Let me ask you something, hypothetically…
Let’s say that I am an attorney, and a nasty one at that… Let’s say that I represent your soon to be ex-husband (no prophecy intended) and so far, you do not have a lawyer…
I let you know that I am perfectly happy to handle the divorce without you hiring an attorney, which will save you money. I explain that since you have been married for several years, we are all sure you understand all the assets and liabilities in the joint estate… and since your husband filled in the form for his assets honestly (you would not want to accuse him of lying would you?) there is no need to get an accountant, or lawyer, to look into these matters on your behalf.
So, what is missing?
But there is more: buyer agents can share information with their clients that listing agents would likely never share. They can do a CMA (comparative market analysis) of similar properties in the area, they can discuss advice on what offer for the property, they can reveal shortcomings in the property, and they can assist in other discussions to help you decide what to do in specific cases. A listing agent, because they represent the seller interest, cannot do these things and remain true to their fiduciary responsibilities. What does that mean? It means that anything, whether knowledge or service, that could accrue to the disadvantage of the seller, is taboo for them, by law.
So back to my example above… very few of us would ever find ourselves in a divorce situation without hiring an attorney… this does not mean that the divorce in and of itself MUST be a nasty fight… it just means that we would want our interests represented, and we would not trust our affairs to someone who by definition represents the other party… why would we do so in the purchase of a house?