Buyer Broker Agreements Expose How Fragile Trust Is With Consumers

Buyer broker agreements are supposed to settle nerves. Instead, so far, they are doing the opposite. They forced a conversation the industry didn’t have to have for a long time, and the reaction from buyers has been telling.

What showed up was not outrage; it was hesitation. Buyers slowing down, asking questions that didn’t used to come up and wondering why they were being asked to sign exclusives so early, often before they understood what they were paying for or what they were giving up.

That response matters. It says more about the state of trust in real estate than any lawsuit or headline ever could.

For years, buyer representation ran on habit

Compensation was rarely broken down in plain language. Exclusivity existed, but most buyers never really understood it. It was part of the process, something that happened along the way, not something that demanded scrutiny. Buyer broker agreements changed that dynamic. Suddenly, everything was written down and the commitment was explicit.

Once those assumptions were put on paper, a lot of buyers started to feel uneasy. Not because representation has no value, but because the structure behind it felt one-sided when viewed up close.

Exclusivity is where the tension really shows. Buyers today do far more on their own than they did a decade ago. They search listings independently, research neighborhoods and track pricing. Many show up to their agent already knowing what they want to see.

Then, they sign an exclusive agreement, find a home on a public portal and learn that the compensation math does not change. In some cases, the agreement actually makes it harder to step back or reassess. From a consumer perspective, that feels incredibly backwards. The more capable buyers become, the less flexible the system seems.

This is where frustration creeps in. Buyers are not trying to avoid paying for help. They are reacting to being locked into a structure before they feel confident in it. They are reacting to fees that feel disconnected from effort. And, they are reacting to a process that still expects trust up front, instead of earning it over time.

Consumers are confused

None of this happened in a vacuum. After the NAR settlement, the industry moved quickly to protect itself. Buyer broker agreements spread because compliance became the priority. That response was understandable. It was also incomplete.

What changed was the paperwork. What did not change was how the process actually feels to a buyer navigating it for the first time. More documents were added, but very little was simplified. Legal exposure was addressed. Consumer confusion was not.

There is an important difference between being clear enough to satisfy a regulator and being clear enough for a buyer to feel confident. Real estate has always been better at the first than the second.

That gap is now harder to hide because the rest of the market has changed. Access to information is no longer scarce. Pricing data, comparable sales, timelines and transaction steps are easier to understand than they used to be. Buyers are not walking in blind anymore, and they are less willing to accept systems that depend on blind trust.

Technology steps in

This is where technology starts to quietly shift the ground under the industry. Not with flashy promises, but with simple outcomes. Fewer forced exclusives. More ability for buyers to handle parts of the process themselves if they choose. Clearer and affordable pricing. Fewer layers between the consumer and the transaction. When those options exist, the old expectation of early lock-in starts to feel outdated.

This does not mean agents disappear. It means their role changes. Value becomes something demonstrated, not assumed. Representation becomes a choice made with context, not a requirement imposed at the start.

Buyer broker agreements did not damage trust

They revealed how much of it was already missing. That revelation is uncomfortable, but it is also useful. It forces the industry to confront a basic reality heading into 2026.

Buyers are no longer willing to sign agreements they do not fully understand. They are less tolerant of complexity that feels unnecessary. And they are increasingly resistant to paying premium commissions in systems that do not offer flexibility in return.

The next phase of real estate will not be defined by tighter language or thicker contracts. It will be defined by whether the industry is willing to simplify, explain and adapt. Trust is not restored through obligation. It is rebuilt through transparency, choice, and a process that finally makes sense to the people expected to pay for it.

Blake O’Shaughnessy is a real estate broker turned co-founder of Ownli.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the editor responsible for this piece: tracey@hwmedia.com