from all parties involved.

Oh, boy, we have same offices here. I don't even want to start talking about them.

I don't see a problem if the agents are ethical and lawful. Then again that may be an assumption.

CO abolished it here, thankfully.  Independent companies are prevalent here.