SonOfSwamp Posted November 6, 2007 Report Share Posted November 6, 2007 Originally posted by Les By the way, it was a real estate salesperson, not a reeeeeltor. Just so folks will know: I started using the intentional misspelling because the reeltors have trademarked the word, "Realtor." I don't want to bother with sticking trademark symbols into messages; and, I don't want to risk getting a cease-and-desist letter from some lawyer that I would have to hunt down, mop with honey and stake to an anthill... Oh, for any humorless reeltors' lawyers out there, the above was written in mirth. WJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n/a30 Posted November 6, 2007 Report Share Posted November 6, 2007 Question for you all who have had your own business for over 5 years: What percentage of your home inspections are from Realtor referrals vs. other means? Only 1/2 of 1 percent (1 or 2 this year) from agents. They have not helped me to any real degree and thus I ignore them. I have not advertised to them in 7 years. The over abundance of agents and compromized inspectors in my area makes it very difficult to make a good living. Most general people in the public do not understand the need to have an independant inspector. Try as I have to make that clear it is very much an uphill battle against the evil forces. The following is taken from my company'sweb page. http://youtube.com/user/tlam100 Please view the above links. Disclosure New measures at the Texas Real Estate Commission requires that inspectors provide clients with the following disclosure form, whenever fees or valuable consideration are being paid or received by a party other than the client (Fee or Other Valuable Consideration Disclosure). You will not receive one of these forms from me. I do not pay or receive referral fees or kickbacks in any form. A huge number of inspectors do however get involved with kickback schemes and referral lists. The simple legally required disclosure does NOT stop the kickbacks or the intrusive sales pitch. The only fee that I collect is the fee that you, my client, pays me us for the inspection. I serve the interests of my clients and only my clients. If you have been referred to me, it is based on merit. No referral fees were involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les Posted November 6, 2007 Report Share Posted November 6, 2007 Al, Two hundred inspections this year? You have a pretty nice website. Real estate sales people must not read it. You know I am just pickin'! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian G Posted November 7, 2007 Report Share Posted November 7, 2007 In six years I've gone from 95% down to about 15%, and that 15% survives mostly because of one small firm outside of town that just won't take the easy-sleasy path (no matter what I write up). They refer everyone to me. My website produces more every year, but the majority are coming from previous clients (repeats and referrals). It's a very nice place to be. Brian G. Reaping What I've Sowed [:-angel] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hausdok Posted November 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 7, 2007 Originally posted by SonOfSwamp Originally posted by Les By the way, it was a real estate salesperson, not a reeeeeltor. Just so folks will know: I started using the intentional misspelling because the reeltors have trademarked the word, "Realtor." I don't want to bother with sticking trademark symbols into messages; and, I don't want to risk getting a cease-and-desist letter from some lawyer that I would have to hunt down, mop with honey and stake to an anthill... Oh, for any humorless reeltors' lawyers out there, the above was written in mirth. WJ Hi Walter, That's exactly why I started with the reel-tour; that, plus it kind of fits. First they reel them in, and then they are their tour guides until the clients decide what they want. OT - OF!!! M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n/a30 Posted November 7, 2007 Report Share Posted November 7, 2007 Les thanks for the compliment on my website. A lot of work has been put into it. A clarification: Two hundred inspections THIS year? No, business has been fairly poor and the rough 200 number is an average over the last 8 plus years. This year it has been only around 50 full inspections and that is very slow. A few other jobs were partials such as pools, stucco, foundations and septic systems. When the business was better I would get 1 to 2 inspections a day 5 to 6 days a week and some times 7 days a week. Out of the total number this year, only 3 came from unsolicited agent referrals. Out of the 3, 2 came from one agent who later called and reminded me that with those referrals comes a need for me to go easy on the properties and the reports. She also wanted me to report directly to her and not my clients. In that manner she could interpret the report for the buyer. Her demands were met with an independent stance that will not be compromised. The other agent just showed up to unlock the property, briefly introduced themselves, minded their own business and left me to do my job alone. I generally have gotten only 1 to 2 Realtor referrals per year in the last few 5-6 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Evans Posted April 29, 2008 Report Share Posted April 29, 2008 Originally posted by n/a The following is taken from my company'sweb page. http://youtube.com/user/tlam100 Please view the above links. Disclosure New measures at the Texas Real Estate Commission requires that inspectors provide clients with the following disclosure form, whenever fees or valuable consideration are being paid or received by a party other than the client (Fee or Other Valuable Consideration Disclosure). You will not receive one of these forms from me. I do not pay or receive referral fees or kickbacks in any form. A huge number of inspectors do however get involved with kickback schemes and referral lists. The simple legally required disclosure does NOT stop the kickbacks or the intrusive sales pitch. The only fee that I collect is the fee that you, my client, pays me us for the inspection. I serve the interests of my clients and only my clients. If you have been referred to me, it is based on merit. No referral fees were involved. Alan, I must say that I am amazed that you had the gall to post this on a public forum 2 days after I sent you a formal notice of copyright infringement (see below) for copying this very content from my website. If anyone wants to verify the original author of the above, all they need to do is check the internet archives, which trace it back to June of 2005 on my website http://web.archive.org/web/200506280818 ... rvices.htm Apparently your "ethics" don't extend to not engaging in plagiarism. I guess it's no wonder you got into hot water with TREC for making misleading claims to consumers http://www.trec.state.tx.us/complaintsc ... Licno=5194 Next time you want to publish something of "yours", make sure you didn't steal it from someone else. You disgrace the profession. *************************** -----Original Message----- Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 10:17 AM To: 'tw3@comcast.net' Subject: Notification of Copyright Infringement Importance: High Alan Austin - Proprietor of Diligent Property Inspections, I am writing to notify you that you have published content and/or graphics on your website www.do-diligent.com which belong to and are copyrighted by HomeCert, LLC and me and are originally published on my website www.HomeCert.com. These items include, but may not be limited to http://www.do-diligent.com/01-general-i ... ndence.htm. While we do realize that this may have been done for you by a third party or that you were unaware of the Copyright laws pertaining to Internet content, this is intellectual property which belongs to me. Your unauthorized use of this content is an infringement on my rights under Federal Copyright law. I request that you immediately remove all copied content from your website and any other marketing materials to avoid me taking legal action. Please acknowledge receipt of this message and provide a date (no more than 48 hours) by which you will have the content removed. If you fail to do so, I will turn this over to my attorney and will notify your hosting service provider of the infringement (upon official notification, the ISP is required to disable your website). Our intellectual property was produced at considerable effort on our part and we consider it extremely valuable. We will defend our rights to it vigorously, if need be. I have included the portion of the Federal Copyright Act which specifically addresses damages. please make note of the potential statutory damages for willful infringement. § 504. Remedies for infringement: Damages and profits (a) In General. - Except as otherwise provided by this title, an infringer of copyright is liable for either - (1) the copyright owner's actual damages and any additional profits of the infringer, as provided by subsection (b); or (2) statutory damages, as provided by subsection ©. (b) Actual Damages and Profits. - The copyright owner is entitled to recover the actual damages suffered by him or her as a result of the infringement, and any profits of the infringer that are attributable to the infringement and are not taken into account in computing the actual damages. In establishing the infringer's profits, the copyright owner is required to present proof only of the infringer's gross revenue, and the infringer is required to prove his or her deductible expenses and the elements of profit attributable to factors other than the copyrighted work. © Statutory Damages. - (1) Except as provided by clause (2) of this subsection, the copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the action, with respect to any one work, for which any one infringer is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just. For the purposes of this subsection, all the parts of a compilation or derivative work constitute one work. (2) In a case where the copyright owner sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed willfully, the court in its discretion may increase the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than $150,000. Your prompt attention to this matter is appreciated. Looking forward to your reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Brown Posted April 29, 2008 Report Share Posted April 29, 2008 Hi Chuck, Just so ya know, weird Al Austin is no longer here. His account was deleted. I can't understand why don't want your content on his very professional website. [:-tong2] We really miss him: [:-yuck] Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Evans Posted April 30, 2008 Report Share Posted April 30, 2008 Hi Michael, Thanks for the status update. I'm sure that it has been a great loss to this board that he is no longer posting here. My congratulations to you all in you efforts to keep it viable after such a loss. I realize that I'm being entirely unreasonable by not allowing him to pick and choose whatever content he likes from my website and publish it as his own. It's a character flaw, but just can't seem to help myself. After all, we are in the same market area and the same industry. That practically makes my content his to use in whatever manner he sees fit. He IS one of the few remaining ethical inspectors in the country [:-crazy] Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erby Posted April 30, 2008 Report Share Posted April 30, 2008 Dripping, just dripping on both your parts
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.