In a forceful commentary regarding the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Feb. 15 Statement of Interest calling for “decoupled commissions” in rebuke of a lawsuit settlement of a case known as Nosalek v. MLS PIN, the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) said the decision would hurt consumers as opposed to helping them.
In a statement emailed to RISMedia on Feb. 23, NAR was adamant in its opposition to the DOJ making decisions to dramatically alter how residential real estate business in the United States has been conducted over a long period of time.
“The Statement of Interest confirms that the DOJ wants to regulate what sellers and their listing agents are allowed to do with their own money and homes,” wrote a NAR spokesperson. “Prohibiting all offers of compensation will harm consumers, including by making it more costly for homebuyers to access capable representation and by reducing access to fair housing.”
Following the Burnett trial outcome in late October, when NAR and real estate power players were found to have conspired to inflate commissions in violation of federal law, there has been a steady stream of copycat lawsuits nationwide, with accompanying legal positions, rulings and the like. NAR has been front and center, having been named as a defendant in many of the suits.
The association has commented in broad terms since Burnett that it plans to appeal and is hopeful for a positive result from all the legal maneuverings.
“There is a great deal at stake for buyers and sellers all across the country,” NAR concluded in the statement, “and we will continue to work, in and out of court, toward the best possible outcome for property owners in America and the professionals who represent them.”
DOJ obviously doesn’t have a clue what they are doing. Their proposal would definitely harm consumers, limit much needed representation, and not to mention create a very unethical situations were buyers agents are negotiating commissions with their offer contract. How can the DOJ be so irresponsible and uninformed? Over 100 years of the naturally evolving system we have now is the best way possible to help the public buy and sell real estate. Let’s not go backwards to how they do it in other countries. On top of that we know the DOJ doesn’t keep their agreements. They need to be removed from office.
It looks like y’all incompetent buyer’s agents, who think you’re automatically entitled to three percent from the seller’s agency, and who don’t know how to negotiate your own fee, let alone a purchase contract on behalf of a buyer client, are going to have to figure it out or leave the business.
As I see it, the issue at hand is streamlining. We have done an excellent job of negotiating the seller and buyer rep fees when we listed the home. We will now need to negotiate buyer fees with each offer. It is cumbersome and will be quarralsome and from an efficiency standpoint, sen us backward by about 20 years. Personally, i will need to charge a higher fee to compensate for the loss of efficiency.
Astute agents will ask for higher fees with full priced offers. I do not see how this helps the general public.
The main hurdle is the inability for buyer’s to finance the commission as part of the loan. Once buyer’s commission is incorporated as a closing cost, perhaps we’ll see more offers with a request for the seller to contribute to the buyer’s closing costs. It seems like this is something that we can all figure out.
smart, every deal will look like that asking 1 m no problem my client offers 1m and want seller to pay 30k towards buyers closing cost. so he can pay me my 30k, so seller is paying again lol doj is a waste of time
Thank God someone is making the case. I’ve been practicing real estate for 32+ years, and the argument about commissions usually comes down to the question, “who really pays the commission?” Is it the seller from whose proceeds commissions are paid, or is it the buyer who pays the seller a price for the home that factors in commissions as an expense, For the elite, having to pay a commission is an irritant, for those trying to buy their first home, it could make that home unaffordable. For the VA buyer who is not permitted to pay a commission, it might mean they can’t find representation at all. The plaintiffs in these cases are so very short-sighted.
If a seller contracts with a broker for a certain amount or percentage commission with the listing broker, the contract is with those two parties. If a different broker becomes involved in the sale representing the buyer, his commission would be coming from the listing (contracted brokerage) not the seller. It is part of the already contracted amount so if it is done that way, only the listing brokerage will get less. The amount of total commission does not change.
Are the parties to the suite asking for an extra commission for buyers brokerages. That will only cost everyone more money. I do not understand what the issue is?