The Real Estate REplay
Host Wendy Gilch, and a rotating cast of expert co-hosts, break down the good, the bad, the unethical (and sometimes illegal) things other sellers and buyers experienced while buying or selling a home.
Learn what went right, what went wrong, what they would do differently and how to spot red flags before they become a problem.
The Real Estate REplay is powered by consumer advocate group, Selling Later.
www.sellinglater.com/resources
The Real Estate REplay
Real Estate’s Great Confusion: Why No One Knows What to Do (and What It Means for You)
In this episode of Real Estate REPlay, we unravel the chaos surrounding the latest commission settlement with special guest Summer Goralik, a real estate compliance consultant and former California Department of Real Estate investigator. Summer has spent years helping agents and brokers navigate complex rules, and she’s here to shed light on why no one seems to know exactly what they should be doing post-settlement.
We’ll break it down into two parts:
- Part 1: For agents and brokers, we’ll discuss why the new rules have sparked so much confusion, the risks of getting it wrong, and what steps they can take to stay compliant.
- Part 2: For buyers and sellers, we’ll explore how the uncertainty might affect their transactions, what they should watch out for, and how they can protect themselves. This section starts around the 28:00 mark.
If you’ve ever wondered why the real estate industry feels like it’s stuck in a game of “he said, she said,” this episode will help you make sense of the noise. With Summer’s expertise, we’ll untangle the confusion and uncover what this all means for the future of real estate. Don’t miss this insightful and practical conversation!
Contact Summer Goralik
Contact Wendy Gilch
State laws and regulations may vary.
Have a story you would like to share with other sellers or buyers?
Hit us up here.
Today we're diving into the he said, she said of the latest commission settlement stuff and asking the big question why the hell doesn't anyone seem to know exactly what they should be doing? First, we'll break down what this means for agents, and then we'll flip the script and talk about buyers and sellers and what these changes mean for them and how they should protect themselves as we move into the 2025 market. Spoiler alert it's complicated, but don't worry, we've got Summer Gorlick here to help us cut through the confusion and figure it all out. Let's talk about it. Welcome to the Real Estate Replay.
Speaker 1:I'm Wendy Gilch, an industry outsider, here to reveal the hidden practices and explain the processes that can impact your next home purchase or sale. Alongside other industry misfits, we'll call out these poor practices and equip homebuyers and sellers with insights they need to protect themselves every step of the way. So I'm super excited to have you on today, because I feel like there is just this big gap between what the plaintiff's side says, what NAR is saying, and the defendants are saying, and then there's a bunch of random people in the middle that are like yes, you can do this. No, you can't. And you always write the best articles for Inman answering questions for people. So, summer, I would love for you to just give like two minutes, before we hash out this hot mess of settlements and what buyers and sellers should know, to just explain your background, because you are more than well experienced in enforcement rules, especially for California specifically. So if you could just share with everyone your background, that would be great.
Speaker 2:Yeah, thanks. Thanks for having me on. I really appreciate this. This is fun. Yeah, so my career in real estate spans about 20 years now and it's kind of not just normal real estate practice, it's like everything. But actually I worked in the escrow industry for about five years. I thought I was going to go to law school. I kind of did a U-turn on that and then, before you know it, the escrow industry pushed me out. It was such a stressful profession. I don't know if a lot of people realize that escrow officers are dealing with everybody on that real estate transaction.
Speaker 2:It's a lot. It was very stressful for me. I didn't have an assistant. I was working for a broker controlled escrow, so I literally ran away to the government I don't know how many people can say that, but and I worked for the California Department of Real Estate for six years as an investigator. So I was tasked with reviewing complaints filed against real estate brokers, salespeople, corporate corporations and then, of course, non-licensed people out there performing real estate. There's a lot of them.
Speaker 2:So I had a great time working for the DRE. I got to write articles, I was on task forces. I worked very closely with the FBI and law enforcement partners, which I don't think people really think. Oh, does DRE talk to those people? Yes, they do. And then from there I worked at the Orange County District Attorney's Office. I worked in their real estate fraud unit. I was an economic crimes investigator and I always tell people I was the only one on my floor that didn't have a gun, so I was just walking around as a you know kind of an agency expert in real estate but essentially criminally investigating real estate licensees. And then for the last eight years I've been working as a real estate compliance consultant, so I help brokers mainly prepare for government audits, maybe investigations. I you know, and also there's all those proactive brokers out there that maybe they're not under investigation or audit and they just want to evaluate their compliance, figure out if they're doing anything wrong, and I help spot those issues and help them correct it.
Speaker 1:And I work. That should be everybody right. Shouldn't that be everybody at this point, like if I love the proactive broker.
Speaker 2:Client call. Just hey, you know, did DRE just call you? No, we just want to be better.
Speaker 1:It's like, yes, let's do independent brokers, or you know, they're just like an individual agent who isn't sure like if their broker is telling the right thing and they're like something feels off, and I feel like those people get overshadowed by those that are just messing it up for everybody and giving bad advice. So your experience here is going to be great to rehash this hot mess of a settlement and I know California is changing some things starting in January. So it's just, I've never seen I don't think anybody has and I don't think anybody thought this would come to fruition like a court, like a trial, a whole system, a whole lawsuit that went on for this many years, that made such a big change that I don't think any expected to change. Even leading up to the settlement, there were people that were saying, oh, nara told us we're going to fight this. And I'm like, do you know that?
Speaker 1:They're like in meetings negotiating a settlement right now, like they are maybe fighting it with a settlement, but you're not getting away with this, like it's not, like it's going to go away and it just is such a messy, interesting dynamic and I think it's really important that we clarify some things, at least from your perspective, especially those in California for consumers, because no one's doing the same thing and it's just a shit show. See, I told you we would swear. I told you, I told you it would come out. I told you All right. So let's start with the first question question why do you think it's so hard in real estate for people to agree on what the settlement says that realtors can and cannot do? Why is it such a shit show?
Speaker 2:You would think it'd be a very simple thing and that everyone would get on board and there'd be one unified way to do it, because they just went through a massive commission litigation, right, and you know there's still more cases out there. This was just the home sellers class action, but I think you kind of said it in your intro there. You know the the narrative on this has been evolving constantly and I think when everyone the jury verdict came out last year and when it's like, oh my gosh, how could this happen? And NAR was going to fight the good fight and I think a lot of realtors were, you know, they were empowered by that. They didn't do anything wrong. We're going to fight this, we're going to appeal this, and I think that was like the initial thought process. It wasn't about changing anything. It was like we're going to fight this and a lot of people took sort of this false sense of security In fact that, oh, this is going to take years to unwind. Right, we're going to. They'll be very happy and cozy, you know, in the current sort of historical way of doing things, until this unwinds itself in court.
Speaker 2:And then, all of a sudden, the NARS settlement of March of this year and it was like, oh shit, well, I didn't see this coming. And all of a sudden now it was like okay, we've settled, we have these practice changes. Oh my gosh, what are we going to do? So once again, the conversation changed and I'll tell you Wendy, you know, just like so many you know, I didn't. I didn't know all the answers. I wanted to learn as much as I could. I'm just following every news source. I was in every town hall, virtual webinars. I was just really just saturating myself with information, which I urge everyone to do, especially now. But I sat in so many town hall meetings where well-established attorneys here in California were telling a room full of realtors don't worry, nothing's going to change, you're still going to get paid.
Speaker 2:And I'm sitting there thinking, well, hold on, something's changed here. We got a massive settlement that's over 100 pages long. There there's these practice changes and the MLS is changing and forms are changing and, oh my goodness, how could you tell people that nothing's going to change? And so then there was like this sort of thing, and I remember sitting in these town halls and realtors would raise their hand and say, well, how am I supposed to talk about commission with my clients? And all of a sudden you know things were being worked out and it was sort of mind boggling.
Speaker 2:And then eventually you know now where we're at. I mean and I know you have other questions on this but we have these different institutions saying different things. So I can't live with that. And I don't even practice real estate, I just work in the compliance part of it. But that drives me crazy I mean, having worked for the California DRE, when you have a regulator telling their stakeholders and licensees we don't want to see this, don't do this. Like the DOJ, obviously not a fan of cooperative compensation, even though the settlement did not out. You know, forbid this right. If you have the DOJ telling you this and you have NAR saying no, it's fine, you can do this. I don't. I feel like we have to get to the bottom of that and some of the other sort of disconnects before we can ever feel normal again or do things right or not fear, you know, antitrust action.
Speaker 1:I think we have to get to the bottom of it, right, and I think the worst part is is then you have some brokers that are saying like hey, you know, the DOJ said they don't want this, so we're just not going to do it. And I know there's a bunch of them, there's some in Colorado and I think at one point even the California realtors took like for a listing. Didn't they take buy side commission like off, totally, totally off, completely Right. So like they're like, yeah, let's not deal with this. But then other people like there's contracts that I saw in Ohio that are like still sharing commission and if you don't take all of it, the listing agent's getting it. And I was like are we still doing this? Like I thought that we were done with this, right.
Speaker 2:But this is the problem. The settlement did not prohibit this. It took it off MLS but specifically does not say that it can't be done elsewhere. So if you say that if that's fine, if that can go on without any issue with the settlement, then people there are going to be some realtors that don't want to change and will continue to do that. But then when you also have the DOJ saying that we have a problem with this, offers off the MLS is fine, but we don't want to see them anywhere. I mean that was a direct quote from Jessica Leal a.
Speaker 2:DOJ attorney, I don't know. For me I look, as the federal government is, you know, the highest, and I don't want to get in their bad way. You know I don't want to side. So I do think NAR has to address this. I mean, and I think that realtors should be demanding that they address it. So maybe the settlement didn't prohibit it. What should we be doing? And I don't know, maybe they can't give that guidance. I mean, you know, I'm not an attorney, Maybe there's things that they're, you know, prohibited from telling their, their realtors. But I do think that there needs to be clarity and there, and I I'm annoyed, I'm annoyed by the fact that there's no clarity. I remember even the first, yeah.
Speaker 1:Well, even after the settlement first came out and I think it was, Kevin made a video and it was like, listen, we're not going to do offers of compensation. And then it was like a wink, wink, like, but I know you guys will figure it out. And I'm like, okay, you just told them, don't worry about it, You'll do something else. Okay, so there's a loophole, number one, and then there's the whole like you can make, you can make more than your agreement. You just have to have your buyer sign it, which I think you just have to have your buyer sign it, which I think Doug and I did a whole podcast with Rob Hahn about this stuff. And even recently, even recently, the plaintiff's side put out that giant response to people that kind of didn't want the settlement to go through. And it was very clear, like you cannot make more than what's in your agreement. And then, like a little bit later, you have a buddy of the president of NAR making a video saying I think you can make more than your agreement. And here's why Now, I did not watch the video, because I just don't watch his stuff. I just out of out of principle, I can't do it, I won't do it.
Speaker 1:But the title alone was like here's why I think you can make more in your agreement. And I'm like, and you are like the buddy of the president of NAR, so then people that follow him are going to be like well, he said it's okay, so I guess it's okay, and it's like so then all of this translates down to consumers too. So it's like you're not sure what your agent's telling you, nor do you, like we probably still don't understand, as a consumer, who gets paid what and how. Because even before that, I think I forget what the percentage was.
Speaker 1:The amount of buyers that didn't know how their agent got paid or know how much they got paid was like astronomical, I think. Combined together it was like 40 some percent. So to not know how much or how is a big issue. And now we're trying to change that process and it's like okay, so how do we help consumers with this? It's just weird that there's no clarifying one guideline. Right, it's like a guideline from NAR with gray area and then a very bold statement from the plaintiff's side, and then everyone's in between like which way do I go? Who should I listen to?
Speaker 2:Yeah, I thought that motion that was filed I don't know, maybe it was a week or so, maybe it's around November 20, or something like that the motion that was filed by the plaintiffs and obviously it addressed, you know, law, law, contracts, professor Tanya Manistier's 136 page objection. I thought that motion was amazing Because you know I'm constantly reading frequently asked questions by NAR. I want to see if they've been updated and those are great, right, those form a good basis for people to kind of wrap their head around it. But there was so much in that motion that if you were to compare it right now and I don't believe NAR has updated those frequently asked questions I think the last time was around September they're in desperate need of a refresh. Think the last time was around September. They're in desperate need of a refresh and in light of that motion that really just it quashes with no on, under no uncertain terms what is not allowed and I think every realtor I mean they should read it. But hopefully NAR will expose it and train on it and so then state and local associations can train on it and heck forms might need to be updated as a result of that.
Speaker 2:I thought the motion was amazing because it's finally some things that I can get behind in terms of, okay, clear answers. No, you cannot do that. It makes my job a lot easier as a compliance consultant when people get on the phone with me and they have a question. Well, cannot do that, and let me tell you why. Let me point you to the document that says you really should not do that so I love that.
Speaker 2:But I think without NAR kind of you know, yelling it from the rooftops, like that's not, it's not going to get dispersed and I think that needs to happen and it's sort of the clock's ticking on that.
Speaker 1:Yeah, which okay. So it leads me to my next one. So outside of NAR, because the other issue is, when this all came out, they NAR went to the MLSs and said here you go.
Speaker 1:What is it? What did they say? Good luck and Godspeed. You're in charge of enforcement, and all these these poor little MLSs are like what the F? Like? What are you talking about? Like just a little blindsided Right, like you were in the settlement room, not the MLSs, like, why aren't you creating enforcement? What about the state associations? What about the local associations? Like, where I mean, what about the broker? I mean the person that's responsible, the people that should be calling you to say, hey, I don't know if we're doing this right, can you help me? It was just, it was weird to think that they just kind of turned around and told the MLS good luck, you know, here you go. Here's what we wanna do. Implement it with your little funds and your little workforce, but we have millions and millions of dollars with our fancy area in Chicago. It just didn't make sense. But so who do you think should be really leading the charge? Does it need to be an individual broker just covering themselves?
Speaker 2:Well, what's interesting is, I think individual brokers, especially brokers that are supervising agents, like sorry, you kind of inherit this, no matter what, like you are you know, and it's not just you know, because a lot of this is not state law, right, there's a disconnect between practice rules and state law which, by the way, that never helps yeah, it never helps to have another rule enforced by a different enforcement body. So, but you know not to digress on that, but I think brokers, if they are in charge of you, know their corporations or maybe their sole proprietorships, and they have a sales first sales force they have to supervise for this Wendy, it's on their watch, because if something happens with one of their agents, people will also include the brokers in those actions, because the brokers are responsible for their aid.
Speaker 1:Well, and the broker's name is on the contract too. I think we forget about that. Like the contract is technically with the broker, with this person helping you.
Speaker 2:Yes, absolutely so. Brokers, no matter what, are tasked with enforcement. But we also need sort of like an independent body. And if it's not the state regulator, right, if state laws and practice rules don't line up, then yes, we need. I mean, it's not the MLS, right? I mean, I've been writing for Inman, as you mentioned, and I get you know feedback once in a while. And some guy I don't know what state it was, but he's like yeah, I work for the MLS.
Speaker 2:And I got one person it's me and I'm in charge of enforcement it's like, oh my gosh, I'm so, I'm so sorry, but you know that's not practical and that's not effective and you know they're being set up to fail in some ways Right and they're not going to be able to do it Right. They're not going to be able to do it in some cases.
Speaker 1:Or do they know what they're supposed to be doing, right?
Speaker 1:So so you have people that you have people still out there that are like we did nothing wrong, this settlement is a bunch of bullshit and it's an attack. I've seen everything. It's an attack. They're attacking us because it's a predominantly female industry. They're attacking us because something it's just always some conspiracy, instead of saying like hey, maybe these practices aren't working and this is what we're doing now, so like let's figure it out, but it just doesn't. So if the person in the MLS, or even I, had someone tell me I think it was Wisconsin that their legal department for I think it was the State Realtor Association was like steering doesn't exist, like I'm like, well, I mean, the lawsuit says differently, so maybe that perspective is not helpful. You obviously don't think anything needs to change. So so that person's guiding a whole organization, right, and I just don't. It's such a mess.
Speaker 2:It all kind of trickles down right. So we need NAR to do the right thing so that state and local boards can do the right thing and so that brokers can lead their agents effectively. So it kind of does have to start at the top. But if that doesn't happen, I don't want brokers sitting around and waiting for it. Right, they do kind of have to take action over their agents and hopefully they're getting. They're diversifying, you know the guidance that they're getting right. Good attorneys, attorneys that know antitrust law, I mean really that have all of the angles figured out. You know there's a lot of real estate attorneys out there, but everyone kind of sometimes has a special niche in that. So they need to find the right sources if they're not getting it from the top.
Speaker 1:Yeah, you know it's funny you mentioned I shouldn't share that. She's probably gonna get mad at me. Tanya was telling me when she first started to write about stuff and write about these contracts, she's like I had a bunch of associations reach out to me like hey, can, can you help us? And she's like, sure, here's my fee. And they're like oh, oh, nevermind, we don't want to pay you. And she's like what isn't that like the pot calling, like you're. You always say we don't work for free or we don't want to work for free, but then you're asking me to work for free. It just seems like an offhanded. I mean, maybe they don't have a ton of money, but I don't know.
Speaker 2:But you know a lot of factors there. But you know, yeah, I mean it's not cheap to get solid, quality guidance and advice.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah, and I'm sure I feel bad for small independent brokers because I feel like you know, doug Miller always says like the small independent brokers are like the place to be because there's less restrictions, there's less corporation tape, there's less guidelines of how much you need to charge, like it just seems like there's more flexibility for consumers to talk, less instances of maybe having dual agency. But he, you know I can understand how maybe it's pricey for them. It's almost like you want them to just like get together to just chip in and get some guidance.
Speaker 2:I don't know, I wish they would do something because Well, it is kind of an interesting time because for me personally, like I've always, when people look for you know they're looking for real estate forms and education.
Speaker 2:Like you know, california Association of Realtors I've always recommended it, endorsed, and so many of my clients have been members of CAR, and to create a form outside of your association would be ludicrous, right, there'd be so much liability and even brokers have policies in their policy manuals that specifically tell agents do not steer from the ship here, you have to use approved forms. But for the very first time those forms are being highly scrutinized. And I actually think this is a second issue that NAR should really comment on as part of their frequently asked questions or just general guidance, like if there's liability with their members using those forms. Tell us those risks, let us play the pros and cons and maybe how can we eliminate those risks. And I just think that there's a lot of elephants in the room and there's almost no more space and we have to kind of get to the bottom of it, right.
Speaker 2:But what I was going to say is that a lot of brokers now are no longer members of NAR, like they're dropping out more, and I've never experienced that in my career. I've never had people say, oh, you know what, we're not, we're actually not going to be a member anymore. We're so disillusioned and disenchanted by what's happened and they're jumping, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1:So then it's weird too. So, and I want to get into the consumer part too, but this is part of the issue. So then you have this huge settlement, but that technically just applies to realtors. So then those that aren't realtors, then state laws just apply. And some of the state laws are really really really lax or how they view agreements. Like I'm pretty sure in mine it's like oh, you have to sign this at some point, you know but that. But in the past that some point could have been when you're making an offer and you already know the commission. So the agent's like, all right, well, it looks like they're offering 3%, I charge 3%. Here you go, can you sign this? And it's like oh, so you know, I, considering that realtors sit on the state boards, I wonder if next year we'll see more individual state changes. Do you think?
Speaker 2:Yeah, you know. So for California, I mean that is a state governmental regulator.
Speaker 2:And so there is. I mean, you know, I used to work at the DRE, the executive leadership team. Not everyone's a real estate broker and even then I don't know that they're practicing brokers. When I worked there, wayne Bell, he was amazing, he had been the chief legal counsel before he became the real estate commissioner, and so I. But I imagine, you know, in other states there's different setups and I know that there's, you know, sort of not as much teeth. It's. It may be, like you said, more of a real estate commission board and it's set up differently. But in.
Speaker 2:California, it. You know it's a, it's a state regulator and the and the laws you can get in big trouble if you're breaking them.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 1:And they enforce? You know they're enforcing the law. That's going to be interesting. And then, oh. So my other question, because I would love your opinion on this, because you wrote about this and I keep thinking about it. So you know, before we switch to the consumer side, one more for agents and brokerages. You talked about like, oh, you can't accept more money than this, but then you talk about these like hidden ways for agents to make money. So my question to you is we have these marketing agreements that some people have a partnership with somebody. For example, say that their client buys an ADT security package from ADT and the agent now gets $200. Does that count towards? You cannot make more than X amount from the buyer.
Speaker 2:That's a very interesting question. So you're kind of alluding to, yeah, the marketing service agreement, fees or compensation, although you know, if it's a law abiding marketing service agreement that's going to be subject to RESPA right and the CFPB's enforcement of RESPA. But you know, depending on that contract, there may be not licensed service involved and they could argue that no, this is outside the scope and I do believe that this is another area that needs to be. You know, I'm not an attorney and I could opine on this, but I do think that A more than anything that has to be disclosed to consumers.
Speaker 2:And you know, marketing service agreements are one thing, wendy, but you know, in just normal everyday real estate, there are referral fees constantly being given and received. Yeah, estate, there are referral fees constantly being given and received. And even just between brokerages and buyers don't know that. Oh my gosh, my agent just received 20% for referring me off to another out-of-state broker and they just don't know that. And reviewing real estate transaction files for a better part of my career here, you never see disclosure of that, just real estate referral fees. And I've gotten in such big fights with good friends who work in the industry and longtime clients that kind of battle me on. Well, it's, it's. It's not impacting the bottom line, it's not, you know, raising commission but it's, it's behind us and to not disclose that referral fee.
Speaker 2:And actually California DRE talks about disclosure of referral fees but it's not really done and I just think that you know the whole historical commission dynamic has been completely, you know, tossed up Right. So now I think that any other area where fees are being received and given in, you know, in connection with that real estate transaction, I think best practice, or even by law, depending on where you live and where you practice, you should be disclosing those referral fees or any kind of financial benefits that you're receiving. Because why wouldn't you? If you're an agent, you're a fiduciary right and you're being looked to by your client and you have to provide the highest standard of care and with that comes disclosure and honesty and loyalty.
Speaker 1:And, yes, you disclose that without a doubt, the one thing that I was listening to Tanya's podcast with James Twiggins and you know, yeah, her, her big thing in her and I've talked about this many times and it's not even just real estate. It's like why can't terms and contracts just be simply stated right and in easy terms in these marketing service agreements, aren't? They're not? They're not. It's like a little sheet of paper. Who knows when you're getting it?
Speaker 1:It's probably like when you're submitting an offer, or when it's too late, or you know, I just I told someone the other day I was like what would these agreements look like if it said like, hey, I'm partners with ADT and if you buy a thing from them, they're going to pay me $200? Or hey, the lender I referred you to pays $15,000 a month to help us with our marketing. Like it might just help pause, you know? Or shoot hey, thanks for using Zillow, just so you know, we're getting 40% of whatever your agent's making and you as a buyer should probably know that because you're responsible and it could impact how you negotiate right.
Speaker 2:A hundred percent. Yeah, knowledge is power, so to know that that money is, you know, exchanging hands yeah, that would definitely make the consumer more informed and maybe provide them with some more negotiating power, which is a lot. What's happened with these big changes too?
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's like it. Should 2025 be like the year of removing gray area, which is probably not going to be, but it would be really nice if it was.
Speaker 2:I feel like everyone should be multitasking towards that goal, because no one wants to go through this hell again. So let's look at any other blind spots that are out there and let's address them, because I feel like the cat is out of the bag now. So let's just fix it and let's not have any lawsuits. You know, follow us around Like we don't need that. We definitely don't need the DOJ. So, yeah, there's a lot that needs to be unraveled Right.
Speaker 1:All right. So, speaking of how consumers can end up paying more because of referral fees, at least in my opinion, let's go into consumer facing questions, if they have not fallen asleep already from all the brokerage jargon that we have just hashed out for 20 minutes. So, with clearer rules about commission agreements, what do you think consumers now have more power with in their transactions?
Speaker 2:It's amazing. You know they have a lot of power and, yeah sorry, they have a lot of power and I, you know it's whether really the consumer even knows that. So you know it all kind of. You know, do we have informed consumers that know the changes? Well, a lot of those consumers are not really thinking about that. Right, they're thinking about I want to, we need to buy our first home here, and you know they're selecting an agent, probably the very first agent they meet, and then it really goes to. Well, how is the whole commission dynamic and options being conveyed to that consumer? So a good agent, an ethical law abiding, good agent that would, you know, understands their fiduciary duty, is going to inform their client and the client will be more informed and empowered and they'll be able to negotiate. For the very first time, the buyer will be able to negotiate commission with their agent. I mean that's huge right. I mean, theoretically they could have done it before.
Speaker 1:But I don't know the way most of the contracts were written. Yeah, I mean most of the way it was written. It was like, yeah, I charge two and a half, whatever it is, whatever percent, but if they're offering more, I'm going to keep that too. And it's like okay, well, what kind of negotiation power does the buyer have? And think about those nine states and I wrote about this where where you can't rebate a client. So like I can't say, hey, it's yeah, hey, lobbying, thanks a lot. It's so stupid. Like, if it's good for 41 states, the nine others should be like oh, yeah, okay, we're wrong.
Speaker 1:But I think about that. Like in those nine States, even if the agent did collect more, they weren't allowed to give some of that back to their client. It was considered illegal. So in those nine States now it's like, well, hey, the more you negotiate down, the better you can make your offer look, because now you're just requesting 2% to be paid, not three or three and a half, whatever it is. It makes your offer look better, because that's really the only tool you have, cause you can't say, hey, if you can get more, give it back to me.
Speaker 1:Like it's not, it doesn't work. I never worked that way, but now, now at least they have that option. They probably don't even know that and I don't know if if you see this a lot, but I wrote about this that I felt like for so long everyone was like just use an agent, it's free. So, like consumers were like okay, like didn't think much of it. And then a couple of years ago it was like we're just kidding, we can't tell you that we're free, but the seller's going to pay it, so don't worry about it. And they're like okay, and like shame on us for not interviewing people and doing due diligence as a consumer, but no one's really taken the time to explain how it works. And now I think it's a great time to start doing that. We should have been doing it all along. But like, what's a fiduciary mean? What does that even mean? What does the word mean? What should you expect?
Speaker 2:Agreed. I do think that you know if consumers were I mean, a lot of consumers have been enlightened by this process, right, so it's. It's always. I always say, you know, for the people that have kind of fought against these changes or fought against the, you know the spirit of the class action, litigation and the conspiracy and all of these horrible things. Right, even if you don't believe that, even if you don't think anything was wrong like that moment's past, generally the consumer is enlightened by all of this. The rules are different. You better get on the right ship here and do the right thing or you could find yourself in big trouble. I mean, that's the way I think about it. But so many consumers are not informed and I think it's like you know groups like yours and other consumer watchdog groups. You guys, really your value just continues to increase in this industry with these changes because you are an independent source of this type of information.
Speaker 1:Yeah, well, thank you, let's do. You know, since we're talking about this, let's do some red flags on things they shouldn't be telling you, so maybe one would be the lawsuit was bullshit, nothing changed. That's a red flag, right, Big time.
Speaker 1:Yes, if you're interviewing them like, yeah, something has changed. Let me think of some good ones. Oh, we can skip the home if we can't get an answer on commission. That's my other red flag. I don't like that one. Have you seen any other ones that you were like what's wrong with you? Like don't tell people.
Speaker 2:Or you know I've heard of this firsthand, not just in reading out there, but firsthand. You know listing agents telling unrepresented buyers that they have to sign an agreement with them to see the property. And I think that's a misunderstanding that, oh, in order to see any property here in the United States, I have to hire an agent, and I think that's a misconception that some have sort of you know sort of reiterated in force and we need to remove that. That's not true Absolutely.
Speaker 1:Oh, and then if you don't offer a commission upfront, people might skip your home which is like I don't even know how you would say that in California, cause it's not even in there there's no agreement anymore. So it's like, and everyone's surviving correct.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that's very, that's very interesting because I think California association of realtors did the right thing Cause you know, you know, I was in some of those meetings to train on those first set of forms and obviously they look much different now. Jay did their formal inquiry into CARS forms, as in other states, but yeah, I think that was a great move by CAR to do that.
Speaker 1:Take that drama right out of there. Yeah, yeah, I mean. It doesn't mean not having a commission stated up front doesn't mean that the seller wouldn't be willing to help cover your cost 100%, you know. And so anyone telling you differently has to happen.
Speaker 2:You know that conversation can now happen during the offer contract station process, kind of where it should be.
Speaker 2:So, yeah, Right, oh, and I think James Wiggins and I I don't know if you follow a lot of what he puts out there, but I think he really did a great service for the industry because with all of the sort of over complication of it, all these kinds of weird workarounds or oh, can I do this, Can I do that? You know, he was really putting out there and it almost just kind of became a thing where he was urging, you know, listing agents to communicate to buyers. Agents just put your, you know, just put your offer in writing. We're going to entertain all offers. And that was like the best advice, Something so simple and also concurrently sort of upholding a listing agent's fiduciary duty to the seller. It really hit a lot of boxes and I loved that.
Speaker 1:It's just weird, though. Why didn't that come from NAR? Why didn't it come from the unofficial spokesperson for NAR, who's the champion of real? This person just gets on my nerves. I'm sure he will figure out I'm talking about him and send me some nasty tweets, or?
Speaker 2:something.
Speaker 1:It's just weird. I don't understand why they're relying on other people to be the messenger.
Speaker 2:It feels that way because where's the message? You know where is the message on that, but you know. Luckily there are people like James and others that are helping guide you know agents in the right direction.
Speaker 1:I thought of one more red flag. Some brokerages, some big ones, really like to tell listing clients that they have exclusive programs that they can list their home on, to like test pricing and blah blah, blah, when really the idea is that they can get both sides of the deal and sell their home to someone within their brokerage or use your home to recruit buyers and your home really, unless you're Kim Kardashian or're kim kardashian or I mean I don't follow. I don't really like her or follow her. I should find someone better who's a better person. I don't follow her.
Speaker 2:I can't even think of anyone yeah, but you know famous people and obviously there could be other situations too, sure issues and death. But I think you're right, I think it is a red flag when one of the first sales pitches that are coming out of an agent's mind is like let's test it here and we won't, you know, broadly market it. And obviously this speaks to the clear cooperation policy and debate on that. But yeah, it really should be consumer driven. If it's not going to be on the MLS, it's right. Those are consumer driven reasons why they don't want that exposure, why maybe netting the most is not as important to them as these other priorities. So I agree with you, that would be a red flag.
Speaker 1:There's so many. Part of me just wants to be like hey, if anything bothers you in your gut that you feel maybe someone's telling you the wrong thing, please email, email. One of us email somebody at midnight. I'll be like, yeah, that sounds like shit, don't do that. Or hey, let me connect you to someone who will tell you yes or no.
Speaker 2:Whether that's right, there needs to be a hotline. Are you available tonight? I know?
Speaker 1:I unfortunately. I always I needed to shut my phone off. Maybe I'll do it in the holidays. I doubt it, but but there's so much.
Speaker 2:You know it's funny. I have a good broker friend who's like summer it was right before I wrote that article about the enforcement trifecta and this sort of like secret profit idea. But you know she sat me down and she's like you have no idea what's going on out there and it's almost like she says it in a cute way. Like you know, I'm working on compliance and I'm not coming across these bad things because no one's going to tell you about it.
Speaker 2:But you know she enlightened me that, not that I can't imagine it on my own. There's good and bad, and there's more good than bad, but the bad gives the good a bad name.
Speaker 1:Well, why don't the bad just go away? That's what I just don't understand. I see, I see my God, I see the real estate Facebook groups and I'm just like well, that's not right Screenshot, that's not right Screenshot.
Speaker 2:I think that whole forum I'm not sure. Doesn't anybody realize that people enforcers, they police those forums. I mean that's not a good place to advertise your thought process and what's going on out there if it's not on the up and up.
Speaker 1:And what's going on out there. If it's not, was the one I got. Oh, he said he was like the number one agent in minnesota or something like that, and someone sent it to me and we looked it up and it was like number one agent rated by some service that you have to pay for and it was based on. It's not about sales, it's not about reviews, it was about a paid platform. But he left that part out, right, it wasn't like number one in sales, not that that even matters.
Speaker 2:None of that matters. That might be my one of my pet peeves, cause I review advertising for a living for compliance, and I can't tell you how many number one agents I cross.
Speaker 2:I come across daily and I'm always saying the same thing. You can't say this unless it's true and give some context. What's the source? What's the time period? Oh, this was 20 years ago. Okay, then we should probably say that True and accurate. And you know you don't want to mislead the public. And these are things such as in california that the dre could pursue licensees on and in misleading advertising so, yeah, that's some state law behind those representations.
Speaker 1:so, people too bad, you don't uh work in massachusetts. Because I reported an agent who has been sued by her clients more than once but they can't talk about it because they signed NDAs. She totally lied about how many sales she had like, exaggerated the number, like look how many homes we've sold last year. And everybody, like four different people, were like look at this ad, she's lying, she's lying. So I sent it to literally like the high up branch in Massachusetts of the Realtor Association. I was like, hey, this person is like a problem person. I don't know why she still even has a license, because she was like in the media that year for something else about money missing, and like here she is lying about stuff. And they were like, wow, that's not really what we look at. I'm like, oh my God.
Speaker 2:Now, that's, you said Realtor Association, but what is? Is there a governmental entity that regulates the real estate law?
Speaker 1:Yeah, I could go that route too, but I even screenshot it because there's something in realtor ethics that says, like misleading advertising, oh absolutely Absolutely. But it's kind of like stuff like that.
Speaker 2:I mean in California that crosses over. Yeah, I mean people, I don't know. Breaking an ethical guideline, that's one thing. Breaking a real estate law where the department of real estate can investigate you and they're not just going to investigate you, they're going to investigate your broker, and that's annoying for the broker, which gives them more motivation to be controlling their advertising of agents to make sure that what's being put out there is true. Yeah, so I don't know. For me, me, yeah, ethical guidelines are fantastic. It holds realtors to a higher standard, but even beyond that, it's kind of nice when state law keeps people in the right lane.
Speaker 1:Right, right, especially if they decide to leave the Realtor Association, at least to still have.
Speaker 2:They might get kicked out of that Realtor Association.
Speaker 1:I don't know.
Speaker 2:Sometimes that happens, I out of that realtor association, I don't know.
Speaker 1:Sometimes that happens. I hear I don't know, yeah, and then they get there was one, this one agent, another one in Massachusetts, a separate one. I love her, her and her mom work together and she's like oh, we have this guy who has been kicked out before. They keep letting him back in and we keep reporting him. We keep reporting him because he's doing stuff, but they're mad at us because they think that we're just like trying to get rid of him again. She's like he's doing the wrong things.
Speaker 2:They just let him.
Speaker 1:It's just weird. You wonder why your reputation is where it is Like get your people in line. I'm so off track, damn it. All right, let me go back. So let's go back to settlement. So how can buyers and sellers take advantage of these new rules? Uh, to maybe better protect themselves? Or maybe some tips when it comes to these agreements in california, um fees, like how do you think consumers should approach this?
Speaker 2:well, consumers need to do their own due diligence right.
Speaker 1:Good lord, please even as, like an I, I serve as an expert with witness in civil cases and Well, consumers need to do their own due diligence right, good Lord please Even as, like an, I serve as an expert witness in civil cases and this will often be asked of me when I'm on the witness stand.
Speaker 2:What was the buyer's duty to do their due diligence, right? So I mean they do have a stake in this. So I think it starts with education. I mean, if they were just to review, you know, your organization's website, that would be. You know, they need to diversify before they even go to the table, right, they have to be armed with what you know. What are our opportunities here? And I think the settlement opens up a lot of doors, and not just for buyers sellers, too, right, sellers too. So many people just focus on buyers, but you know. But some buyers haven't been all that happy about the fact that now they're basically financially responsible for their agent's compensation.
Speaker 2:And some people have kind of enforced that, yeah, this is not good for first-time home buyers and blah blah blah. But I do think it opens up the door that an informed consumer can literally interview buyer's agents. You don't have to go with the first person that you talk to on the phone. You can interview them, you can ask them questions about what they're going to do and I'll tell you it's a great exercise. Agents, and you know, for me personally, my mom, my mom has worked in real estate for over 30 years and she works her butt off for buy. You know, buyers right, buyers sometimes never buy property for years and, you know, never make the deal. And I do think now it gives buyers agents an opportunity to ensure that they're going to get paid to really be able to quantify and qualify what they do.
Speaker 2:And and then, of course, it's an open discussion on commission, and you know, it's an open discussion on commission and maybe the buyer can lower that commission and I think, slowly but surely, I think that will happen. I think buyers have a lot of power. Agents are going to actually compete. I mean it actually. It's a good, the concept is great. It just needs to be executed in a uniform way. If we have everybody doing different things. That's going to be against the consumer right. We need to all get on the same page.
Speaker 1:Yeah, no, it's very valid. God, please interview people. I don't know why we don't do that. And it's funny you say that because I'm working on something I was going to go out by the end of the year, but I told you what a shit show my past couple weeks have been, because I say yes to too many things, including PTO stuff that I have not even organized or gotten on top of yet I'm working on.
Speaker 1:You know, hey, if you're going to buy or sell sometime next year, the best thing you can do for yourself now is to like interview and search online and start pulling names of people you might want to work with. So it's not a last minute. I think that's part of it, right? Like you meet with an agent and they're like, okay, you need to get pre-approved. And they're like, okay, well, who do I go to? And those partnerships between, like, the lender who's paying the marketing ads, they're like, oh, I have someone here, use them, so we just move on over there. When it's like, well, is that person going to give you the best rates? Are you going to have some fees? Like what you know? You don't know what you don't know until you start comparing people and like the best thing you could do now is just start interviewing people.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and have a set of questions right. Ask the agent about their sales record, their tracker. You know how many houses did you sell last year, and you know. Ask them about those stats. You know there's a lot of new agents out there that may not have those histories. Okay, there, that may not have those histories, okay, well, that's interview one. Now let's interview a second agent. And you know, buyers have a lot of power in deciphering who they want to work with.
Speaker 1:And you're not rushed, Like if you, if you do it now, you're not rushed. And I think what would be super interesting, especially for buyers, if you make it clear like, hey, we're not looking until the end of the school year. I'm just like meeting people now. If someone starts pressuring you because they obviously it's not very busy right now and they probably aren't making a lot of money, If someone's like harassing you, like we should go look at this, we should go look at this, so you'll know like, hey, probably not Nobody wants that.
Speaker 1:Yeah. So it's like almost like a good way to watch their behavior after they know you're interested to see. Are they looking out for me? Do they need? Are they looking out for their pocket? Like, how are they treating me as I'm waiting to hit the market? I just, I don't know. No, it's cool.
Speaker 2:And if I'm wearing my investigator hat, which sometimes I can't help but wear my former investigator hat, you know, search them, search these people online.
Speaker 2:And it's not just Yelp and Google, right? I mean I say, make sure they're licensed, right? So if you're in California, you're going on DRE's website, you're running their name through the license portal and you're actually seeing if they have any disciplinary actions against them which are public record and you're making sure that they're licensed. And they're licensed with the brokerage. I mean, sometimes agents licenses expire and a good you know I shouldn't say good a broker that's supervising that agent could miss that. I mean that happens, I see that happen. So I always say do some legal checks. The internet is a beautiful place for vetting some of these things. So that's just my protection.
Speaker 1:Yeah, and on selling later too, I should mention we offer for consumers to do like report cards for people not for real estate agents, because lately they have been submitting competitors names and I'm like you are wasting our time because of you can look up this stuff by yourself, like go on your MLS and pull the own information yourself. But for consumers like let's take MLS and pull the own information yourself. But consumers like let's take a look at their actual sales, let's take a look at how long their homes are on the market, how many price drops have had. Uh, do they use the same lender all the time? Like all that stuff, we can find out for you and help you not to decide if you want to use them or not, but at least craft some questions to call out. Can you explain this to me? Why do five out of your 10 homes have price drops, like what happened you know? So that's available too, but yeah, please, that's fantastic.
Speaker 2:And you you mentioned you know if. If an agent is recommending a lender or recommending an escrow or title company, you know an informed consumer might ask well, what are their fees? Can we get a net sheet from that escrow holder before we enter into a contract where we agree, and do you have any relationship to that escrow company? So, again, the informed consumer is more powerful than before. Right, because so much emphasis on transparency? Licensees have to do the right thing, yeah.
Speaker 1:And if you're not rushed, you have the time to be your own little investigator right.
Speaker 2:That's right. Oh yes, it's so fun.
Speaker 1:Pick up some dirt, and if you can't do it, I'll do it for you, like you know, and on my free time again, it'll probably be at midnight, oh man.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 1:It's just never ending. That's okay. That's what you sign up for, All right? Wrap up questions, because I don't want to take up too much of your time and I could talk forever and get off track forever. What do you think the next big issue maybe lawsuit might become in real estate?
Speaker 2:So honestly, and I don't mean to beat a dead horse here, but I do. I mean the Department of Justice statement of interest, you know, filed just 48 hours before the final court approval hearing, which really the timing of that is. It's disgraceful in some ways, I almost it doesn't do anybody really any good and especially when the judge didn't care, it didn't, it didn't make a difference. I mean this should have come out so much sooner. I guess I was naive to believe, wendy, that was asked and didn't happen. But I do think that this issue that the DOJ brought up in their statement of interest, that you know they don't like the fact that buyers have to enter in an agreement before that's a scary revelation. I mean, I understand they're saying they have independent antitrust law concerns. They believe it could harm consumers or buyers, specifically, could limit competition between brokers. Ok, ok, but now what? Yeah, this had been in effect since August. You know forums have been, you know we're underway here, which you know realtors are trying to do the best they can do and the fact the DOJ puts that out there. I think we sort of have to get to the bottom of that, otherwise the DOJ is telling everybody that, hey, perfect compliance with the settlement is not going to protect you from our scrutiny.
Speaker 2:I don't like those final words. Now, if I was actually a practicing broker, a realtor and I'm not, I don't practice real estate I'd be pretty upset by that and concerned, and I would want to figure out well, how do we solve this problem? Because I want to be able to work hard for my clients, use the right forms, say the right things, do everything on the right side of the law and not have to be worried about the DOJ. So for me that's part of first and foremost, and then you know, figuring out if cooperative compensation, although allowed by the settlement, is this something that are we going to be haunted by forever with the DOJ? Those are things that I think that need to get solved and granted there's like right before the holidays the administration changes Right In January and it's like well.
Speaker 1:I heard someone say, like well, when Trump takes office, like they're going to go away, and the reality is the DOJ has been fighting with NARS since longer than I've been alive, probably so nothing goes away.
Speaker 2:You know, I might sleep for a little while, Right, nothing goes away. I might sleep for a little while, right. Yeah, I might sleep, it might not.
Speaker 1:Or they might burn the place down before the administration changes. Nobody knows, right? No one knows. But yeah, I know what you mean, though, because, again, nar says this, the plaintiffs say this, doj says this, and everyone's like who do I listen to? I don't want to get sued again Like how do I just do the right thing?
Speaker 2:Yeah, and I also think, with the workarounds that have been specifically spelled out in that motion that was filed by the plaintiff lawyers, I really do think that I mean realtors need to be evaluating right now, at the end of the year Okay, do my forms comply with the settlement? Okay, and you know, at this point I just think agents should be really realtors and agents. They need to be critically thinking and they can't just accept stuff because that's kind of where we got here in the first place. So they have to truly vet it because we don't want to relive any massive litigation next year. There's been way too much drama in the real estate industry. It shouldn't really be that exciting and it has been yeah.
Speaker 1:Or that messy or that messy, that excitement.
Speaker 1:Yeah, just because you saw it on YouTube or TikTok does not mean it's correct. So please, just like consumers, like hey, agents, like do your own due diligence and make sure that what you're doing is correct. And the last thing, because I find this fascinating, because this is the answer I get when we talk about, like, referral fees or dual agency it's that, but it was disclosed, so it's fine. I disclosed it, but it was disclosed, so it's fine. I disclosed it, but it was fine. And I keep seeing that over and over again for all different variety of reasons. And so I want to know from your perspective, what the difference is between like it was disclosed in a consumer signing a paper Like is it what's the best way to word this? Like it, so what if it was disclosed? Is it more about how you explained it to the consumer versus what's on the paper?
Speaker 2:or so, in my opinion, and again having served as an expert witness and even California DRE put out a helpful article on this for licensees, I think, electronic signatures and the fact that documents can be signed within a heartbeat, has really changed the game, whereas you're not.
Speaker 2:You know, now it's not so typical that a seller and a listing agent are, you know, side by side, going through each page and you know the seller is reading it, the listing agents, you know, answering any questions that they can, granted that they're not legal or tax related, but that's can, granted that they're not legal or tax related, but that's changed, right? I mean, you know, and it's so, the amount of documents that a principal has to sign is so daunting anyway, and they got about 10,000 other things in their mind at the same time when you're selling or purchasing property. So you know, they may not be completely focused and if they're signing something that's been just sent to them electronically, they're pressing start and they're clicking through. I mean, I would say a lot of consumers do that. So, but that doesn't change the licensees duty and I say licensee because it's realtor or not, A licensee, as a fiduciary, has a duty to explain what the what the consumer is signing, explain it.
Speaker 2:You know, you don't just put something in and say nothing and that's what's happening electronically. Hey, electronic signatures are great, but people can also get in trouble and I think that narrative and I take it to like a civil lawsuit if you're talking to that buyer or seller on the sand and they're asking how was this document presented to you? And it's actually my agent just quickly emailed it to me because we wanted to get our offer in as soon as possible or whatever I mean and that's common, but that's not going to preclude the licensee from potential legal action, civil suit and even more under, you know, a government regulator enforcing real estate law.
Speaker 1:Yeah, so it was disclosed. Isn't going to work for you if you didn't explain it or if you explained it wrong. There's like that. I think I talked about this before that dual agency case in New York, right when it was. This brokerage did 10,000 dual agency transactions in seven I forget the number. Was it seven years? Wow, crazy, yeah, ridiculous.
Speaker 2:That's quite the number.
Speaker 1:Yeah, how convenient for them and lucky for them. But then so I think the court battle was like seven years and it finally they settled out of court right before the trial was supposed to start, because within that settlement, they now are not allowed to incentivize their agents to make more money if the transaction closes in-house.
Speaker 1:And one of the big things was like oh wow, I would hope not, but yeah, well, I can think of a few people who have a reputation for doing that as well. So take notes if you're listening. But the interesting thing is that you know they would say, like how dual agency was disclosed, like the broker, just like we'd had all the paperwork, but it wasn't explained and consumers didn't understand. And so you know, if you, if you I think it's totally Lawrence was the brokerage, but like if, if your idea of it was disclosed, it's fine, is okay, you should probably read that case, because it was disclosed on a piece of paper, it just wasn't explained.
Speaker 2:It's not enough. And you know, when you work in real estate and I and I, you know, I often, sometimes feel sorry for real estate licensees, everything they say and do and advertise and transact, you're, you know, consider yourself in a fishbowl and everything counts. You know, words matter and you know, really you know, licensees, when they have these conversations with consumers in person, they should be reiterating that in writing so that everyone walks away with the same, you know, a good meeting of the minds.
Speaker 2:That's so important and to document that because again, you have to transact with the idea that you could be sued in the future on this exact deal, even if your clients love you. Unfortunately, you have to think like that. But if you think that you'll be able to protect yourself and your client will probably be better served as well, yeah, there's a broker in California the ones that emailed you about that escrow thing where they do everything.
Speaker 1:They do everything in Slack. So there's a record of everything said. Everything is in there, I mean, I guess, unless it's deleted, I don't know.
Speaker 2:Pitches that do that too.
Speaker 1:Yes, I have no idea if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but I know it's somewhere saved, so at least there's that versus a phone call. Yeah, so you know, maybe maybe the key for consumers you know, as we wrap up is next year. Maybe the key for consumers, as we wrap up, is next year. Do your due diligence. Yes, if you don't understand something, get answers and get everything in writing.
Speaker 2:Yes, Everything, and I think the red flags that you pointed out are great too right. So if a consumer is hearing something that's not sounding so great their little buzzards should be going off here that this might not be the right agent for me.
Speaker 1:Yeah, it's funny. I always tell people like your gut will tell you, like if something feels off, like, trust your gut, ask more questions or just find someone else, because you're probably right. You know there's. There's wonderful people out there, but they are mixed in with some morons and some not so great people and you just kind of have to fish for them, uh, which is going to take a little bit work. I know nobody wants to do the work and then you go in zillow and now you might have to pay more money in commission because your agent has to pay zillow a ton of money, but that's right. Oh, what a mess. But thank you, uh, if anybody wants to reach out to you because I know I have another pto thing to do because I keep saying yes to shit, so I have to get going. But if anyone wants to reach out to you, what's the best way to get ahold of you?
Speaker 2:They could find my website expertdrecompliancecom. I'm on LinkedIn. Just search my name and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Speaker 1:This is my life. Can you help people out of different states from a NAR settlement standpoint?
Speaker 2:You know, I have clients that are licensed in multiple states. So, yes, I, you know, I've, I've actually become, you know, sort of well-versed in other laws as a result of my clients being licensed in different states. So just because you're not in California doesn't mean it's a deal breaker, but I'll be sure to tell anyone that calls me if I can help them or not on the matter.
Speaker 1:Yeah, breaker, but I'll be sure to tell anyone that calls me if I can help them or not. Yeah, on the matter. Yeah, it's worth every penny. People, it's better to do that than to get sued, which I'm sure someone will next year. It's never ending.
Speaker 1:There's I think there's so many lawyers that thought I'm going to get off track. Damn it, real quick. There are so many lawyers I want to put this out there. There are so many lawyers out there who tried to jump in with copycat settlements who, if the settlement, you know, if everything keeps going wipes them out right.
Speaker 1:But in that process, most of them probably didn't know a lot about real estate, and I can think of one in particular who didn't. And I met with them just because I wanted to sniff them out, like if they knew, you know what they know about the industry. Yeah, we talked for two hours and they were like every every, like 10, 15 minutes. They're like wait, what you can do that? Wait, you can't do that as an attorney. Like how do people get away with that? And I'm like so, just just to put that out there like I not that I want to say it's open season, but like I think that people are more aware of issues and not afraid to go after them. Now that they see that, maybe there's a possibility, because in the past I think they thought NAR was so big, nobody would take that on.
Speaker 2:It's definitely a possibility that people need to consider. If it wasn't bad enough that you have all of these different things to contend you yes, there are private attorneys seeking these issues, watching what's going on looking for opportunity. I hate to say it that way, but it's true.
Speaker 1:And also can consumers email you in California if they think it's not sufficient.
Speaker 2:I mean I work with everybody really. But, yes, I do often help consumers when they have complaint-related issues, or sometimes I'm hired as an expert. So, yes, consumers.
Speaker 1:You work for everybody. Have a story or a question you want to share? Hit us up at therealestatereplaycom.
