Should a real estate agent be punished for being knowledgeable?

Recently, we came across a couple of articles asking to what extent a real estate professional holds the burden of assisting clients rather than taking advantage of a good real estate deal themselves. On the one hand, a REALTOR owes it to their buyer clients to show them any properties they may be interested in, and to their seller clients to find the best financial offer out there. On the other hand, the agent may also be a buyer, and their offer may be the best one the seller receives.

Real estate agents, and REALTORS in particular, are held to the standards of the National Association of REALTORS (NAR), including its Code of Ethics. This includes protecting and promoting the interests of their clients, and treating all parties honestly. So if you know you want to purchase a property as a rental investment, but your client expresses an interest in it, what do you do? Bite your tongue and show them the property without telling them you would like to purchase it? If you are representing the seller, whatever offer entails the highest price would be in their best interest, right?

These questions can be tricky, as can the other point the writer brings up about how REALTORS should want more first-time homebuyers to have a chance to purchase rather than getting beat out by more knowledgeable real estate professionals. Should agents have to endure a waiting period wherein the listing is exposed to the market for a certain amount of time, before they are allowed to purchase a property someone already has their eye on and is willing to put in an offer for?

Here is the Part 1 article from writer Tom Kelly for Inman News.

In response to the comments Kelly received on his first article, “Should Real Estate Agents Get First Dibs on New Listings?”, his Part 2 article discusses the audience response, and follows it up with a Washington state case that delves into this very topic.

“The responses fell into two main pots,” writes Kelly. “Readers said agents should be allowed to buy if it was in the best interest of the seller. Others who responded thought that agents should be allowed to purchase a property as soon as it is listed, provided they knowingly had no other active clients who wanted the same home.”

It sounds like it all comes down to the “treating all parties honestly” part of the code. In the case of the agent who bought from under his client’s nose, he not only bought a property he knew his client was interested in, but he also relayed some personal, and possibly incorrect information to the listing agent to keep his client from winning the bid. To make things worse, the agent bought the property under his wife’s name, presumably to hide his indiscretion.

Court documents show that the seller’s agent didn’t know the buyer’s agent’s wife was related to the buyer’s agent, or he wouldn’t have participated in the deal. Besides this lapse of honesty, there were two other areas it seems the buyer’s agent went beyond ethical judgement as well as Washington law by attempting to beat the system: 1) He seemingly ignored Washington state real estate law requiring a buyer’s agent to “be loyal to the buyer by taking no action that is adverse or detrimental to the buyer’s interest in a transaction (and) to timely disclose to the buyer any conflicts of interest.” 2) The law also rules against revealing confidential information after the agent-client relations ceases or has been finalized.

Although the settlement itself is confidential, it is obvious the agent was a bit underhanded in his dealings with his buyer client as well as the seller. Hopefully he had a good E&O policy in place to help him with the legal costs, but it is likely his name has been dragged through the mud in the real estate community.

What do you think—should agents be made to wait until a property has been listed for a while before they get a chance to purchase it, allowing less knowledgeable buyers some time to work out the kinks in their offer? Is it punishing those in the real estate profession to do so?

This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 4:57 pm and is filed under Real Estate E&O Claims, Real Estate E&O Insurance, Real Estate Topics, Risk Management. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.