The Brookfield Megathread

[Occam]

1.  Yes, I was aware of the fact that the rates varied but didn't mention it.  The 4.1% I referred to is in Ontario.

2.  Are they negotiated?  I have no reason to disbelieve you but I'll mention it to our agent just to see what they say.

3.  I can't speak to what their costs are.  That said, we've been watching properties in our neighbourhood very closely, and we asked the agent to give us the listings for them - and they're all selling at the 5% rate (none are military pers, and none are RCMP unless they've been hiding it well and wear plainclothes all the time).

I hope you're right - we're selling at or slightly below the median for similar properties in our area, in the hopes that it moves quickly and that will give us lots of time to be picky about what we want to move into before the two year period is up at end-Sep.

 

[DAA]

3.  I can't speak to what their costs are.  That said, we've been watching properties in our neighbourhood very closely, and we asked the agent to give us the listings for them - and they're all selling at the 5% rate (none are military pers, and none are RCMP unless they've been hiding it well and wear plainclothes all the time).

I hope you're right - we're selling at or slightly below the median for similar properties in our area, in the hopes that it moves quickly and that will give us lots of time to be picky about what we want to move into before the two year period is up at end-Sep.

Your right, the standard "rate" for Ontario is 5%.  However, given the fact that CF relocations move very very fast with very little effort on the part of Realtors in comparison to their "normal" client base, the rate is reduced.  So as long as your agent is listed as a "3rd Party Provider" on the IRP website, which you should be able to access, they already know the rules of play.  So you should check to see if your Agent is listed there.

Why does it sound like your Agent may have been involved with prior local sales involving people from OGD's (ie; DFAIT, CIDA, CIC, etc) and is rather "gun shy" expecting this to take a very long time?

 

[Occam]

They were listed in the directory when we bought our current home in 2008, although I can't seem to find them in the directory now.  I'd be very surprised if they're not listed - they've had several referrals from us (all military) who have all bought through them, and they're with one of the largest Royal Lepage brokerages in the city.  I can only assume that what they're telling me is based upon seeing it happen.

 

[Trapster]

Had an interesting meeting with our real estate agent last night.  We're starting the process of my IPR move - my, two years post-release goes by quickly!

Our real estate agent tells us that the "usual" real estate commission these days is 5%, and they wanted to know if an IPR move had different rate than a regular "posting" move.  I checked with BGRS today - regardless of the type of move, they will only pay 4.1% for a real estate commission.

The real estate agent explained that the 4.1% limit really puts military/RCMP/PS personnel behind the 8-ball for a couple of reasons.  First, a real estate agent representing a buyer will see the 4.1% at the bottom of the MLS listing, and know right off the bat that it's a government relocation, and that the seller is likely on a timeline.  That puts the seller at a disadvantage.  Second, if buyers have come down to a short list of homes they're interested in, the buyer's real estate agent is going to try to steer buyers away from the government relocations at 4.1 in favour of other homes that are selling at a 5% commission rate, because it'll mean more money in their pocket.

The solution?  Advertise at a 5% commission rate, and pay the difference to the buyer's real estate agent out of pocket.  Unfortunately, that doesn't seem fair to the selling real estate agent, but unless you want to pay them the difference too in order to keep it fair, it is what it is.  The government put us in this position by not paying agents the going rate.

I was told something almost identical to this, and I was going to ask if you were in Alberta (which is where I am).

After meeting with several realtors, I would suggest you not fall for this BS.

I was told that I should pay, out of pocket, the extra $1200 to $1300 to top this up to the normal going rate. At first, I thought "Well that makes sense" because we should be on an equal playing field as anybody else. But after thinking about it, and speaking to more realtors, they specifically addressed this. The bottom line is, you are being forced to move through your job, so why should you pay out of your own pocket just to line another person's pocket? This is a person who has agreed, by being on the Brookfield list, to the pre-set commission. If they don't like it, then don't be on the list.

The other realtors all told me they offer full commission to the buyer's agents in order to attract as many people to buy your home as possible, and agree to take a hit in commission in order to receive referrals and have their name spread in a favourable light. One of them told me he made $300 on a recent sale, with the buying agent making MUCH more, and he had no problem with it at all.

 

[Sprinting Thistle]

I would offer that any agent asking the member to pay out of pocket should be avoided.  After successfully buying and selling 7 houses due to postings I have never been proposition like this.  In fact, I have had agents offer to knock on doors of houses that I liked but were not for sale.  Same agents had no issues assisting in buying houses on Grapevine or similar websites with 2% commission.  I had one agent offer to provide a incentive out of her commission to potential buyers in a flat market.  The bottom line is that a good agent, whether they have participated in a sale associated with the military or not, will do their best for their client regardless of the commission.  The good ones know that we are a tight-knit community who will pass along our stories, whether good or bad.  The good ones will get repeat and refereed business and they rely on this. 

My thoughts based upon my limited experience.

 

[Occam]

Okay, I don't think people are fully understanding the issue here.

The going rate for real estate commissions in Ontario is 5%.

I employ Agent A to sell my house.  Agent A puts "4.1%" as the commission rate on the MLS listing sheet for the sale of the house.  Agent B comes along representing buyers.  Agent B knows right away that:

1. We're a government move, and that we may be faced with a timeline (and it puts us at a negotiating disadvantage if we are); and

2.  If Agent B gets their buyers down to a shortlist of a few homes, they can exert gentle pressure to homes that are listed at the going rate of 5%, which means steering them away from my home.

What was brought to our attention (and nothing more than that) was that if we wanted to take away those factors from coming into play with any potential buyers, then we should consider listing at 5% and paying Agent B the 2.5% (instead of 2.05%) commission rate, and pay the difference out of pocket.  At no point did they suggest we top up their (Agent A) commission rate.

It's not the agents who have created this situation; it's the government relocation policy that hasn't kept up with current rates for services.  Those outdated rates are having visible effects on government moves.

Again, I'm no longer serving - this is my IPR move (Intended Place of Residence).  I released 20 months ago.  I'm not being forced to move; I don't even have to move.  I'd like to move.  I also don't want my listing to appear as though I'm in a hurry to sell, and under the current policy, a potential buyer would see that "4.1%" rate in my MLS listing and be under the mistaken impression that they'll be able to knock my price down because I'm in a hurry to sell.  Nobody needs to see that we (or anyone else) are a government relocation, and that rate in the MLS listing is a dead giveaway.

 

[Trapster]

Okay, I don't think people are fully understanding the issue here.

The going rate for real estate commissions in Ontario is 5%.

I employ Agent A to sell my house.  Agent A puts "4.1%" as the commission rate on the MLS listing sheet for the sale of the house.  Agent B comes along representing buyers.  Agent B knows right away that:

1. We're a government move, and that we may be faced with a timeline (and it puts us at a negotiating disadvantage if we are); and

2.  If Agent B gets their buyers down to a shortlist of a few homes, they can exert gentle pressure to homes that are listed at the going rate of 5%, which means steering them away from my home.

What was brought to our attention (and nothing more than that) was that if we wanted to take away those factors from coming into play with any potential buyers, then we should consider listing at 5% and paying Agent B the 2.5% (instead of 2.05%) commission rate, and pay the difference out of pocket.  At no point did they suggest we top up their (Agent A) commission rate.

It's not the agents who have created this situation; it's the government relocation policy that hasn't kept up with current rates for services.  Those outdated rates are having visible effects on government moves.

Again, I'm no longer serving - this is my IPR move (Intended Place of Residence).  I released 20 months ago.  I'm not being forced to move; I don't even have to move.  I'd like to move.  I also don't want my listing to appear as though I'm in a hurry to sell, and under the current policy, a potential buyer would see that "4.1%" rate in my MLS listing and be under the mistaken impression that they'll be able to knock my price down because I'm in a hurry to sell.  Nobody needs to see that we (or anyone else) are a government relocation, and that rate in the MLS listing is a dead giveaway.

I suppose that is slightly different, but my stance on the issue is generally the same. I've done quite a bit of research, and yes there is a generally accepted commission rate, but this is totally negotiable no matter where you are. So in order to make sure that point #2 does not come in to play, offer the buyer's agent full commission and slash your seller's commission. If they don't go for that, move on to one that will, because there will still be plenty of good one's who are willing to sell your house at a lower commission.

 

[Occam]

I suppose that is slightly different, but my stance on the issue is generally the same. I've done quite a bit of research, and yes there is a generally accepted commission rate, but this is totally negotiable no matter where you are. So in order to make sure that point #2 does not come in to play, offer the buyer's agent full commission and slash your seller's commission. If they don't go for that, move on to one that will, because there will still be plenty of good one's who are willing to sell your house at a lower commission.

I guess I'm of the opinion that the buyer's agent shouldn't benefit at the expense of my agent because the IRP won't cover "reasonable and customary" rates being charged by the industry.  Can the rates be negotiated? Sure.  Should they be?  Not in my opinion.  We're going to list at the 4.1% rate initially, and if the house sits for a while (and it shouldn't, because it's competitively priced) we'll re-evaluate whether that's something we want to revisit.

 

[Pat in Halifax]

Occam and others:
I understand the differring ideas on this. My brother is actually one of the 'listed' agents with KW in the 'book' in Ottawa. Like he said to me, many people (and realtors too) forget that the agent actually works for (and is paid by) the vendor. An agent not adhering to this may be construed as unscrupulous. I also grew up in a household with two parents as RE agents and heard a form of this MANY times. Unfortunately, we, the buying (and selling) public are letting some get away with the practice of not abiding by this rule. Kind of like tolerating politicians making up their own salaries and benefits.

Pat

 

[CDNmilMBR]

Could someone PM or post a PDF of the IPR election form from the DIN? Thanks.

 

[dapaterson]

From: http://cmp-cpm.forces.mil.ca/DHRIM/mhrrp/ch15/engraph/e15F07.doc

 

[CDNmilMBR]

From: http://cmp-cpm.forces.mil.ca/DHRIM/mhrrp/ch15/engraph/e15F07.doc

Thanks!

 

[AirDet]

  The government put us in this position by not paying agents the going rate.

I'd say the greed of the agents and their corporate handlers are who put us in this situation. I remember my first house purchase was 2%. Now here we are years later and their greed is staggering.

Thankfully, my house is fully paid and I have no intent of leaving.

 

[mkil]

Good Day all,

Kind of a weird situation I guess. I was recently posted to Bagotville from my QL3 in Borden. My posting message says "No Move and No Move of HG and E. No cost." I left Borden feeling very confused. Brookfield there said that I am entitled to half a months pay, as well as travel to my new post. Brookfield hadn't received authorization from my CM, and told me that my CoC needed to do this. I approached my CoC, and their response was that I was not entitled to anything as it was written in black and white "no cost".

Fast Forward, I arrived in Bagotville and went to Brookfield here. One lady said that it is them who deals with the claim but I would have to come back on Monday (today) to have the bases Brookfield/Military liason  call my CM and get authorization for Brookfield. I did just that, only the woman working today in Brookfield says it isn't them, it is the Base who will deal with the claim.

I am frustrated, as I have a friend recently posted under similar circumstances (No move, no cost) and received full travel and half a months pay from Brookfield. His was completely done and paid out before he left Borden.

Does anyone know what is going on and who pays this claim? I have no idea how to proceed.

 

[DAA]

Good Day all,

Kind of a weird situation I guess. I was recently posted to Bagotville from my QL3 in Borden. My posting message says "No Move and No Move of HG and E. No cost." I left Borden feeling very confused. Brookfield there said that I am entitled to half a months pay, as well as travel to my new post. Brookfield hadn't received authorization from my CM, and told me that my CoC needed to do this. I approached my CoC, and their response was that I was not entitled to anything as it was written in black and white "no cost".

Fast Forward, I arrived in Bagotville and went to Brookfield here. One lady said that it is them who deals with the claim but I would have to come back on Monday (today) to have the bases Brookfield/Military liason  call my CM and get authorization for Brookfield. I did just that, only the woman working today in Brookfield says it isn't them, it is the Base who will deal with the claim.

I am frustrated, as I have a friend recently posted under similar circumstances (No move, no cost) and received full travel and half a months pay from Brookfield. His was completely done and paid out before he left Borden.

Does anyone know what is going on and who pays this claim? I have no idea how to proceed.

Which CFRC did you "enrol" from?

 

[mkil]

I enrolled in Chicoutimi, approx. 8 km from BFC Bagotville.

 

[DAA]

I enrolled in Chicoutimi, approx. 8 km from BFC Bagotville.

Because you are now posted, within the Geographical Boundaries of the CFRC which Recruited'Enrolled you, your entitltements are governed by CFIRP Directive, Section 11.03.  To obtain a financial coding associated with your move, see Article 11.3.05

*** --->  http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-benefits-relocation/2014-directive-amend-ch11.page#sec-11-03

Your BOR should be able to tell you who the local CF Relocation Coordinator is and it is there responsibility to resolve the issue.  If you have problems in finding out just who that person is, PM me and I will send you there name.

You do have benefits coming, so don't let anyone tell you otherwise.........

 

[mkil]

The link you posted says:

Section 11.3 Local Moves
11.3.01 Purpose
This section describes the move entitlements for CF members who are posted and are authorized a move of (D)HG&E within the same place of duty as a result of that posting.

I am not authorized a move of my HG&E, so maybe this does not apply to me. It does mention, however, that all CF members are entitled to something called a "movement grant" even if the move of HG&E is not authorized.

 

[DAA]

The link you posted says:

Section 11.3 Local Moves
11.3.01 Purpose
This section describes the move entitlements for CF members who are posted and are authorized a move of (D)HG&E within the same place of duty as a result of that posting.

I am not authorized a move of my HG&E, so maybe this does not apply to me. It does mention, however, that all CF members are entitled to something called a "movement grant" even if the move of HG&E is not authorized.

Provided this is your "FIRST" move after enrolment, then you fall under Section 11.1 and seeing as you were recruited from that same area, you then default to Art 11.3.

Your's is a rare instance and should be sent up to DCBA for review, just to ensure that a proper ruling is provided.

This will all revolve around the "interpretation" of the statement in 11.1.03

11.1.03 Limitation of benefits

The benefits for a move from the place of enrolment are generally the same as those contained in Parts 1 and 2 except for the limitation on LTS.

When CF members are posted within the same place of duty but their HG&E is not located at the current place of duty, their move is not considered to be a move within the same place of duty.

 

[mkil]

Good Day all,

Kind of a weird situation I guess. I was recently posted to Bagotville from my QL3 in Borden. My posting message says "No Move and No Move of HG and E. No cost." I left Borden feeling very confused. Brookfield there said that I am entitled to half a months pay, as well as travel to my new post. Brookfield hadn't received authorization from my CM, and told me that my CoC needed to do this. I approached my CoC, and their response was that I was not entitled to anything as it was written in black and white "no cost".

Fast Forward, I arrived in Bagotville and went to Brookfield here. One lady said that it is them who deals with the claim but I would have to come back on Monday (today) to have the bases Brookfield/Military liason  call my CM and get authorization for Brookfield. I did just that, only the woman working today in Brookfield says it isn't them, it is the Base who will deal with the claim.

I am frustrated, as I have a friend recently posted under similar circumstances (No move, no cost) and received full travel and half a months pay from Brookfield. His was completely done and paid out before he left Borden.

Does anyone know what is going on and who pays this claim? I have no idea how to proceed.

Just to provide an update to my above situation:

My career manager (who is very new to the job) had never encountered the situation before, and claimed responsibility for the mix up. I received travel expenses (meals, hotel, gas and incidentals) as well as the moving allowance which is a taxable payout of 1/2 a months pay. The quoted documents from DAA were of great help when defending my claim to the Liaison.