Normally the practice followed in my area is that the agents don't let the buyer and the owner get together.This way they tend to make more money and buyer stands to lose.

I guess agents in your area are very unethical :)

I think the seller and buyer should meet (the agent can insist to be present) at least once before the offer is sealed.

Actually the practice they are following is that buy (virtually) from the seller and then strike a deal with the buyer.If asked,that you want to meet the seller,the curt reply is that he himself is the seller.

If the transaction is totally online, I don't see the need for a agent. And there must be trust between the direct seller and buyer for the transaction to proceed smoothly online without meeting even once .

Online deal has its own disadvantages.I feel that without an agent the deal should not be made but at the same time one must look for an agent who will get a direct deal with the seller or else be well versed with the ongoing rates.

I don't really agree with you.  There is really no need for a buyer to have a agent to  look for a driect seller.  What will mostly likely happen is that the transaction will end up with 2 agents - one each from selller and buyer.

I'd say 1/2 of our turnovers are FSBO homes in our area. I'm currently looking to buy and I've found the best deals and the HONEST people are normally the home owner. Agents tend to cover up things and not negotiate on price..

I have to agree with most of the comments.

 

1, Agents are in it for the money an are therefore not unbiased

2, Owner and buyer should get together if possible

3, If the deal is to be online why do yo uneed an agent?