Will new upfront property agent fees scare homebuyers away?

We have the solution to the co-broking problem (because hopeless optimism is still a kind of solution).

16 property agencies have signed a Memorandum of Understanding, on how to resolve co-broking disputes. 

If you’re not sure why this is a big issue, let’s put it this way:

By convention (and not by law), buyers in Singapore generally don’t pay their agent (it’s a different case for HDB transactions). When you buy a property, the seller’s agent usually splits their commission with your agent; so the seller pays all, and you pay nothing. For example:

You engage a property agent, and buy a condo unit for $1.5 million. The usual commission is two per cent, or $30,000. The $30,000 is paid by the seller, and the seller’s agent and your agent split this amount — say $15,000 each (but this could be different depending on the market conditions). You, as the buyer, pay no commissions. 

But there’s a whole bunch of problems that arise from this, such as:

• The seller’s agent refuses to pick up the phone, when a buyer’s agent calls. Because if they sell directly to a buyer, they get to keep the whole commission. In the above example, if you spent the money to market the listing, take cool photos, conduct viewings, etc., would you want to pay some other guy $15,000? In any case, an inexperienced buyer might lose out here, and end up paying more than they should if faced with a sly seller agent. 
• Such scenarios above mean that there are many cases of seller agents not presenting all offers to their seller, because they’ve picked and chosen buyers based on when they can get the highest commissions. 
• Behind the scenes, there have been ugly cases of agents ending up in lawsuits with each other. I’ve heard of one situation where the buyer’s agent allegedly agreed to take a lesser cut, but then turned around and sued the seller’s agent for a full 50-50 split of the commission.

There are no actual regulations about these co-broking issues, so the deals are less slick and professional, and more like that Hungry Hungry Hippo game you played as a kid. It gets wild and ends up in too much shouting, is my point. 

But now, with the new MOU, it’s suggested that property agents:

• Go through arbitration and mediation schemes, run in partnership with the Law Society of Singapore
• Agents should agree on how the commission is shared before engaging with clients
• Agents must prepare a co-broking agreement if they’re going to share the commission 

Now I hate to say this, but as effectiveness goes…

First off, the current system involves a lot of arbitration and mediation schemes already. I don’t know how every agent solves their disputes, but I’m certain most of them aren’t thinking MMA cage matches or knife fights. If their respective agencies fail to help, agents are already turning to other forms of mediation. So this is a bit of a nothingburger. 

Then there’s having the agents agree on the commissions beforehand. Look, any agent with a millilitre of common sense will already discuss the shared commission beforehand. Have you seen the paperwork for even one transaction? I once printed all of it, and I still think I caused the intern’s hernia by having him bring it over. No one is doing all that work without certainty of how much they’ll get paid.

The real problem behind the MOU though, is…well it’s an MOU.  

We still don’t have any actual regulations and these are just guidelines. And as long as they remain that way, the solution doesn’t amount to more than sunshine and optimism. 

In the meantime, buyers and sellers are at a real risk of being caught in the middle, with agents who may have agendas. And even if their own agent is being ethical, the behaviour of a less professional agent will affect them (e.g., the seller’s agent refusing to co-broke, thus cutting off the buyers from making offers).

The one star that I do give is for acknowledging the issue 

The truth is, this is a hard problem to fix. It’s hard to see the current situation changing to the same as they do in HDB transactions, as it has been this way for so long. While it’s better if an agent’s work can move towards a fee-based transaction to account for their time (like how you pay lawyers), most buyers aren’t prepared to pay for that upfront. (We’ve detailed out what it’s like here). 

And to be frank, most agencies are unlikely to want such a situation to happen — they would all overall make less than what they do with the current system. 

That said, it’s still good to see that so many agencies are out in the open about this, and recognising it as a real issue. That’s the first step toward fixing it, and it’s been a long time coming. But as far as baby steps go, this one barely even made it outside the crib. Let’s take it another step further, and soon.

Weekly Sales Roundup (Nov 6 – Nov 12)

Top 5 most expensive new sales (by project)

Top 5 cheapest new sales (by project)

PROJECT NAME	PRICE $	AREA (SQFT)	PSF	TENURE
HILLOCK GREEN	$1,085,000	517	$2,100	99 years
J’DEN	$1,206,000	527	$2,287	99 years
ORCHARD SOPHIA	$1,327,000	474	$2,802	FH
THE ARDEN	$1,367,000	818	$1,671	99 yrs (1969)
PINETREE HILL	$1,373,000	538	$2,551	99 yrs (2022)

Top 5 most expensive resale

PROJECT NAME	PRICE $	AREA (SQFT)	PSF	TENURE
SILVERSEA	$5,000,000	2540	$1,968	99 yrs (2007)
THE WATERSIDE	$4,150,000	2411	$1,721	FH
GRAND DUCHESS AT ST PATRICK’S	$4,030,000	2508	$1,607	FH
THE BEAUMONT	$3,600,000	1475	$2,441	FH
THE ANCHORAGE	$3,580,000	1798	$1,992	FH

Top 5 cheapest resale

PROJECT NAME	PRICE $	AREA (SQFT)	PSF	TENURE
LE REGAL	$618,000	420	$1,472	FH
STRATUM	$640,000	474	$1,351	99 yrs (2012)
SKYSUITES17	$650,000	355	$1,830	FH
SEASTRAND	$755,000	592	$1,275	99 yrs (2011)
THE GARDEN RESIDENCES	$770,000	452	$1,703	99 yrs (2017)

Top 5 biggest winners

PROJECT NAME	PRICE $	AREA (SQFT)	PSF	RETURNS	HOLDING PERIOD
BOTANIC GARDENS VIEW	$3,550,000	1410	$2,518	$2,670,000	20 Years
THE ANCHORAGE	$3,580,000	1798	$1,992	$2,500,000	17 Years
HAZEL PARK CONDOMINIUM	$2,275,000	1335	$1,704	$1,539,000	16 Years
COSTA DEL SOL	$2,300,000	1561	$1,474	$1,371,000	17 Years
OLEANAS RESIDENCE	$2,400,000	1141	$2,103	$1,270,000	26 Years

Top 5 biggest losers

PROJECT NAME	PRICE $	AREA (SQFT)	PSF	RETURNS	HOLDING PERIOD
SILVERSEA	$5,000,000	2540	$1,968	-$390,000	11 Years
NOVENA REGENCY	$880,000	495	$1,777	-$281,000	10 Years
THE CREST	$2,450,000	1281	$1,913	-$223,000	6 Years
THE LAURELS	$2,740,000	1001	$2,737	-$191,929	14 Years
SOLEIL @ SINARAN	$1,100,000	581	$1,892	-$150,000	10 Years

Transaction breakdown

ALSO READ: 2 property agents fined for marketing 'brand new' BTO flats that didn't meet 5-year MOP rule

This article was first published in Stackedhomes.