ethics complaint

You can contact REBNY (Real Estate Board of New York), as well as the National Association of Realtors (NAR).

It sort of depends on what your complaint is.

All brokers are licensed by the Department of State, so if it's a violation of licensing law, it goes through DOS. DOS has the power to fine agents and to suspend licenses. Misdemeanor convictions can even include jail time.

If it's a fair housing complaint ("they turned down buyers with more money because they were discriminatory") it's federal, and you go to HUD, but the city will take it very seriously, so you can start with 311.

I would first make a complaint to your agent's manager at Sotheby's, and also to our trade association, the Real Estate Board of New York. That might not necessarily give you the "results" you want, but if you need to go to higher levels, you can prove you went through channels first.

ali r.
{downtown broker}

care to tell us what happened?? leave out the names involved obviously, maybe we can shed some light on the proper routes to take. front_porch is an extremely knowledgeable broker who, if you tell us, can help you even more than she already has. i wish every broker was like front_porch

thanks Stoyvel
(*flattered*)

ali r.
downtown broker

I already complained to the director of the office, and she was little or no help.

The long and the short of it is as follows:

We listed with Sotheby's.

2 offers came in, 1 from Sotheby's, 1 from corcoran.

My Sothebys' broker divulged the offer from the corcoran broker to the buyers they were representing.

Both were lowball offers, in my opinion.

They did little or nothing to bring the corcoran offer up. They only wanted to negotiate with their buyer. When the Corcoran offer was off the table and I figured out what happened, I called them out on it. Then they said they would only present the buyers final offer if I signed a disclosed dual agency agreement which protected them from the fact that they violated their fiduciary responsibility to me.

I ended up accepting the offer and we are supposed to close next week, but I would really like to speak to an attorney before we close. My attorney refuses to get involved because he has to deal with these people all the time and doesn't want to make any enemies.

These people are real shady and give the profession a bad reputation.

If anyone knows a good lawyer, please let me know.

thx

Contact Department of State Immediately.

We had a similar problem as buyers of a place on the UWS. Our agent was from Citi-Habitats and the listing agency was Fenwick, Keats ,Goodstein. We had been told that our offer was accepted by the seller, then when the paperwork dragged on for 2 weeks (after their attorney had our 10% down check) the FKG agent sold the place from under us, of course to a higher bidder who was not represented by anyone else without asking us for a final offer. These scenarios are all too common in NYC when greedy agents play buyers against each other and the seller, only to maximize the agency's part of the 6%. Good luck in finding a real estate or contract attorney willing to accept your case. Knowing NYC a little better now, this seems to be a way of life and as much as our former C-H agent said he'd never had an issue like ours before, your story is merely the flip side of ours. Typical NYC RE practices based on the fact that ANY completed sale means a full commission to the agent/agency and splitting between brokers is to be avoided unless the place has real defects or has been stagnating on the market. BTW - the place we bid on had been on the market for 9 months with at least one hefty price reduction and still had not sold until we appeared.

These people are scum. I cant believe technology and market forces hasn't found a way to do away with this entire profession. Talk about zero value added to a profession. If I could teach my dog to walk people through the apartment and point out the obvious "this is the kitchen, ruff, this is the bathroom, woof" we would all be better off.

I'm sorry raddoc, but I don't see how those two situations are at all similar. You got outbid, so what?

They verbally accepted is offer, took his money and then didn't even give him the chance to counter offer. How is this right??

first of all, they took the check, I'm willing to bet they didn't cash it, if they did I have a different opinion of the situation. They have no duty to give him a chance to counter. As has been discussed many times, the verbal acceptance means nothing, sellers can walk just like buyers, until a contract is signed.

Wait--so raddoc, you're saying you submitted a deposit check BEFORE having a signed contract? If so, why??

ccdevi,
"They have no duty to give him a chance to counter."

- Actually they do. They can't disclose the amount of the other offer, but they have to inform other buyer about it. They should of gone to best and final.

bramstar,
Usually contract is finalised, signed by the buyer and with 10% check attached gets returned to the seller. Untill contract is signed by the seller, it has no legal value. If seller doesn't sign it, check gets returned. It can be only cashed after seller signes it.

elena
(broker)

How do you knwo when a broker is lying?

His/Her/Its lips are moving.

The check was submitted with our signed contract, awaiting the seller's signature. The seller's attorney maintained radio silence for 2 weeks while the broker negotiated with another buyer so the broker's agency would not have to split a commission. Simple math : 6% of $880K beats 3% of the $900K we would have offered if the broker gave us the opportunity. The seller (now down $20K) and the buyer (starting to look all over again) both had losses when dealing with the creeps in the middle.

I take it that raddoc's point is that if broker was looking out for seller's interests, broker would have asked raddoc to top the bid. Have to wonder what broker told seller about raddoc.

Tonyc, that sounds like really shady behavior. If I were in your shoes, I'd definitely want to get in touch with someone who knows more about the law/professional standards in this sort of case.

I was hoping someone could recommend a good lawyer

"Actually they do. They can't disclose the amount of the other offer, but they have to inform other buyer about it."

I'm certainly not an expert on this but I find it hard to believe such an obligation exists. Under what rules? In any event I am certain this goes on all the time, people maintaining radio silence with one bidder why negotiating with another.

raddoc, I'd also point out that the sellside broker really isn't increasing their commission. Of the 6% you mention, 3% is still going to the buyside broker just as it would if it was someone at a different agency. Sure the Company makes out better and for that maybe the sellside broker gets some marginal benefit.

I just think people are making too much of this. We have no idea what was going on behind the scenes. Maybe the 2nd bidder had much better financials or was all cash, maybe the seller told the sellside broker to take it, without going back to raddoc. We just don't know.

In raddoc's case, it's worth making the point that brokers don't accept offers, sellers do. And the seller might not accept the "highest" offer -- sometimes there are other factors like how fast the seller can get his/her money and which candidate looks like they'll pass a co-op board.

The broker duty here is to present the seller with the best possible offers in both price and terms. I can't see inside anybody else's deal, but it does seem like the way to achieve that would have been to mention that there was another offer and that the bidding price was going upward.

tonyc's case is more complicated, and harder to comment on since I'm a REBNY member and the names of two REBNY member firms are getting mentioned here. There's a million little chess moves here, and I don't know what happened, so I can't judge.

You might, however, want to google the Conrad Black Sotheby's case.

The story as I've seen it reported is that Sotheby's sold Black's apartment, and then supposedly tipped the Feds off; Black then reportedly stopped payment on the commission.

I've read that Sotheby's is suing for its commission, and Black, as part of his counter-charges, is claiming that Sotheby's mishandled its dual agency.

ali r.
{downtown broker}

Also, it might be that the seller wanted this particular buyers. Could be a "quiet sale" and probably a lawyer will not find anything illegal there.

Have you considered going back to Sotheby's and telling them you will only pay them a lower commission (3% if only one agent and maybe 4% if it actually involves 2 Sotheby agents)? Since they drove awaya a potentially viable bid to keep the whole commission in-house, that seems like a fair outcome. This may be preferrable to threatening a lawsuit that will mess up your close.

ccdevi,

"Under what rules?"

It's a mandatory for NAR (National Association if Realtors) members to take ethic course each year.
It’s a mandatory for REBNY members to take ethics course at least once (within a year of becoming a member).

Those trade organizations enforce it. For example if two firms have a dispute, they can set up hearing within REBNY or NAR. An outsider can't ask "what was going on, why my party wasn't informed about second offer on the table?", but buyer's broker who represented raddoc can.

--
Many years ago there was a case when big house sales agent didn’t submit last minute offer to the seller she represented, because it was presented to her through other firm and another offer was already accepted. She sold the apartment on a strait deal and it would of bean the end of it, but person whose offer was not presented met an owner at the party, and it came out that the owner never even heard about second offer which btw was bigger then the one he accepted. There was a law suit and brokerage house had to return its commission to the seller, on grounds of breaching its fiduciary responsibility. Sales agent license was suspended.

It really amazes me how many sales agents stop showing property they represent at the point when offer gets accepted and a contract goes out. According to fiduciary, property has to be shown until broker has fully executed contract, unless owner himself tells broker not to show any longer. (which is rarely in his interest)

At the same time according to the ethics rules sales agent has to disclose to all involved parties about what is going on: another offer on the table, building requirements, owner's wishes, ets.

elena
(broker)

broker ethics is such an oxymoron. Anyone who uses a real estate broker in NYC without expecting the absolute worst is a total fool. I speak from first hand experience. These people are totally driven by their own financial interests and nothing more. I cant urge buyers and sellers enough, BEWARE. YOU ARE PLAYING WITH FIRE.

All we can hope for is simple advance in technology that will make these unnecessary middlemen obsolete. I cant believe sellers keep forking over 5-6% and buyers don't realize that they are paying in the end anyway. I would have gladly saved my buyers the 100k I gave to the brokers, They could have furnished the entire place, instead, som middle aged women is loading up on Prada, Botox and Boniva as we speak.

-Tony

tonyc
about 6 weeks ago
ignore this person These people are scum. I cant believe technology and market forces hasn't found a way to do away with this entire profession. Talk about zero value added to a profession. If I could teach my dog to walk people through the apartment and point out the obvious "this is the kitchen, ruff, this is the bathroom, woof" we would all be better off.

lol - crack up, thanks for lightening my day. having just gone through a buying purchase I totally agree. My wife's comments were 6% for acting as a key opener not a bad way to make a living.

Cheers,
Dean