Crunch Hardtack
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2006
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Ohio
Thought some might find these interesting.
Link 1: http://justice.gov/atr/cases/f232800/232803.htm
Excerpt: "The United States of America, by its attorneys acting under the direction of the Attorney General, brings this civil antitrust action pursuant to Section 4 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 4, against Defendant Consolidated Multiple Listing Service, Inc. ("CMLS"), to obtain equitable and other relief to prevent and remedy violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1."
"25. CMLS has harmed competition among brokers in the Columbia Area to the detriment of consumers. As a result of CMLS's Rules, consumers of brokerage services in the Columbia Area pay higher commissions or fees for brokerage services and have fewer alternatives regarding the method of providing those brokerage services.
26. CMLS achieves these adverse effects by adopting and enforcing the following Rules, among others:
CMLS's Rules prohibit its members from competing with one another by offering consumers the sort of fee-for-service brokerage options described in Paragraph 22 above. For example, CMLS's Rules require that its members have "active involvement" in all aspects of the transaction, including "in the marketing, sale, and closing of the property." CMLS By-laws, Art. IV. See also CMLS Rules, Rule 1(a) (requiring that members only use CMLS's pre-approved contract, which includes Article IV's active involvement language). The Rules also require that "[o]ffers on properties included in the CMLS shall be made in written form to the Selling Company and not directly to the Owner," thereby precluding brokers and home sellers in the Columbia Area from entering into contracts whereby the brokers would let the sellers handle the offers in return for a reduced commission. CMLS Rules, Rule 2. These Rules prohibit brokers and home sellers from negotiating brokerage service terms and, consequently, harm consumers in the Columbia Area because they have fewer brokerage service models from which to choose.
CMLS's Rules prohibit its members from competing with one another by offering alternative contractual terms to consumers, such as the Exclusive Agency Listings contract described in Paragraph 23 above. CMLS requires that "[e]ach listing submitted by a Member shall be in writing on the Exclusive Right to Sell Form as approved by the Board from time to time. No alteration of any kind to the provisions of the Listing Agreement shall be allowed." CMLS Rules, Rule 1(a). That same Rule forbids CMLS's members and consumers from "mak[ing] any agreement . . . which varies, in any way, the provisions of the Listing Agreement." This Rule, for example, prevents brokers and home sellers in the Columbia Area from agreeing to an Exclusive Agency Listing whereby the seller would pay no commission or fee to her broker if the seller finds the buyer herself. Consequently, through CMLS, brokers in the Columbia Area have stabilized the commissions and fees they collect, at the expense of Columbia Area consumers. "
And
Link 2: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/nar.htm
Excerpt: "According to the United States, the working group that formulated Defendant's Initial VOW policy understood that the opt-out rights were fundamentally anticompetitive and harmful to consumers. (Id. ¶ 7.) Two members of the working group wrote that the opt-out right would be "abused beyond belief," with traditional brokers selectively withholding listings from particular VOW-based competitors, as they previously had been unable to do. (Id.) The chairman of the working group, according to the United States, also admitted that the opt-out right was likely to be exercised by brokers notwithstanding that "it may not be in the seller's best interest to opt out." (Id. (internal punctuation omitted).) However, the chairman "took comfort in the fact that the rule did not require brokers to disclose to clients that their listings would be withheld from some prospective purchasers as a result of the brokers' opt-out decision, thus providing brokers 'flexibility without conversation.'" (Id.)
Link 1: http://justice.gov/atr/cases/f232800/232803.htm
Excerpt: "The United States of America, by its attorneys acting under the direction of the Attorney General, brings this civil antitrust action pursuant to Section 4 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 4, against Defendant Consolidated Multiple Listing Service, Inc. ("CMLS"), to obtain equitable and other relief to prevent and remedy violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1."
"25. CMLS has harmed competition among brokers in the Columbia Area to the detriment of consumers. As a result of CMLS's Rules, consumers of brokerage services in the Columbia Area pay higher commissions or fees for brokerage services and have fewer alternatives regarding the method of providing those brokerage services.
26. CMLS achieves these adverse effects by adopting and enforcing the following Rules, among others:
CMLS's Rules prohibit its members from competing with one another by offering consumers the sort of fee-for-service brokerage options described in Paragraph 22 above. For example, CMLS's Rules require that its members have "active involvement" in all aspects of the transaction, including "in the marketing, sale, and closing of the property." CMLS By-laws, Art. IV. See also CMLS Rules, Rule 1(a) (requiring that members only use CMLS's pre-approved contract, which includes Article IV's active involvement language). The Rules also require that "[o]ffers on properties included in the CMLS shall be made in written form to the Selling Company and not directly to the Owner," thereby precluding brokers and home sellers in the Columbia Area from entering into contracts whereby the brokers would let the sellers handle the offers in return for a reduced commission. CMLS Rules, Rule 2. These Rules prohibit brokers and home sellers from negotiating brokerage service terms and, consequently, harm consumers in the Columbia Area because they have fewer brokerage service models from which to choose.
CMLS's Rules prohibit its members from competing with one another by offering alternative contractual terms to consumers, such as the Exclusive Agency Listings contract described in Paragraph 23 above. CMLS requires that "[e]ach listing submitted by a Member shall be in writing on the Exclusive Right to Sell Form as approved by the Board from time to time. No alteration of any kind to the provisions of the Listing Agreement shall be allowed." CMLS Rules, Rule 1(a). That same Rule forbids CMLS's members and consumers from "mak[ing] any agreement . . . which varies, in any way, the provisions of the Listing Agreement." This Rule, for example, prevents brokers and home sellers in the Columbia Area from agreeing to an Exclusive Agency Listing whereby the seller would pay no commission or fee to her broker if the seller finds the buyer herself. Consequently, through CMLS, brokers in the Columbia Area have stabilized the commissions and fees they collect, at the expense of Columbia Area consumers. "
And
Link 2: http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/nar.htm
Excerpt: "According to the United States, the working group that formulated Defendant's Initial VOW policy understood that the opt-out rights were fundamentally anticompetitive and harmful to consumers. (Id. ¶ 7.) Two members of the working group wrote that the opt-out right would be "abused beyond belief," with traditional brokers selectively withholding listings from particular VOW-based competitors, as they previously had been unable to do. (Id.) The chairman of the working group, according to the United States, also admitted that the opt-out right was likely to be exercised by brokers notwithstanding that "it may not be in the seller's best interest to opt out." (Id. (internal punctuation omitted).) However, the chairman "took comfort in the fact that the rule did not require brokers to disclose to clients that their listings would be withheld from some prospective purchasers as a result of the brokers' opt-out decision, thus providing brokers 'flexibility without conversation.'" (Id.)
