Why shouldn't the public be allowed to see why an agent is steering them to a property with a higher commission, or in fact boycotting showing a client a "perfect" property because it has a lower commission?
In fact, why is this practice allowed at all since it's against the law...it's against the Sherman Antitrust Act. This is both unethical and illegal.
2007-07-05 14:06:34 · 8 answers · asked by BS,MS,Ph.D 2 in Business & Finance ➔ Renting & Real Estate
All a client needs to do is prove steering based on commission rates. Violations of the act currently are punishable by fines of up to $350,000 for individuals and up to $10 million for corporations, as well as by imprisonment of up to three years.
2007-07-06 04:48:29 · update #1
One could plant lower commissions and get a statistical analysis on a particular company, that way the damages would be far greater against a real estate corporation.
2007-07-06 04:51:58 · update #2
the problem is to proof it, what hard facts do you have that a agent did not pull a listing to show a client because the commission was low ball? the client will most likely not know, so it comes down to the seller who places a house on the mls with a low commission who does not get showings how do they legally demonstrate that a single agent did not show the place based on the commission
2007-07-05 14:13:53 · answer #1 · answered by goz1111 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If this is something that worries you so much, then should be willing to sign a Buyer Brokerage agreement with your Agent, stating you'll pay him a 3% commission or make up the difference if he is not compensated such on the listing. This way your agent will show you all the properties regardless of commission being offered and can even show you FSBO's in addition to the MLS listings. But then you probably wouldn't have a problem with seeing the 3% listings first right?
If the property meets all your needs and is in your price range, then what does it really matter to you how much your agent gets, if he finds you a house you really want? I offer Buyer Rebates to my customers and always disclose my commission on the sales contract regadless, so it doesn't matter to me, but I was just curious why this was such a big deal to you. The Sellers who offer the smaller commissions are usually the most over priced homes and least eager to sell anyways.
Thanks,
SELL2K
2007-07-06 01:27:58 · answer #2 · answered by SELL2K_com 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It sounds like you have firsthand knowledge of an agent who's doing this. An agent might "steer" you to a property that they prefer (for whatever reason) but nobody can force you to buy it. And if you feel that's what they're doing, find another agent that you actually respect.
Yes, there are lots of agents who do this. We're not supposed to but there are unethical people in every walk of life. But as someone else already mentioned, the MLS is owned by agents and the general public didn't have access to ANY of the information until recently. It's up to them what information they will publish freely.
2007-07-05 22:50:43 · answer #3 · answered by operababe_61 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most agents will not do this, and if you actually catch one doing it you could file a complaint. Why should we have to disclose what we are making? Do I walk into your job at walmart and ask you how much you make? No, that would be rude. If you just find an agent you know and or trust you will nit have this problem. I know I have sold homes that were only offering $500 on a 300k home. I sold it because it was the right home for my buyer. It wasn't the happiest day of my life, but you know what? It was for my client, and that is what matters. Not all agents are money hungry like you think.
RE Agent,
Remax
2007-07-05 22:58:22 · answer #4 · answered by frankie b 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Even if the information were available to the eyes of the public, it would be meaningless, since it is NOT against the law to steer buyers toward such properties with higher commission structures. I have no idea where you got the notion that such a practice violates Sherman Anti-Trust.
The MLS's are agent owned organizations and, as such, they can choose to reveal or not reveal any information at their own discretion.
2007-07-05 21:18:05 · answer #5 · answered by acermill 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
In fact the opposite is true. According to the Justice department anything that can be done to improve competition within the real estate business is encouraged not discouraged that includes negotiating the best commission possible for the best marketing program. Remember that the commission promised is the property of the real estate broker (he/she earns it) not the public and what he/she does with it has nothing to do with whom he shares that information. Here is a link that might give you some understanding.
Department of Justice Antitrust issues in Real Estate (testimony)
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/testimony/217299.htm
I wish you the best on your research
2007-07-05 21:26:16 · answer #6 · answered by newmexicorealestateforms 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Agency is the key and who is representing whom. A reputable agent will explain agency at the first point of contact and if you choose to have that agent represent you, then they will also have a compensation disclosure at the time of an written offer.
If a person wants to be shown properties but doesn't want to commit to representation, the agent has no obligation to disclose offered compensation.
2007-07-05 23:09:21 · answer #7 · answered by craigmische 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just ask. If the agent isn't willing to disclose that, find one who will. I've never run into one who wouldn't disclose that though there are certainly some who would.
Not sure how your figure this is against the Sherman Act. Whatever.
2007-07-05 21:15:31 · answer #8 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋