Question 74

Yes, because a broker may represent any principal party in a transaction.

This arrangement is appropriate as brokers are authorized to represent either the buyer or the seller in real estate transactions, depending on the agreement made. In this case, the broker has agreed to represent the buyer, which is a standard practice in the industry.

A) Yes, because a broker may represent any principal party in a transaction.

This option is correct because it accurately reflects the role of brokers in real estate transactions. Brokers can represent either the buyer or the seller, and the signed contract signifies that the broker is officially acting on behalf of the buyer.

B) Yes, but only if the buyer is responsible for paying the broker.

This option is incorrect because a broker can represent a buyer regardless of who pays the commission. While it is common for buyers to pay their broker, the essential factor is the agreement between the broker and the buyer, not the payment structure.

C) Yes, but only if the broker is not participating in the MLS.

This option is incorrect as the ability of a broker to represent a buyer is not contingent on their participation in the Multiple Listing Service (MLS). Brokers can represent buyers regardless of their MLS involvement.

D) No, because the laws of agency dictate that the broker always represents the seller.

This option is incorrect as it misrepresents the laws of agency. Brokers can represent either party in the transaction, and there are various types of agency relationships that allow for buyer representation.

Conclusion

The correct answer is A, as it aligns with the established practices in real estate transactions where brokers can represent either the buyer or the seller based on mutual agreement. Options B, C, and D fail to accurately reflect the principles governing broker representation, making them incorrect.