Over the years Vita and Associates, Inc. has run the gamut from being a small office with a few salespeople in the 1980's to a ten salesperson firm in the 1990's and on to its present configuration as a one man shop.

One thing, however, never changed.  We were always ahead of the curve when it came to services, innovations, industry trends and technology.  

• Vita & Associates had the first computer system in the local real estate trade and complied its own in-house MLS service years before our local Realtor association finally began one. 
 
• Vita & Associates had the first computer system in the local real estate trade and complied its own in-house MLS service years before our local Realtor association finally began one.
 
• Our office policy manual, which may have been a local first as well, required our agents to disclose our agency status as representatives of our sellers to prospective purchasers a number of years before the State of Virginia required all licensees to do so. For many years we Realtors only represented sellers.  Buyer representation was not even dreamed of and yet it was already company policy at Vita And Associates that our agents disclose to our buyer customers that we worked for our seller clients.  This disclosure was to be made as soon as possible after initial contact with the buyer customer so that they were  aware that they shouldn't confide to us any information they didn't wish the seller to know. (see our definitions page for more discussion on agency).  It arose out of our early realization and concern that buyers needed to be informed of the nature of the relationship between agent and buyer that was prevalent in the entire industry at the time. The State of Virginia didn't pass a law making this disclosure required to be made by all real estate agents until the early 90's.  Like I said, we were way ahead of our time.
 
• Several years later we introduced buyer agency into the local market.  It wasn't received too well by a few traditional agents who didn't realize that it was an idea whose time had come and that the practice of agents representing buyers and still sharing commissions negotiated by listing agents was rapidly catching on and spreading throughout the country. 
 
• In 2001, about eight years after buyer representation took hold in the local market, we made the bold and risky decision to voluntarily refrain from representing sellers all together so as to provide buyers with a unique service, their own exclusive representation.  By doing so, we believed that we limited our own exposure to liability because (a) the failure to properly disclose a dual agency relationship, (b) to do so in a timely manner as prescribed by law, and (c) to fail to fully inform a client of the implications to them of such a change in service has become one of the most common problems nationwide for real estate practitioners.  We sought to avoid even the remote possibility of getting into a conflict of interest situation and have been able to provide our buyers with a very unique and rewarding  service.
 

Exclusive Buyer Representation.

But why, you may ask, would we give up the one thing that all agents regard as the biggest money maker in our profession ---- listings?  Simply because we sincerely dislike the practice of dual agency that is particularly common in our market due to its small size.  Calculations based upon information provided by our local MLS consistently show that dual agency and designated agency (which by nature include de-facto conflicts of interest for real estate salespersons) are practiced in approximately half of all real estate transactions which involve local Realtors. This means that the typical real estate company in our market will "represent" both sides in a transaction approximately fifty percent (50%) of the time. Sometimes, the same agent will "represent" both sides in a transaction. The extent of the de-facto conflicts of interest in local real estate transactions was unacceptable for us. It is not in the best interest of sellers or buyers and it creates a lot of potential for problems for the real estate agents and their brokers as is born out by references made by The Real Estate Board, our state licensing authority.  

So, we made a bold but appropriate change in the way we conduct business and it has paid off. I couldn't be happier with the way my business has evolved.
In addition to assisting prospective purchasers to find and purchase property, I conduct real estate appraisals, manage a small amount of property, conduct a local referral program for
clients looking for guidance on selling their properties, and provide real estate consulting services to individuals, government entities and various companies.      

I firmly believe that buyers, as well as sellers, who are being served by dual agency agreements are not getting any real advocacy from their agents due to the very nature of the legal relationship and the conflict of interest inherent in it.  It has nothing to do with whatever good intentions or professional expertise an individual agent might have.  There are many experienced, successful and honest agents in our market. Their hands are simply tied by the inherent nature of dual agency.

I believe the laws of the State permitting one agent or agency to "represent" both sides in a transaction should be changed. One day the law may evolve so as to require agents to represent either buyers or sellers. Until then, buyers can look to the few buyer representation specialists like me for help. 

I've been very happy with my decision from both personal and financial points of view and wish to thank all of my loyal clients for allowing me to be of service.