Realtor Takes Advantage of 9/11 WTC NYFD Widow !!!

[Richard Carlsen]

Will someone tell me exactly what he or she thinks the Realtor in this case did wrong?

I'm not sure what the laws are in that state but I would bet that there is no law against a person making a dumb decision.

It certainly is sad to see this lady do something dumb, especially someone connected to 9-11 but it is her right to make dumb decisions.

So, be specific on what the Realtor did wrong and lets leave the "9-11 feelings" out of it.

 

[Joe Birrell (NY)]

Richard:

The Realtor:

1). Listed the property with the wrong neighborhood name. The listing showed a superior neighborhood where values are much higher than the actual area.

2). The improvements where exaggerated (GLA, and overall degree
of quality).

3). She DID NOT do a CMA which is obvious. If she did do one, there is
no way in hell that she could have arrived at such a price. She also lives in the area, in fact, she lives next door to the subject property in a virtually identical home. She and the owner of subject purchased these homes for $350,000 in summer of 2000.

Article 1 Code of Ethics

......."treat all parties honestly".....

Article 1 Standard 1-3

......."shall not deliberately mislead the owner as to market value".

These violations are on the first page of the Code of Ethics. I'll leave the
remaining violations to the rest of the Realtors on this site to figure out.

Her initial actions set this whole thing in play. 9/11 and the widow are secondary to her unprofessional behavior.

 

[Richard Carlsen]

Agreed the Realtor may have violated the Code of Ethics and be subject to action on those grounds. But my question is, did he/she do anything illegal.

Overstating a property is not a crime. Not doing a CMA is not a crime. False information can be but it seems to me that the buyer had ample information and opportunity to fully understand what she was buying.

Obviously, if she is going to disregard advice from the appraiser and her own father, she is responsible for her actions. If she wants to buy the property at an inflated price, neither the Realtor nor the owner can be faulted for selling it to her.

 

[Joe Birrell (NY)]

Richard:

On the basis of legal v. illegal, I suppose the Realtor didn't violate any laws (with exception of maybe false advertising, which they nearly all do in my area by virtual of the MLS data).

What happened with the buyer could have happened to any buyer, it just happened to be a 9/11 widow, which simply adds to the outrage.

Your right about her being responsible for her own actions. If she started out being uninformed, she was made well aware by the time of the contract signing. I have the felling there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye, which we'll never know.

I'm waiting for the next appraisal in the area. This sale will certainly cause havoc with the market, which is also a consequence of her ignoring the Code of Ethics (but that's another story).

 

[Richard Carlsen]

I agree with you Joe. I'll bet there is a lot more to this story than we mere mortals know.

It is sad when someone does something like this. Especially when is someone that has such a profound connection with all of us.

But look on the bright side: you now have a wonderful comp to work with. It is, after all, an arms length transaction regardless of what we might think of the value. Might come in handy some day.

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

One sale $200,000+/- above all others in it's area? Not a comp I would ever use. Same as one $200,000+/- below all others there. Something very obviously wrong with a sale like that. I have had Realtors say what a great new comp I would have to make the prices higher in the area when trying to talk me into making a value way above where it belongs. Maybe this NY Realtor is planning on selling her own house next - using this as the one and only comp. There's some motivation for her actions.

 

[Blue1]

Richard,

At what point should a realtor be responsible? I mean, if a reatlor can list a property without looking at the market and, if a realtor can "overstate a property" isn't that giving "false information?" After all, a typical buyer expects that the purchase price of a home is withint market parameters don't they?

Falsely inflating the listing price of a property causes false expectations on the part of the seller also, that is, by accepting an "overstated" listing the reatlor (who is supposed to be a professional) is lending credence to the sale price. This puts undue pressure on the appraiser to "hit" an over-inflated value. And if you (or anyone else) thinks that this "pressure" does not amountn to coersion, and cause thousands of homes to be "oversold" I have some swamp land to sell you.......

What happens when an appraiser cannot "hit" the sale price? He/she gets undue pressure from the realtor and lender. The unspoken threat is loss of future business. I have actually been told by a realtor that I "will never work in this town again." (That was over 5 years ago) Scared me at the time but I "stuck to my guns."

Here's a question: Are realtors legally responsible for having a CMA in thier files? Is it a violation of some kind not do do one? In the past, I have requested CMAs from realtors and never recieved one yet.

 

[xmrdfghap]

<span style='color:brown'>Bruce, giving false information would be something like "It has new plumbing" when it was new 30 years ago. I can price my property at any price I choose ........and if a person is willing to pay it, then that is a meeting of minds. You and I provide an opinion based on historical marketing data while trying to anticipate the future........cash at closing trumps our opinion anytime.

If a real estate sales person overstates the property, it won't sell. that may not be professional, but it is not illegal. How can a property be inflated if there is a willing buyer at that price?

CMA's are a tool to assist the owner/seller to arrive at a fair market price. If the owner decides to market it at 10 times the CMA value, it is entirely up to him.....and if a willing buyer comes along, obviously the CMA was wrong.</span>

 

[Blue1]

Greg,

I think "overstating" is to genteel a term. I prefer "psuedo inflated." In other words, having no real market basis for placing a listing price on a property. Sure, a seller can sell a property for whatever they want but, a realtor is SUPPOSED to be a professional and (in my never to be humble opinion) should do "due diligence" in canvassing the market and placing a realistic sale price on a property OR, walking away from the deal. Unfortunately most don't and some even have the gaul to expect an appraiser to "come in" at any old price they list a property at. Just because they have a willing buyer doesn't necessarily mean the the property is "worth it."

Cash at closing may "trump" our opinon of one transaction but it means nothing in the market unless there is a preponderance of market data to support it.

How can a property be inflated if there is a willing buyer at that price? Well, because the home is listed 50% higher than it's market and the buyer is ignorant of the local market and no one is telling him any different......that's how. Think that could be called fraud?






As far as CMAs go, I have never seen one but have requested them many times.

 

[xmrdfghap]

........... but, a realtor is SUPPOSED to be a professional and (in my never to be humble opinion) should do "due diligence" in canvassing the market and placing a realistic sale price on a property OR, walking away from the deal.

Why? I have an 85 Chevvy Citation in my back yard. I hire you to sell it for $10,000. I tell you that for that amount I will part company with it. I will not sell it for less. I also instruct you to tell the truth......do not reprresent it as anything but what it is. If you find a buyer for it at $10,000, does that make you unethical?

Cash at closing may "trump" our opinon of one transaction but it means nothing in the market unless there is a preponderance of market data to support it.

It could also presage a trend, couldn't it?

........because the home is listed 50% higher than it's market and the buyer is ignorant of the local market and no one is telling him any different......that's how.

<span style='color:brown'>
But under these circumstances, both the parent of the buyer and an appraiser informed the buyer as to the true value of the home......how many times does the buyer have to be told the true value and by whom does she have to be told? Had there been dual agency laws in effect, ( and yes, if the broker was acting both as agent for the buyer AND the seller, then the agent might have failed in his fiduciary responsibility to the buyer if he did not explain to her that "this property is way over priced.")

But a Real estate agent, just like an attorney who must defend his guilty client and get him off if possible, MUST be an advocate for his CLIENT exclusively. Under the scenario described, I think the agent did exactly what he should have done. He did not misrepresent the condition of the home, he did not fail to disclose anything, he marketed the property as instructed.

The buyer should have had an attorney or agent negotiate the price for her. But, after she received what appears to be good advice from both a professional and an interested third party (her dad), and she takes their information under consideration, then makes the decision she made, how can you fault the selling agent?

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

On a completely different topic, isn't it interesting how, in this discussion, you, Bruce, are talking about "social responsibility" and arguing for legal protection of the uninformed while I, the supposed liberal of the bunch, am taking the opposite tack and trying to support the caveat emptor characteristics of a free market system...............just goes to show......assumptions are funny things......and rarely accurate :lol:
</span>