kurt Posted September 8, 2005 Report Share Posted September 8, 2005 A very interesting lawsuit was filed today in Federal Court right here in Chicago...... The Justice Dept. is suing the National Board of Realtors for restraint of trade or similar action. Seems that the JD thinks it's not right for the big boys to restrict listings from the internet brokers who charge lesser fees. If this flies, we will be looking @ the beginning of the end for high commission rates. If the internet was actually used in the manner that it could be, i.e., put the friggin' listings up on the net & let people look @ 'em, realtors, as we know them, are dinosaurs. I get all warm & fuzzy feeling just thinking about it....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonTx Posted September 9, 2005 Report Share Posted September 9, 2005 Originally posted by hausdok Hmmm, By the same token, it should be illegal to allow some inspectors to leave flyers and such while telling others they can't. Or, giving out a list of 'approved' inspection companies to their agents. Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating the whole realtor/inspector thing. However, it they were prohibited by law from trying to steer clients or from picking and choosing which inspectors' literature would be allowed in their offices, they'd lose some of their sway over so many new to the business and I don't think they'd be so easily corrupted. Just call me naive'. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike Let me start my disagreement with Mike by saying I don't leave flyers/brochures in any realty offices and I don't care who does or does not. However I look at this strictly from a business standpoint, If I'm running a private business, then I should get to call the shots about who or who does not get to leave stuff in my store. If I was King [:-king], there'd be no flyers/brochures left in offices. And to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest, whether real or imagined, there'd be no realtors referring HI's or any other trade that could affect the transaction (such as pest control companies, appraisers). I'd make a declaration that any consumer who was too lazy or stupid to do their own research to find an HI, doesn't deserve to own a home anyway. [:-dunce] I'm glad to see that the JD is going after the big boys. It should be a good fight. Our state RA [:-witch] has been whining and trying to undermine the FSBO companies in the state for some time now. I love to see the little guys win. [:-thumbu] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackJack Posted September 9, 2005 Report Share Posted September 9, 2005 Sherman Anti-trust action or a RICO case? Do you have a case #? or Defendants name? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurt Posted September 9, 2005 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2005 Originally posted by BlackJack Sherman Anti-trust action or a RICO case? Do you have a case #? or Defendants name? No, it was on NPR while I was driving home after work yesterday; no details other than there's action afoot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Kibbel Posted September 9, 2005 Report Share Posted September 9, 2005 This was in my e-mail yesterday: NEWS BULLETIN: GOVERNMENT FILES ANTITRUST LAWSUIT AGAINST NAR Agency says NAR's revised ââ¬Ëopt-out' policy is unfair to consumers www.rismedia.com/index.php/article/arti ... 11690/1/1/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.