The August 2024 NAR settlement made buyer representation agreements mandatory before showing in most states, with state-specific divergence in how the rules apply. Texas requires a written agreement before substantive action effective 2026; Alabama and Mississippi allow touring before signing; California and most other states require the agreement before any showing. The platform ships state-aware buyer-rep agreement templates as part of the realty vertical pack, with auto-updates when state rules change and commission disclosure language pre-filled from the realtor's defaults. Compliance is built into the same workflow that drafts the buyer outreach — not a separate tool to remember.
TL;DR
- Buyer-rep agreements: state-aware templates, auto-updated when rules change
- Commission disclosure: pre-filled from realtor defaults, fully editable per buyer
- Tour-vs-sign rules: per-state logic determines when the agreement must be signed
- Workflow integration: signed agreements feed back into the
contactsanddealsatomic agents - Audit trail: every agreement version, edit, and signature recorded in
agent_audit_log
What did the NAR settlement actually change for buyer agents?
Effective August 17, 2024, the NAR settlement required two structural changes to how buyer agents work:
- MLS listings can no longer display buyer-agent compensation offers. Sellers and listing agents may still offer buyer-side compensation, but the offer is negotiated outside the MLS rather than published inside it.
- Buyer agents must have a written representation agreement with the buyer before showing properties. The agreement must include a specific dollar amount or percentage rate of compensation, an objective methodology for that compensation, a prohibition on the agent receiving more than the agreed amount from any source, and a conspicuous statement that fees are negotiable and not set by law.
The changes shifted the burden of articulating value and compensation from the seller-side to the buyer-side — every new buyer relationship now requires explicit conversation about how the agent gets paid before any showing happens.
How does state-by-state divergence work?
State implementations of the settlement diverged significantly. The platform tracks the live rule set per state and applies the right template and workflow:
| State | Rule | Workflow trigger |
|---|---|---|
| Texas | Written agreement required before substantive action; effective 2026 | Block showing scheduling until agreement signed |
| Alabama | Touring permitted before signing; signature required before offer | Allow tour, block offer flow until signed |
| Mississippi | Touring permitted before signing; signature required before offer | Same as Alabama |
| California | Written agreement before any showing | Block showing scheduling until signed |
| Florida | Written agreement before showing | Same as California |
| All others (default) | Written agreement before showing | Same as California |
The state matrix is maintained as data in the realty vertical pack and updates without requiring a platform release. When a state's rule changes, every realtor using the platform in that state sees the new template and workflow on the next pipeline action.
What's actually in the buyer-rep agreement template?
Each template is per-state and includes the four NAR-mandated elements:
- Specific compensation amount or rate (pre-filled from realtor defaults, editable per buyer)
- Objective methodology for compensation (set dollar, percentage, hourly, or fee-based)
- Prohibition on receiving more than agreed from any source
- Conspicuous statement that fees are negotiable and not set by law
Plus the per-state additions:
- Texas: substantive-action definition + effective-date language
- States with dual-agency rules: the disclosure clause
- States with mandatory consumer-protection notices: those notices
Templates are versioned; every signed agreement records the template version in the audit trail.
How does the workflow stop the realtor from accidentally showing without a signed agreement?
The platform's deals atomic agent enforces the per-state rule when the realtor schedules a showing. If the buyer's record doesn't have a signed agreement on file, the showing flow is blocked with a one-click path to send the agreement for signature. The realtor can override the block with a documented reason — useful for edge cases (existing client, prior agreement on file outside the platform) — and the override is logged in agent_audit_log.
The system enforces the rule but the realtor stays in control of the exception. McKinsey's trust scaffolding principle: clear review points for higher-risk actions, simple indicators of uncertainty, concise summaries of what the system did and what it touched.
What about commission disclosure when the seller is not paying buyer-side?
When a listing has no offered buyer-agent compensation (increasingly common post-settlement), the buyer-rep agreement workflow surfaces the alternative compensation paths the realtor has set up in their defaults — flat fee, hourly, percentage of purchase price, or buyer-paid bonus on top of seller-offered. The buyer signs to whichever applies, and the deals agent tracks the actual compensation source through to closing.
For listings where the buyer-side offer comes via concession at closing rather than as a direct payment, the agreement language clarifies the mechanism so there's no surprise at the closing table.
How does this compare to PrimeStreet IRIS or other compliance-only tools?
PrimeStreet IRIS is the closest standalone product addressing NAR settlement workflow. It's narrowly scoped to lead engagement and compliance, sold as a separate tool. The platform takes a different approach: compliance is integrated into the buyer-pipeline workflow, not a parallel tool.
| Tool | Scope | Integration with buyer-pipeline |
|---|---|---|
| PrimeStreet IRIS | NAR compliance + lead engagement | Standalone — separate login and dashboard |
| DocuSign / Dotloop / SkySlope | E-signature for any document | Standalone — realtor manages templates |
| State association forms | Hand-filled per buyer | None — paper or PDF |
| This platform | NAR compliance integrated into atomic agents | Yes — deals, contacts, audit agents enforce and track |
The integration matters because the cost of compliance isn't drafting the agreement — it's remembering the rule, picking the right template per state, getting the signature before the showing, and maintaining the audit trail. The atomic-agent architecture handles the remembering automatically.
What if state rules change after a buyer has already signed an old template?
Existing signed agreements remain valid under the version they were signed against. New signatures use the updated template automatically. The audit trail records template version + state-rule version on every signature, so any compliance review can trace which rules applied at signature time.
When a state issues a substantive rule change that affects existing buyer relationships (rare but possible), the platform surfaces an alert in the realtor's dashboard with the affected buyer list and a one-click path to re-sign with the updated template.
Start a pilot
Free 14-day pilot includes the full state-aware NAR-compliance workflow for every state. Request access — no credit card.