Prague agent proposes representing both sides on CZK 7,540,000 offer

Z

zane_homes

Real estate agent
Established
Founding Member
We have to decide soon whether to entertain an early offer of roughly CZK 7,540,000. A quick sale is attractive, yet the proposed arrangement would have our listing agent acting for the buyer too.

Before agreeing, I would want the conflict set out in writing: who the agent owes duties to, what information stays confidential, how fees are handled and whether the buyer has been financially qualified. I would also want to know who supports us if this deal falls through and the property has to return to the market. What protections would others insist on in Prague?
 
I would not proceed on a verbal assurance alone. Ask for a written explanation of whom the agent represents, who pays each fee, what information may be shared, and how negotiations will be handled. I would also have an independent Czech property lawyer examine the arrangement. Permission and genuine protection are not necessarily the same thing.
 
One more missing fact: has the property already been fully marketed, including the agreed photography, or did this offer arrive before that work? If you are paying a full listing fee for a quick in-house transaction, ask what services remain included and whether the fee changes.
 
I would not reject it automatically. One agent may make communication faster, provided everyone accepts that the agent cannot give each side completely opposed negotiating advice. The practical safeguard is a clear process: offers in writing, deadlines recorded, and no disclosure of your minimum acceptable price or the buyer’s maximum.
 
Speed only helps if the buyer is credible. Before changing the marketing plan, ask what the agent has actually established about the buyer’s financing position and intended timetable. “Interested and ready” is not enough detail when an early offer could discourage wider exposure.
 
Agreed on qualification, but I would separate that from the price decision. The agent should present this offer without steering you toward it merely because they may earn from both sides. Ask whether further viewings and offers will still be accepted, and how every offer will be communicated to you.
 
Also put the fall-through scenario in writing. If this buyer withdraws, does the agent promptly restart marketing, arrange or retain the photography, contact previous interest and continue under the same fee? A fast deal can become a slow relaunch if nobody has defined that support.
 
The fee basis would change my view. Is the buyer paying the agent separately, is the seller paying everything, or does the agent receive fees connected to both parties? That does not prove misconduct, but you need the full structure to understand the incentive behind the recommendation.
 
There is another distinction: does “we can work with the buyer” mean the same named contact will handle both sides, or two people within the agency? Two contacts do not eliminate the agency-level conflict, but one person carrying both parties’ confidential messages is harder to manage. Get names, roles and escalation contact in the disclosure.
 
Because the property is in Czechia, I would have a locally qualified lawyer confirm what form of consent or disclosure is required rather than relying on general descriptions of dual representation. The lawyer can also remain your independent channel for the contract while the agent coordinates communication. That preserves convenience without treating the agent as independent adviser to both sides.
 
I would send one email with numbered questions: representation, fee recipient, confidentiality boundaries, buyer qualification, treatment of later offers, named contacts, response times and what happens after a failed sale. Ask for numbered answers. If the reply is vague on any of those, the promised convenience is probably not worth it.
 
My caveat is that written disclosure cannot make the underlying interests align. The seller wants more and the buyer wants less. If you continue, I would treat the agent as a transaction coordinator rather than your confidential negotiator, decide your own position independently, and avoid revealing the lowest figure you would accept.
 
Without knowing the asking price or how long the property has been exposed to buyers, nobody can say whether CZK 7,540,000 is compelling. An early offer may reflect strong demand as easily as fair value. I would compare it with the planned marketing period before allowing the agent’s dual role to turn urgency into the main argument.
 
My decision rule would be simple: continue only if the buyer is sufficiently qualified, the fee and conflict are fully disclosed, independent legal support remains available, and other offers are not suppressed. If the agent resists any of those conditions or will not commit to prompt written responses, keep the seller representation separate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top