# [Dispute Over RE Broker's Commission]



## 6scoops

The broker actually tries to make you pay commissions even if you decide you no longer want to sell your DVC contract.  The broker _<Broker's name_> also, uses deceptive practices by recommending you sell at much to low of a price.

The agreement claims to be non exclusive but has clauses in her contract that you must  to let her know in writing if you use another broker, if you don't she gets her fee, and if _<Broker>_ has a full priced offer that you choose to not accept you must pay her fee?  

She posted my contract and had a full priced offer within a hour.    I didn't even have a chance to change my mind or get a hold of her to let her know I felt it was priced to low?  This seems very shady to me!  

Easy money for this broker, get someone to list to low by claiming this is what the market will bare and it would most likely take a while to sell.   Then as soon as she has contract in her hands lists it as sold,  if you don't accept she gets her money no matter what?  It is shady, shady shady!!  It is like asking for a upfront fee but advertising she does not except upfront fees.

I know I made a big mistake listing with this company, I realized as soon as I spoke to another broker and saw the differences in the two contracts.  At that point (within a hour)  it was to late.  I am just trying to warn others of _<Broker's>_ deceptive practices.  I would not list with this broker or take any of her advise for pricing.

I will need to get my lawyer involved and will be filing a complaint with the BBB.  Any advise on how to deal with this would be appreciated!


----------



## presley

I listed with her before.  I did see that I'd have to pay the commission if I was offered full asking price.  My contract was also listed with 2 other brokers and one of the others sold it.  I email _<Broker>_ and told her it was sold and to remove it.  She had no issues with it.


----------



## 6scoops

presley said:


> I listed with her before.  I did see that I'd have to pay the commission if I was offered full asking price.  My contract was also listed with 2 other brokers and one of the others sold it.  I email _<Broker>_ and told her it was sold and to remove it.  She had no issues with it.



Well that is because she didn't have a buyer.  And was the price similar with the other brokers?  As soon as I realized it was priced a bit to low, I told her and because she has a buyer she thinks she can bully me into accepting.


----------



## DeniseM

Did you agree to the list price, and then back out after she had a buyer?  

If there is a written contract, and you signed it, and agreed to the terms, what grounds do you have to sue her?

How much independent research did you do on the price before you listed with her?

How many brokers did you talk to before your chose her?

Did you ask for advice on TUG?


----------



## csxjohn

6scoops said:


> Well that is because she didn't have a buyer.  And was the price similar with the other brokers?  As soon as I realized it was priced a bit to low, I told her and because she has a buyer she thinks she can bully me into accepting.



It sounds like you did your research after the fact.

If you signed the agreement to pay her in full if she found you a buyer offering the price you wanted what is your complaint?

I'm sorry but I think you will be wasting you time and money if you hire a lawyer to fight this.

My advice on how to deal with this is to realize you priced it too low and move on.


----------



## chriskre

She probably already had a buyer in the wings when she took your listing.
Nothing wrong with that, she works with buyers and sellers.

Sounds like you might have a case of sellers remorse.
That's normal when sellers get a contract right away, they assume they are giving it away.  That's not necessarily the truth.  
Could be, but not necessarily.

Unfortunately I bought direct so am not familiar with _<Broker>_, but she seems to have a good reputation on the Disney board that I frequent, Mouseowners.

Next time put it here in the TUG marketplace first.


----------



## 6scoops

chriskre said:


> She probably already had a buyer in the wings when she took your listing.
> Nothing wrong with that, she works with buyers and sellers.
> 
> Sounds like you might have a case of sellers remorse.
> That's normal when sellers get a contract right away, they assume they are giving it away.  That's not necessarily the truth.
> Could be, but not necessarily.
> 
> Unfortunately I bought direct so am not familiar with _<Broker>_, but she seems to have a good reputation on the Disney board that I frequent, Mouseowners.
> 
> Next time put it here in the TUG marketplace first.



My point is, so other people don't make the same mistake I did.  This clause she puts in her listing agreement  seems harmless, but if you don't accept or simply change your mind, and don't wish to sell you are still on the hook, if she happens to get a offer before you have a chance to cancel.  

*This is another way of asking for a upfront fee.* 

There is something very wrong with having a buyer in the wings and convincing a client to sell at that price for her own interest.  I'm sure I have a right within a certain amount of time to change my mind, and that is what I will be talking to a attorney about.  I do not wish to sell at any price.   I simply changed my mind.  The other broker I listed with does not have any such clause in his agreement, which to me is more honorable, I'm simply saying beware of this listing agreement.  There is no reason for her to put these clauses in the contract other than for her to be guaranteed her money!  UPFRONT FEES anyone??


----------



## DeniseM

If you disagreed with the terms - why did you sign the contract? 

Her commission is not an upfront fee - it is a penalty because you defaulted on the legally binding contract, which caused her to lose her commission.  

That's what a contract is - a legally binding agreement.  When you sign it, you are promising to abide by it.  

I'm sorry, but you did not do your due diligence here.


----------



## drbeetee

*6scoops*

From the sounds of this, you are upset because 1 person is smart enough to cover there basis with a contract, and the other is not.  What professional wants to work on something for somebody for free?  I understand you may have some sellers remorse, but you ultimately decided to sell at that price.  I think once everything settles you will be ok with the decision you made.  Just the initial shock of something you may have valued for a while may be gone.


----------



## chriskre

6scoops said:


> My point is, so other people don't make the same mistake I did.  This clause she puts in her listing agreement  seems harmless, but if you don't accept or simply change your mind, and don't wish to sell you are still on the hook, if she happens to get a offer before you have a chance to cancel.
> 
> *This is another way of asking for a upfront fee.*
> 
> There is something very wrong with having a buyer in the wings and convincing a client to sell at that price for her own interest.  I'm sure I have a right within a certain amount of time to change my mind, and that is what I will be talking to a attorney about.  I do not wish to sell at any price.   I simply changed my mind.  The other broker I listed with does not have any such clause in his agreement, which to me is more honorable, I'm simply saying beware of this listing agreement.  There is no reason for her to put these clauses in the contract other than for her to be guaranteed her money!  UPFRONT FEES anyone??



Just so you know in the future, you don't have to accept a contract as typed.  You can always cross off what you don't agree with and negotiate the terms.
I'd let her or anybody know if I wasn't happy with what was typed into the contract.  If they didn't want to negotiate then that would be my cue and hopefully yours in the future to find another agent.


----------



## capjak

I bought from her and she was excellent, no issues.

As for the contract I see no issues with the clause.  It is the seller (i.e. Owner of the DVC) that ultimately determines the asking price and if you get that price than you should have to abid by the contract.  Secondly I have been looking to purchase another DVC contract and her prices are not the cheapest on the market.

What price did you sale your SSR contract at?  The DVC at SSR is going for around $50 to $65 per point.  If you got that or more than you should be satisfied.


----------



## chriskre

6scoops said:


> *This is another way of asking for a upfront fee.*
> 
> There is something very wrong with having a buyer in the wings and convincing a client to sell at that price for her own interest.  I'm sure I have a right within a certain amount of time to change my mind, and that is what I will be talking to a attorney about.  I do not wish to sell at any price.   I simply changed my mind.  The other broker I listed with does not have any such clause in his agreement, which to me is more honorable, I'm simply saying beware of this listing agreement.  There is no reason for her to put these clauses in the contract other than for her to be guaranteed her money!  UPFRONT FEES anyone??



I'm sorry but I don't agree with you that this is an UPFRONT FEE.
She had a buyer.  You wanted to sell.
She brought you a buyer.
You changed your mind.
How is that an upfront fee?

She performed for you.  She is owed a commission.
Her mistake was doing it so quickly since you obviously hadn't really decided that you wanted to part with this ownership. 
That's okay, you have a right to change your mind but unfortunately there are consequences to that decision since you signed a binding contract.

She may decide that if you bring in a lawyer that it's not worth quabbling over a small commission and may let you go without consequences but don't count on it.  

I may be biased in all this since I am a realtor too.  I know how people change their minds all the time with buyers and sellers remorse.  It's normal but it's also frustrating for agents to deal with.  _<Broker>_ has obviously encountered this more than once, hence she puts it in her contracts.  Can't say that I blame her.  :ignore:


----------



## 6scoops

chriskre said:


> I'm sorry but I don't agree with you that this is an UPFRONT FEE.
> She had a buyer.  You wanted to sell.
> She brought you a buyer.
> You changed your mind.
> How is that an upfront fee?
> 
> She performed for you.  She is owed a commission.
> Her mistake was doing it so quickly since you obviously hadn't really decided that you wanted to part with this ownership.
> That's okay, you have a right to change your mind but unfortunately there are consequences to that decision since you signed a binding contract.
> 
> She may decide that if you bring in a lawyer that it's not worth quabbling over a small commission and may let you go without consequences but don't count on it.
> 
> I may be biased in all this since I am a realtor too.  I know how people change their minds all the time with buyers and sellers remorse.  It's normal but it's also frustrating for agents to deal with.  _<Broker>_ has obviously encountered this more than once, hence she puts it in her contracts.  Can't say that I blame her.  :ignore:




I'm not selling.  It's that simple.  Per the contract I signed, I also had the right to cancel and I did.  The timing of her offer and my canceling was very close and very quick.   Literally the same time.  Thanks everyone for your helpful advise.  I am moving on now.  Not going to concern myself with this broker another minute.  Live and learn!  Funny how other brokers don't feel the need to put such a clause in their contracts?


----------



## BocaBum99

6scoops said:


> chriskre said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry but I don't agree with you that this is an UPFRONT FEE.
> She had a buyer.  You wanted to sell.
> She brought you a buyer.
> You changed your mind.
> How is that an upfront fee?
> 
> She performed for you.  She is owed a commission.
> Her mistake was doing it so quickly since you obviously hadn't really decided that you wanted to part with this ownership.
> That's okay, you have a right to change your mind but unfortunately there are consequences to that decision since you signed a binding contract.
> 
> She may decide that if you bring in a lawyer that it's not worth quabbling over a small commission and may let you go without consequences but don't count on it.
> 
> I may be biased in all this since I am a realtor too.  I know how people change their minds all the time with buyers and sellers remorse.  It's normal but it's also frustrating for agents to deal with.  _<Broker>_ has obviously encountered this more than once, hence she puts it in her contracts.  Can't say that I blame her.  :ignore:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not selling.  It's that simple.  Per the contract I signed, I also had the right to cancel and I did.  The timing of her offer and my canceling was very close and very quick.   Literally the same time.  Thanks everyone for your helpful advise.  I am moving on now.  Not going to concern myself with this broker another minute.  Live and learn!  Funny how other brokers don't feel the need to put such a clause in their contracts?
Click to expand...


Don't be too sure that you will be so clean.  _<Broker>_ could lien your property so that your ultimate buyer cannot take clear title.  I hope she does it.  You are wrong, everyone on this message board agrees you are wrong and _<Broker>_ should provide your name to every other timeshare broker in the country to beware of you as a seller.  You think brokers don't have their own message boards?


----------



## BocaBum99

Here is how easy it is to file for a judgement against a deadbeat seller.

http://www.lienitnow.com/


----------



## MichaelColey

I believe clauses like those are pretty standard in most real estate listing contracts.  The last thing an agent wants is to find a buyer and then have the seller back out.  It leaves a bad impression with the seller, and the agent loses out on the commission they're due.

I'm sympathetic with the seller's remorse, but I think you're in the wrong here.  You agreed to sell at a set price and she found a buyer at that price.


----------



## Beefnot

6scoops said:


> I'm not selling.  It's that simple.  Per the contract I signed, I also had the right to cancel and I did.  The timing of her offer and my canceling was very close and very quick.   Literally the same time.  Thanks everyone for your helpful advise.  I am moving on now.  Not going to concern myself with this broker another minute.  Live and learn!  Funny how other brokers don't feel the need to put such a clause in their contracts?



I'm curious as to why you were intent to sell, so much so that you listed with a broker, and also why you suddenly changed your mind? You make it sound like it was more than you feeling you were mislead into listing it for too low, but you had a complete change of heart about selling at all?  Would be interesting to understand your thought process behind the selling and reneging decisions if you care to elaborate.


----------



## bogey21

6scoops said:


> I will need to get my lawyer involved and will be filing a complaint with the BBB.  Any advise on how to deal with this would be appreciated!



Why do I see "get my lawyer involved" or the like as the answer in so many threads?  Call the Agent and work it out.  If changing your mind costs you a few dollars, pay it, learn from your mistake, and move on.  It will probably be cheaper than paying a lawyer.

George


----------



## vacationhopeful

EVERY real estate broker wants and loves a FAST CLOSING deal - esp if they have both the buyer and seller. I am NOT a licensed real estate sales person but I deal ALOT in real estate and have for almost 30 years full time.

If a broker has a buyer and a seller appears for WHAT their buyer wants, this happens. The broker will try and get YOU to list at that buyer's BUY POINT. It is YOUR choice to list at the broker's suggested price or NOT to list or to tell them YOU want to list higher. In a HOUSE/CONDO market, most buyers and sellers have the ability to review ads, check online MLS listings, and the other houses in the neighborhood that have been or on the market. Bit harder with timeshares sales information.

I rent houses and apartments --- sometimes using real estate brokers. I find it annoying to be battling an agent whose ONLY answer for anything is, "Lower your asking rent". Never is the refrain, "I need to run more or different ads" coming from their mouths to get my place rented. 

Sorry - you should have done YOUR (independant) research before signing the listing contract. 

And as I tell my friends and family, realtors ONLY make money when they either get YOU to sell something at or lower than market OR they find a BUYER who believes them, when they say that is the best price around for this piece of real estate. Not their job to tell anyone they can make $10K more ($150 more commissioned $$ side of each 4 way cut) while YOU lose out on $9,400 in real cash. They ain't your best friend or drinking buddy or old family friend or neighbor, etc. And if you are too dumb or too time constainted or not in the area, GET a professional appraisal for $500-1000 of your house before you list it (one with all the little assocation signs & none of which say the big R or M L S).


----------



## BocaBum99

*Language in standard Florida Listing Agreement*

Here is language I pulled from a standard Florida listing agreement which is typically used for residential real estate.   Despite what the OP wants to believe, they are wrong.  In fact, they couldn't be more wrong.  It is customary and standard for a broker to be entitled to a commission when they bring a full price offer as agreed to in the listing agreement and the seller backs out.  And, it is NOT an upfront fee scam.  It's is money earned for work performed according to a contract.

We need to start a new TUG forum to out buyer and seller scammers.  6scoop is the scammer and a deadbeat seller who should be banned from the broker community.



> 8. COMPENSATION and COOPERATION: BROKER will cooperate with and compensate all NEFMLS brokers,
> NEFMLS reciprocal brokers and MLSAdvantage brokers acting in all legally recognized brokerage relationships
> except __________________________. For finding a buyer ready, willing and able to purchase the Property,
> SELLER will pay BROKER, no later than the date of closing, a brokerage fee of $_______________ and
> ______________% of the purchase price, or $_______________, whichever is greater, whether the buyer is
> secured by BROKER, SELLER, or any other person. BROKER agrees to pay a selling (cooperating) broker
> compensation of _____% of the purchase price or $_______________. If none, the Property cannot be placed in
> NEFMLS. *The brokerage compensation is due in the following circumstances:* (1) if any interest in the Property is transferred, whether by sale, exchange, governmental action, bankruptcy or any other means of transfer,
> regardless of whether the buyer is secured by BROKER, SELLER or any other person; (2) *if SELLER refuses or
> fails to sign an offer at the price and terms stated in this Agreement, fails to perform or defaults on an executed
> purchase and sale agreement, or agrees with buyer to cancel an executed purchase and sale agreement without
> BROKER’S written consent.* If there is a conveyance of title to the Property within twelve (12) months after
> termination of this Agreement to any person to whom the Property has been shown during the term of this
> Agreement, including any extension(s) hereof, SELLER will pay the full brokerage compensation to BROKER on
> demand. However, no brokerage compensation will be due BROKER if, after this Agreement is terminated, the
> Property is listed with another broker and sold through that broker. In any sale of the Property, permission is
> given to BROKER to represent and receive brokerage compensation from both a buyer and SELLER.
> Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event the Property is rented or leased during the term of this Agreement or
> within twelve (12) months after termination of this Agreement to any person to whom the Property has been
> shown during the term of this Agreement, including any extensions(s) hereof, SELLER will pay BROKER a rental
> or leasing fee of ___% of the gross rentals paid or to be paid, or a flat fee of $_______, whichever is greater, on
> the date SELLER enters into a lease or an agreement to lease, whichever is earlier; however, no rental or leasing
> fee will be due BROKER if, after this Agreement is terminated, the Property is listed with another broker and
> rented or leased through that broker. If there is a conveyance of title of the Property to any such person (tenant)
> within twelve (12) months from the termination of any lease or rental agreement or extensions thereof, SELLER
> will pay BROKER the full brokerage compensation on demand. The aforementioned brokerage compensation is fair and reasonable and a result of arm’s length negotiations. *Closing is not a prerequisite for the brokerage
> compensation being earned and payable.*


----------



## vacationhopeful

bogey21 said:


> Why do I see "get my lawyer involved" or the like as the answer in so many threads?  Call the Agent and work it out.  If changing your mind costs you a few dollars, pay it, learn from your mistake, and move on.  It will probably be cheaper than paying a lawyer.
> 
> George



Another good approach -- esp on a timeshare DVC deal. Unless the agent was buying the points to flip it themselves or for family usage.

I (and several other TUGGERS) recently rented our DVC points thru an agent via a thread on TUG. Covered my MFs with almost NO action on my part for my banked points, by current year's points, my next year (borrowed) points within a week's time. Got 1/2 of the money with the reservation printout (covered ALMOST all of the MFs) and the balance will be paid on the day of checkin (called PROFIT).


----------



## Beefnot

BocaBum99 said:


> Here is language I pulled from a standard Florida listing agreement which is typically used for residential real estate.   Despite what the OP wants to believe, they are wrong.  In fact, they couldn't be more wrong.  It is customary and standard for a broker to be entitled to a commission when they bring a full price offer as agreed to in the listing agreement and the seller backs out.  And, it is NOT an upfront fee scam.  It's is money earned for work performed according to a contract.
> 
> We need to start a new TUG forum to out buyer and seller scammers.  6scoop is the scammer and a deadbeat seller who should be banned from the broker community.



What is your deal. Woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? Chill out with the hyperbolic nonsense about OP being a scammer. OP was an uninformed seller who did not do his/her homework and may end up paying for it. No more no less.


----------



## Beaglemom3

Agree with Beefnot.  

I do not believe that the OP's complaint has merit, however, this tone's thread has has escalated into vitriol with baseless & accusatory statements (not from all). No need.

OP, please, consider having it closed.








-


----------



## BocaBum99

Beefnot said:


> What is your deal. Woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? Chill out with the hyperbolic nonsense about OP being a scammer. OP was an uninformed seller who did not do his/her homework and may end up paying for it. No more no less.



The OP posted a thread about a scam.  That's fine if it is a scam.  Then, she gets facts that prove the broker is not a scam, but the OP is herself indeed wrong.  Then, she defiantly says she is not going to pay what is honestly due to the broker.  There is without any reasonable doubt a case for the broker.  The OP won't pay up.  That is a scammer in my definition of it.  There are plenty of brokers who should know about this seller so that they don't get screwed over for a commission either.  This message board should represent all timeshare stakeholders.  In this case, a broker was wronged and the seller has no remorse and remains defiant.

On the other hand, should the OP read the facts presented in this thread and changes her mind and calls the broker to negotiate a fair compensation, then I will change my mind and alter my post.  For now, this broker has a thread posted on TUG wrongly being accused them of scam when indeed it is the OP who is wrong.


----------



## BocaBum99

Beaglemom3 said:


> Agree with Beefnot.
> 
> I do not believe that the OP's complaint has merit, however, this tone's thread has has escalated into vitriol with baseless & accusatory statements (not from all). No need.
> 
> OP, please, consider having it closed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -



I thought you were an attorney.  An attorney needs to be able to argue either side of the case without passion or prejudice.  Please point out the baseless statements.  If you do not accept such language regarding the OP, then you should not accept the same language when used for businesses who are alleged scammers that may not be.  

In this case, the OP is openly not paying a commission duly earned which in my book is the definition of a scam to a broker.  Those are my facts and my logic for my post, what are yours?

Lastly, if you want the thread closed, I would like to see the title changed so that it does not reflect negatively on the broker who was wrongly accused.


----------



## DazedandConfused

BocaBum99 said:


> Lastly, if you want the thread closed, I would like to see the title changed so that it does not reflect negatively on the broker who was wrongly accused.



I have no dog in this fight, but I 100% agree that the title of this thread is damaging to the reputation of "_<Broker>_" and should be changed as this is already indexed by Google and on page 2 of the Google search for "_<Broker>_" and may eventually get to page 1

_[link deleted]_


----------



## Beaglemom3

BocaBum99 said:


> I thought you were an attorney.  An attorney needs to be able to argue either side of the case without passion or prejudice.  Please point out the baseless statements.  If you do not accept such language regarding the OP, then you should not accept the same language when used for businesses who are alleged scammers that may not be.
> 
> In this case, the OP is openly not paying a commission duly earned which in my book is the definition of a scam to a broker.  Those are my facts and my logic for my post, what are yours?
> 
> Lastly, if you want the thread closed, I would like to see the title changed so that it does not reflect negatively on the broker who was wrongly accused.




 It's your tone. If you don't like the title, then you should have requested to change it right away. 

  How is the OP a scammer ?  *6scoop is the scammer and a deadbeat seller who should be banned from the broker community.*  Opinion or fact ?

Try staying on point instead of challenging me based on watching  "Law & Order" episodes.


----------



## JudyS

vacationhopeful said:


> ....
> And as I tell my friends and family, realtors ONLY make money when they either get YOU to sell something at or lower than market OR they find a BUYER who believes them, when they say that is the best price around for this piece of real estate. Not their job to tell anyone they can make $10K more ($150 more commissioned $$ side of each 4 way cut) while YOU lose out on $9,400 in real cash. They ain't your best friend or drinking buddy or old family friend or neighbor, etc.....


Actually, aren't real estate agents in most states legally required to represent the seller's best interests? (Assuming they have signed a contract as the seller's agent, of course.) 

This isn't a comment on the OP's post, just a question about how real estate agents work.


----------



## Beefnot

True agents are supposed to represent the best interests of the clients they represent, which may result in conflicts when they work for both buyer and seller.

Agree with others that title of thread should be changed though, as it unfairly impugns the broker's reputation.


----------



## Beaglemom3

Agree again. The title should be changed.

Would like to read _<Broker's>_ contract. I thought Florida was not a dual-agency state unless that has changed. I was thinking of becoming a snowbird a while back and researched Florida R.E. laws. At the time,   this was illegal in Florida because Florida had determined you cannot have a fiduciary relationship with both sides of the transaction. Things might have changed .  

Dual agency is like playing checkers or chess with yourself (IMHO). They are legal in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, but I think they should be illegal.

I like _<Broker>_ and would have bought from her a few years ago, but could not find what I wanted. I'd still work with her if I ever buy DVC (as if I need another t/s).


----------



## JudyS

I agree that the title of this thread should be changed. It isn't fair to _<Broker>_.

However, I do not agree with the description of the OP as a "scammer." A "scammer" deliberately sets out to defraud people. When the OP signed her contract w/ _<Broker>_, she was intending to follow through on the deal. She was not signing it just so she could back out. What would even be the point of doing that? It's not like the OP can make money that way.


----------



## vacationhopeful

JudyS said:


> Actually, aren't real estate agents in most states legally required to represent the seller's best interests? (Assuming they have signed a contract as the seller's agent, of course.)
> 
> This isn't a comment on the OP's post, just a question about how real estate agents work.



When people LIVE on commissions and a commission is ONLY earned by an executed contract and closing, they tell lots of WHITE LIES. And almost ALL TIMESHARE salespersons are Licensed Real Estate Agents working under a broker. A person working on an hourly rate and paid to represent YOUR interest, in my neck of the woods is called a LAWYER (not that you or I can afford a lawyer tilting at windmills or righting all the injustices that happen in your daily life).

Listing real estate agents job is to convince you to sign an agreement and THEN start to convince you, that you are wrong on the value, price and terms. And as for caring about your FINANCIAL interests, you had better THINK again. ANY commissioned agent only get paid when a BUYER puts the money on the table.


----------



## MichaelColey

Agree that the OP is wrong, but I also agree that Boca's uncharacteristic vitriol is not helpful or accurate.  6scoop may be wrong, but he's definitely not a fraudster and to propose that he be banned and blacklisted is laughable.


----------



## bogey21

JudyS said:


> However, I do not agree with the description of the OP as a "scammer." A "scammer" deliberately sets out to defraud people. When the OP signed her contract w/ _<Broker>_, she was intending to follow through on the deal.



But the point is that she didn't follow through.  Maybe "Scammer" is not the best word to describe her actions.  Pick another you like better to describe someone who says "I'm not selling.  It's that simple." after the other party to the Agreement performed.

George


----------



## chriskre

JudyS said:


> Actually, aren't real estate agents in most states legally required to represent the seller's best interests? (Assuming they have signed a contract as the seller's agent, of course.)
> 
> This isn't a comment on the OP's post, just a question about how real estate agents work.






Beefnot said:


> True agents are supposed to represent the best interests of the clients they represent, which may result in conflicts when they work for both buyer and seller.
> 
> Agree with others that title of thread should be changed though, as it unfairly impugns the broker's reputation.



Most brokers in Florida work as transaction brokers representing neither the buyer or the seller.


----------



## chriskre

bogey21 said:


> But the point is that she didn't follow through.  Maybe "Scammer" is not the best word to describe her actions.  Pick another you like better to describe someone who says "I'm not selling.  It's that simple." after the other party to the Agreement performed.
> 
> George



All she did was change her mind.
No crime in that.
Happens every day in real estate.

Maybe _<Broker>_ will forgive the commission.
We haven't heard from her on this yet.
I'm sure she doesn't want to have a google fight.  

Sorry this has turned ugly.
6Scoops, I hope it works out for you.


----------



## larryallen

On the other hand if I list my house for sale I trust that the licensed and "professional" Realtor is looking out for my best interests. If this Realtor truly listed it for well below fair market value I do see the complaint that this seller has. Yes, she should have done her research but that's why you hire a Realtor.  While I agree the seller is a bit off here I do think there is something to her case.


----------



## Miss Marty

*6scoops - Tug Member - for 3 years*

_
6scoops _

I have enjoyed reading 6scoops (nearly 400) posts 
& from what I have read 6scoops really loves DVC.

From posts here on Tug 
It appears 6scoops owns 

Three Hundred Saratoga Springs Aug Use Year
DVC Points - Purchased - Directly from Disney.

2013 Resales prices range from $59-$69 pt
a far cry from their original DVC Dev price!

Every $1 less in sales price equals $300 
less return on a 300 SSR point contact.


----------



## bogey21

larryallen said:


> If this Realtor truly listed it for well below fair market value I do see the complaint that this seller has. Yes, she should have done her research but that's why you hire a Realtor.



I own race horses.  When I put a horse up for sale I set the price not some middleman.  Sure I ask for the opinion of others as to how much they think a horse is worth, but if I set the asking price too low, it is on me.  More importantly, if someone agrees to buy, no way in Hell would I say that I have changed my mind and am not going to go through with the sale.    

George


----------



## dbs1228

I have worked with 2 other dvc resale companies on a sale of my dvc and purchase.  Both of these companies had the same policy - once a property is listed and a full price offer is made the resale agency earns there commission.  Both companies also offered co listing and in the contract it states if you list with another agency and the contract sells you must notify them in writing.  If you change your mind about a listing you must let listing agent know in writing!  It is spelled out!  When I bought and sold I did research on what the market was doing so I was informed.  6scoops apparently did not do her research before listing the property.  I would be curious to know what she thinks is lower then market value since a lot can play into the DVC market - loaded contract vs stripped.


----------



## dbs1228

BTW I just checked the _<Broker>_ website and all SSR contracts listed are right in line price wise to the other brokers out there and more importantly the contracts are selling mid 50's stripped to upper 60's loaded.


----------



## DeniseM

I have changed the title of the thread to what I believe is a "fairer" representation of the issues, and I'd appreciate it if everyone would turn down the venom a click or two.

Thank you!


----------



## JudyS

bogey21 said:


> But the point is that she didn't follow through.  Maybe "Scammer" is not the best word to describe her actions. Pick another you like better to describe someone who says "I'm not selling. It's that simple." after the other party to the Agreement performed.
> 
> George


I would use the word "unreasonable" or perhaps the term "acting in bad faith." Scamming, however, is another thing entirely. The term "scammer" typically refers to people who commit various financial *crimes*. Failing to fulfill the terms of a contract is generally just a civil offense, not a crime. There's a huge difference.


----------



## JudyS

vacationhopeful said:


> When people LIVE on commissions and a commission is ONLY earned by an executed contract and closing, they tell lots of WHITE LIES. And almost ALL TIMESHARE salespersons are Licensed Real Estate Agents working under a broker. A person working on an hourly rate and paid to represent YOUR interest, in my neck of the woods is called a LAWYER (not that you or I can afford a lawyer tilting at windmills or righting all the injustices that happen in your daily life).
> 
> Listing real estate agents job is to convince you to sign an agreement and THEN start to convince you, that you are wrong on the value, price and terms. And as for caring about your FINANCIAL interests, you had better THINK again. ANY commissioned agent only get paid when a BUYER puts the money on the table.


I think we are talking about two different things here. 

I was asking whether real estate agents have _a legal responsibility_ to get the best price for a seller. Various people have posted here that *if* the real estate agent is acting as the seller's agent (and not the buyer's agent), then yes, the agent has a legal responsibility to get the best price for the seller. 

You are talking about what real estate agents _actually do_, and pointing out that they often have a conflict of interest between getting the best price for the seller and getting the easiest commission for themselves. 

You seem to be saying that many real estate agents fail to act in the seller's interest when required to do by law, and because so many agents do this, it's not grounds for the seller to break the contract. That's not how the law works. Even if many real estate agents aren't living up to their legal obligations (and I have _no idea_ if that is the case or not), the legal obligation still exists and failing to fulfill it is grounds for breaking the contract. 

In any profession, some people don't follow the rules. So, yes it would be prudent for real estate sellers to be careful and look out for their own interests. But even if a seller initially fails to do that, the seller still is entitled to terminate the contract if the real estate agent had signed a contract saying s/he would be the agent for the seller (and not for the buyer) and then deliberately listed the property below fair market price. (The agent might get in trouble with the real estate commission, too.) 

Based on what others have posted here, real estate agents in Florida are not acting as the seller's agent. So, in the OP's case, I don't know if listing a property below fair market value would be grounds for the seller terminating the contract or not. (I also have no idea whether the property in question was listed at a fair price or not, or what the original contract said, or anything like that.)


----------



## csxjohn

JudyS said:


> I think we are talking about two different things here.
> 
> I was asking whether real estate agents have _a legal responsibility_ to get the best price for a seller.



I doubt you will find written anywhere that it is an agents legal responsibility to obtain the "best price" for their client.

The agent has many other things to consider in any transaction.

I would think that the "best deal" would be something to strive for, but that does not always mean the highest price.

The OP got the price agreed to and found out that others were selling for more.  Now they don't want to pay what was originally agreed to and as some kind of misguided defense says the unit is no longer for sale.


----------



## JudyS

csxjohn said:


> I doubt you will find written anywhere that it is an agents legal responsibility to obtain the "best price" for their client....
> 
> I would think that the "best deal" would be something to strive for, but that does not always meant the highest price...


I agree that the "best price" is not always the highest price. For example, a seller may want to sell for the best price they can _get quickly_. Or, a seller of a house may be unwilling to clean their house, or willing only to show it to buyers at limited hours, and that will reduce the selling price, too.

What I meant by "a legal responsibility to get the best price" is that real estate agents sometimes have a fiduciary responsibility to sellers. Probably some people reading this thread aren't familiar with the term "fiduciary," so I used other terms. 

At any rate, from things posted here, Florida real estate agents don't have a fiduciary responsibility to sellers. So, I wasn't talking about the OP's situation in particular.


----------



## Quadmaniac

As with hiring anyone to assist you, there is not always a guarantee that they are the most knowledgeable of the bunch. You do need to a bit of your own research to know whether the person you are hiring is the best person to do the job you need. 

It may not necessarily be that they are asking for low ball listing prices but more that they might not be that closely in tune with what the real current prices are of that specific product even if they are supposedly "specialized" in that area. I see that all the time. I've seen houses and condos listed by agents way below the market and it gets scooped up quick. 

In either case, trying to go after someone for that might be a tough one to win as many have pointed out.

I personally am involved in a very specialized vertical market of commercial business resales and have seen sellers refuse to sell for one reason or another when you do bring a buyer. It is reasonable that the broker be paid for their time if they have found you a buyer under the terms of the agreement. I've been screwed over a number of times and I have had to sue clients for commission where the business sold but I was not paid for my services. 

In one case, the wife was double dealing and even though I got them a full priced offer, they sold it to their friend for 15% less than list. They expected that they didn't have to follow the terms of our listing since they sold it to their friend instead of my client with a higher offer. They learned the hard way that it is not that easy. It would have been smarted to take the full priced offer and they would still have more after commission than their deal. Instead they went through with their deal and the legal fees / commission settlement they ended up with a lot less than 15% off list - more like 35-40% after 2 years of legal proceedings before settling the case before it got to court. 

As such I have added many of these same conditions in my listing agreements as well. I work in good faith that I am going to be paid and if that doesn't happen as agreed upon from the beginning, there are consequences. Nothing is free and there are costs involved with listing properties.


----------



## 6scoops

*2 sides to every coin!!  I had a bad experience!!*

First of all my title, which I still maintain BEWARE OF _<Broker>_ LISTING AGREEMENT!!!  It is the agreement I have a issue with.  I don't feel it is in anyone's best interest to sign such a agreement unless.... you price high, to alway be assured the final say in what you ultimately choose is in your own best interest.  That said, I know I made this mistake I would hate to have anyone else fall into this trap.

Let me start by saying which I already said in original post,  I made a mistake, I was too trusting, and I relied on her as a professional, It didn't cross my mind that she is only looking out for herself.  I did not talk to enough brokers before I talked to her.  I should of not signed her contract. I thought her contract was standard, and it is not!!  So you can all quite harping on me for my own admitted mistakes... which is far from me scamming anyone!! (Thanks for that by the way!!)  Really,none of you here have ever done something they regret?  Maybe signed a contract that you wish you hadn't?  Took some advice you wish you hadn't?  If we are talking about the second broker I spoke to none of this would even be a issue.  His contract is not written in such a way as to take advantage or trap anyone,  but in direct contrast, to do a good job and have a happy repeat customer.

Does everyone really not see what is wrong with this picture?  IMO _<Broker>_ has a very *LARGE incentive* to take advantage of a first time seller by convincing them to price low.  By putting in her contract if she gets a full price offer she has earned her commission?  If she get's me a extra 1500.00 that is only 150.00 more for her and does not guarantee her a payday.  Getting me to sign for less, with a buyer in the wings gets her a payday guaranteed.  A quick payday I might add!  This took her a hour to list it as sold, she was not slaving away to make this sale.  I bet no one who buys through her has had any problems!!  

Here is what her contract states, and I admittedly should of never signed.  It is the owner's responsibility to contact _<Broker>_ in writing if the property is no longer available for sale. If we submit a contract to you at listed or verbally accepted price, we have earned our commission. If the property has been sold or taken off the market without written notice to us, we are due our full commission. Your signature on this document signifies agreement.
This agreement is non-exclusive; you may use other brokers or agencies without cost or obligation to _<Broker>_ a Licensed Real Estate Broker. Seller agrees to notify _<Broker>_ immediately upon acceptance of a contract from any other entity.
It is the owner's responsibility to contact _<Broker>_ in writing if the property is no longer available for sale. This will stop further efforts by us to secure a buyer. If we submit a contract to you at full price, we have earned our commission. If the property has been sold or taken off the market without written notice to us, we are due our full commission. Your signature on this document signifies agreement.


AS you can see, I do have a right to cancel, did I have much time to do that, not really considering she had it listed as sold the minute she had contract in her hands.  Me changing my mind does not make me a scammer.  I am well within my rights to change my mind.  Question:  What if other broker had similar or higher offer at the same time, I would of had to still pay her commission if she sent me offer before I was able to send her notice of it being off market.  There is more than one way for her to trap sellers with hidden fees, by her agreement.  

I thought she was giving me a professional opinion and looking out for my best interest when she suggested the price.  I trusted her, in part because she has favorable revues on some of my favorite most trusted sites, what is wrong with letting people know if I had a less then favorable dealing with a broker?  

My conversation with _<Broker>_: I was very clear with her that I was in no hurry to sell and would like to get the best price I can. But wasn't sure what that price should be.  She informed me, that at the price she recommended  it would probably take a while to sell, and I would most likely have to deal with some low ball offers before it would sell.  Maybe even have to lower my price by a dollar after a few weeks?  Now to say all that knowing you have a client waiting in the wings?  Who's best interest was she serving?  NOT MINE 
If I had told her I wanted a quick sale, then yes _<Broker>_ would of done a great job for me.

The timing of this:  As soon as she had the contract in her hands which I snail mailed, she was off the races to list it as sold!  At the same time I was getting very different advice about price and looking at a very different contract, that made me very uncomfortable, knowing what _<Broker's>_ contract states and what she said to me about the price.  So I felt very much like she played me!!  Also, I did eventually have a complete change of heart about selling at all, again due to some very personnel reasons.  Let's just say I was having a very bad week!  

The other broker:  Take a look, which would you rather sign?  His or _<Broker's>_?  Like I said if I had talked to him first I would not have any problems right now!  His suggested price to start at $7 more per point in his opinion it would prob go for 4 or 5 more per point than what _<Broker>_had recommended.   WOW big difference?  OH NO, what did I do??  Pump the brakes, OH that's right, it was to late, I was trapped the minute she had the contract in her hands.   _<Broker>_ has earned her commission!


The other brokers contract:  How We Work: NO HIDDEN or UPFRONT FEES to list. A 10% commission, paid at closing, is subtracted from the selling price. This agreement is an “Open Listing”, meaning that we have to produce to earn. You may use other brokers or agencies without cost or obligation to A Timeshare Broker, Inc (ATB). This agreement will be for a term of 3 months from signature date and will automatically renew upon its anniversary date unless canceled in writing by either party. NO FEES for declining a full-price offer. When a ready, willing and able buyer is found at an agreed upon selling price, you will affix your signature to the contract and we will process to Disney’s ROFR board. The commission is earned at closing. 

Here is another quote from _<Broker's>_ cover letter:

As a transaction broker we will work diligently to get the most money possible for your vacation ownership.

I wasn't suggesting suing her, I may need a lawyer to defend myself against her suing me, which she started telling me would happen when I told her I do not wish to sell it anymore.   As a matter of principle, I feel it would be worth it, to fight it.  Or I can just accept that she got one over on me and pay her, her earned :hysterical: commission?   This girl is very smooth I will give her that!!  Cue a famous Micheal Jackson hit!!!  (stating a opinion, not a fact)


----------



## 6scoops

*Huh?*



dbs1228 said:


> BTW I just checked the _<Broker's>_ website and all SSR contracts listed are right in line price wise to the other brokers out there and more importantly the contracts are selling mid 50's stripped to upper 60's loaded.



If you check now, she does not list one DVC contract for below $64.00 per point.  How do you know what they are selling at, when you can only see what she is offering them at?


----------



## DeniseM

6scoops - I am not going to change the title back - because it was misleading.

The broker did not violate the contract - you did.  

Many experienced Tuggers have explained to you that the terms, which you are now objecting to, are STANDARD in the industry.  You may not have understood what you signed, but that doesn't make it unethical.

Hiring an attorney to fight a suite, which you will probably lose anyway, will cost you far more than just completing the sale.


----------



## 6scoops

larryallen said:


> On the other hand if I list my house for sale I trust that the licensed and "professional" Realtor is looking out for my best interests. If this Realtor truly listed it for well below fair market value I do see the complaint that this seller has. Yes, she should have done her research but that's why you hire a Realtor.  While I agree the seller is a bit off here I do think there is something to her case.



Thank you for pointing out something other than the fact, That I should of never signed this contract!!  and Exactly....  This was my mistake.


----------



## 6scoops

DeniseM said:


> 6scoops - I am not going to change the title back - because it was misleading.
> 
> The broker did not violate the contract - you did.
> 
> Many experienced Tuggers have explained to you that the terms, which you are now objecting to, are STANDARD in the industry.  You may not have understood what you signed, but that doesn't make it unethical.
> 
> Hiring an attorney to fight a suite, which you will probably lose anyway, will cost you far more than just completing the sale.



Not asking you to change title back.


----------



## bogey21

DeniseM said:


> Hiring an attorney to fight a suite, which you will probably lose anyway, will cost you far more than just completing the sale.



OP has every right to renegue on the deal.  It may not be the most ethical thing to do but she has the right to do it.  If she gets sued (unlikely IMO), it more than likely will be for the commission rather than for specific performance.  She can then make a decision.  "Am I better off paying the commission, paying a  lawyer or maybe paying both?",  but she will get to keep her Week.  Her call.

George


----------



## DeniseM

bogey - No one said she didn't have the "right" to default - what I said is that defaulting will probably cost her a lot more than just completing the deal, since her posts seem to indicate that she is not willing to pay the commission without a fight.


----------



## DeniseM

6scoops - In a nut shell, what you really have a problem with is the *price* - not the contract.  

It's just not logical to say that you signed a contract, but you didn't understand it/don't agree with it, so you don't think it should be binding.  That's the same argument we hear from newbies every day, and they get the same response you did - "Why did you sign it if you didn't understand it?"

If you had simply said that you felt you got bad advice from the broker on the price, then I think Tuggers would have given you a lot more support, because that's a valid argument.


----------



## Beaglemom3

Somewhere in your contract..... does it contain anything similar to this ?  

_*This is a legally binding contract. If you do not understand it, seek legal advice.*_


----------



## larryallen

How many points are we talking about here? Is the four or five bucks extra per point really relevant? Is it worth the discussion?  Are we only talking 100 or 200 points?  1,000 points?  What's the bottom line here?


----------



## csxjohn

6scoops said:


> ... A quick payday I might add!  This took her a hour to list it as sold, she was not slaving away to make this sale. ...)



You really have no idea how much work she put into selling this.  She could have been working on a sale for months and when your unit came along she had something to sell.

I still do not see anything wrong with her putting that clause in the contract.  Just because you found a broker who does it differently doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the way she does it.

It is too bad were starting to be called a scammer.  I don't believe this is true at all and there is nothing wrong with you pointing out what you don't like about the contract she uses.

In fact it is helpful to know the different kinds of things that are put into these types of contracts.

I listed a TS with a broker that wasn't exclusive but if someone who owned at the resort or was visiting the resort bought, I owed the commission.  I gladly signed because I wanted it sold and had no problem with paying to sell it.

Bottom line is, you signed it and she found a full price buyer so you owe her the money.  That doesn't mean you will end up paying it, that depends on how hard you want to fight it and how much you want to spend to fight it.


----------



## Beefnot

csxjohn said:


> You really have no idea how much work she put into selling this.  She could have been working on a sale for months and when your unit came along she had something to sell.



How much time she was working on this prior to 6scoops' unit coming along could be seen sympathetically or cynically depending on the facts. For all we know, she could have been working on this thing for months with a lowball buyer and then found a live one in 6scoops the ignorant lowball seller. 

Either way, a contract is a contract, so she has legal footing. She has every right to pursue her commission which she is entitled to, thou 6scoops can try to use what ever mechanisms and machinations possible to avoid paying it. Realistically, I would be trying to get out of paying if I could, though I would like to think that I would never have let myself get into this situation in the first place.  I wouldn't sign a contract unless I was truly ready to sell, and if I was ready to sell, I would have a decent idea of what my property was worth.


----------



## DeniseM

6scoops - Just curious - exactly what happened that made you decide this was a bad deal?  It sounds like one hour after you made the agreement, you got a call that it was sold?  What happened during that hour that changed your mind?

Also - How much were the points sold for, and how much do you think you should get?


----------



## Miss Marty

*www.occompt.com*

_
To learn how much people are paying for (Orlando) DVC Points  _

Go to the Orange County Florida Comptrollers website to search 
and view the most recent Disney Vacation Club recorded deeds.


----------



## JudyS

6scoops said:


> ....If we submit a contract to you at listed or verbally accepted price, we have earned our commission. If the property has been sold or taken off the market without written notice to us, we are due our full commission. Your signature on this document signifies agreement.
> This agreement is non-exclusive; you may use other brokers or agencies without cost or obligation to _<Broker>_....



Well, I have already supported the broker in the dispute. However, I had assumed the contract was for an exclusive listing. I find it very strange that the listing is non-exclusive yet says the commission is always owed if the broker finds a buyer at the listed price. 

What happens if a seller lists with several brokers, and two brokers find a buyer at about the same time? Could a seller end up owing a commission to both brokers? 

I know we have a lot of real estate professionals on this board, and probably some lawyers, too. Is it valid to for a listing agreement to be non-exclusive, yet also have the "If we submit a contract to you at listed or verbally accepted price, we have earned our commission" clause? (I can see the point of a contract such as the one csxjohn mentioned, where a non-exclusive listing agreement provides for a commission under specific conditions such as a buyer being found at the resort itself.) 

At various times, I have considered selling timeshares through a real estate broker. Until reading this thread, I had assumed that ifs a listing was "non-exclusive," I would only owe the broker a commission if I sold to _their _buyer. Also, I have sometimes had trouble getting straight answers about whether a listing agreement was exclusive or not. For example, I had one broker (_not_ _<Broker>_ -- this was not a DVC listing at all) tell me over the phone that listing with them was non-exclusive, and then when I read the contract, it said the listing was exclusive. Needless to say, I didn't sign the contract.

Maybe some of the real estate professionals here can weigh in on when exactly a broker is due a commission, the difference between exclusive and non-exclusive agreements, etc. I think this may be a confusing issue for timeshare owners, especially if they haven't sold property before. Perhaps we could eventually have a sticky or an advice article explaining selling a timeshare through a broker.


----------



## Twinkstarr

JudyS said:


> Well, I have already supported the broker in the dispute. However, I had assumed the contract was for an exclusive listing. I find it very strange that the listing is non-exclusive yet says the commission is always owed if the broker finds a buyer at the listed price.
> 
> What happens if a seller lists with several brokers, and two brokers find a buyer at about the same time? Could a seller end up owing a commission to both brokers?
> 
> I know we have a lot of real estate professionals on this board, and probably some lawyers, too. Is it valid to for a listing agreement to be non-exclusive, yet also have the "If we submit a contract to you at listed or verbally accepted price, we have earned our commission" clause? (I can see the point of a contract such as the one csxjohn mentioned, where a non-exclusive listing agreement provides for a commission under specific conditions such as a buyer being found at the resort itself.)
> 
> At various times, I have considered selling timeshares through a real estate broker. Until reading this thread, I had assumed that ifs a listing was "non-exclusive," I would only owe the broker a commission if I sold to _their _buyer. Also, I have sometimes had trouble getting straight answers about whether a listing agreement was exclusive or not. For example, I had one broker (_not_ _<Broker>_ -- this was not a DVC listing at all) tell me over the phone that listing with them was non-exclusive, and then when I read the contract, it said the listing was exclusive. Needless to say, I didn't sign the contract.
> 
> Maybe some of the real estate professionals here can weigh in on when exactly a broker is due a commission, the difference between exclusive and non-exclusive agreements, etc. I think this may be a confusing issue for timeshare owners, especially if they haven't sold property before. Perhaps we could eventually have a sticky or an advice article explaining selling a timeshare through a broker.



Being a DVC owner and reading enough threads on the DIS & MO, I think the brokers who specialize in DVC have those types of clauses in their listing agreements. Also see a lot of threads, where a buyer thinks he has a deal and the seller backs out. Because on the DIS boards a lot of the advice is to rent your points for a few years if you are tired of WDW, can't afford ticket prices at the moment etc. because do you really want to give up your piece of the Mouse 

Also MO has a nice thread about ROFR on DVC contracts, so if you don't want to look at the Orange County site, which Miss Marty suggested, it also can give you an idea of pricing(ie resort, and loaded vs stripped contracts).


----------



## 6scoops

DeniseM said:


> 6scoops - Just curious - exactly what happened that made you decide this was a bad deal?  It sounds like one hour after you made the agreement, you got a call that it was sold?  What happened during that hour that changed your mind?
> 
> Also - How much were the points sold for, and how much do you think you should get?



Well, It is the conversation I had with her and then the next broker.  If you read my rather long winded post, you see I felt mislead in pricing by her, after I talked to other broker and realized, I was sending her a email to change price or cancel.  Which was quick.  It is not that I didn't understand what I was signing, it is that she verbally made it sound like this was the best price and it would take a while to sell, oh and non-exclusive?


----------



## 6scoops

JudyS said:


> Well, I have already supported the broker in the dispute. However, I had assumed the contract was for an exclusive listing. I find it very strange that the listing is non-exclusive yet says the commission is always owed if the broker finds a buyer at the listed price.
> 
> What happens if a seller lists with several brokers, and two brokers find a buyer at about the same time? Could a seller end up owing a commission to both brokers?
> 
> I know we have a lot of real estate professionals on this board, and probably some lawyers, too. Is it valid to for a listing agreement to be non-exclusive, yet also have the "If we submit a contract to you at listed or verbally accepted price, we have earned our commission" clause? (I can see the point of a contract such as the one csxjohn mentioned, where a non-exclusive listing agreement provides for a commission under specific conditions such as a buyer being found at the resort itself.)
> 
> At various times, I have considered selling timeshares through a real estate broker. Until reading this thread, I had assumed that ifs a listing was "non-exclusive," I would only owe the broker a commission if I sold to _their _buyer. Also, I have sometimes had trouble getting straight answers about whether a listing agreement was exclusive or not. For example, I had one broker (_not_ _<Broker>_ -- this was not a DVC listing at all) tell me over the phone that listing with them was non-exclusive, and then when I read the contract, it said the listing was exclusive. Needless to say, I didn't sign the contract.
> 
> Maybe some of the real estate professionals here can weigh in on when exactly a broker is due a commission, the difference between exclusive and non-exclusive agreements, etc. I think this may be a confusing issue for timeshare owners, especially if they haven't sold property before. Perhaps we could eventually have a sticky or an advice article explaining selling a timeshare through a broker.



Judy, This is one of the many things I am trying to point out.  Her contact is non-exclusive, she advertises this, but read her contract and play out different scenarios, you will end up owing this broker no matter which way you slice it.  

A earlier poster said they listed with her and another,  and the other sold it.  It states in _<Broker's>_ contract that you have to let her know in writing as soon as you list with someone else or you will owe her a commission.  I wonder if earlier poster did let her know?  If not she could of gone after him for commission as well.  In my case The other broker I was talking to is a big DVC seller and his listing agreement is short and sweet and upfront.  (I posted it) _<Broker>_ is barely non exclusive.  not truly non exclusive.  I was to ever sign a contract like this again, 90 percent of this would need to be crossed off and amended.


----------



## DeniseM

6scoops said:


> Well, It is the conversation I had with her and then the next broker.  If you read my rather long winded post, you see I felt mislead in pricing by her, after I talked to other broker and realized, I was sending her a email to change price or cancel.  Which was quick.  It is not that I didn't understand what I was signing, it is that she verbally made it sound like this was the best price and it would take a while to sell, oh and non-exclusive?



I read it all - but several things aren't clear:

1)  Did you contact another broker AFTER signing a contract with the first broker (in the next hour?)

2)  Did you try to cancel AFTER she informed you that she had a buyer?

3)  How much were you getting from the original broker?

4)  What price did the 2nd broker claim that he/she could get for you?

5)  Did the 2nd broker actually make you an offer?  (i.e. have a buyer for you at a higher price?)​


----------



## csxjohn

DeniseM said:


> _I read it all - but several things aren't clear:_
> 
> 1)  Did you contact another broker AFTER signing a contract with the first broker (in the next hour?)
> 
> 2)  Did you try to cancel AFTER she informed you that she had a buyer?
> 
> 3)  How much were you getting from the original broker?
> 
> 4)  What price did the 2nd broker claim that he/she could get for you?



For some reason the OP wants to complain about the contract but doesn't want to give us any details despite being asked several times.  

I'm done here.


----------



## dbs1228

6scoops said:


> If you check now, she does not list one SSR contract for below $64.00 per point.  How do you know what they are selling at, when you can only see what she is offering them at?



I know because I am in the* PROCESS*  of buying BWV and *SELLING my **SSR contract* and I have been talking to brokers, searching the web, and seeing what the contracts are being sold at for the past 3 months!  I went with a broker who I trust and have done business with before for the sale - he recommended I list my property at 67.00PP with the HOPES to get in the lower 60.00's for selling price!  I got 63.00PP which I was thrilled with because that is more then I spent for this contract 3 years ago!  People are lining up to buy DVC the contracts are being sold before they are listed due to DVC increase pricing at ALL the resorts due to happen 3/20 which was announced about 2 weeks ago!

The BWV contract I bought (or trying to buy since I believe DVC my ROFR it) was not even listed on the brokers (different broker) main website but I found it on another site and called immediately broker was shocked I already saw it, since it was not yet listed,  I offered full price and it was sold before it was listed on their actual website!  I also had the broker I was selling through call me with a BWV contract he just got in - again not listed yet so I would not be so sure your broker already had a buyer - prospects yes probably! 

Anyway I now know if I waited about a week longer to list my SSR I probably would have gotten closer to asking because the activity to buy is crazy in the past 2 weeks!  It took me 5 days to sell which I thought it would be much longer, I too was not in a hurry.  

In conclusion your contract sold quickly  because it was priced right - 64.00PP was in NO way a low ball price!  If you told me 50.00 -55.00 which some have sold at recently I would have agreed with you.  

Good luck with whatever you choose to do and yes it is all a learning experience!


----------



## DeniseM

dbs1228 said:


> In conclusion your contract sold quickly  because it was priced right - 64.00PP was in NO way a low ball price!  If you told me 50.00 -55.00 which some have sold at recently I would have agreed with you.



The OP has not posted what she got - she seems reluctant to share that info.

My guess is that broker #2 offered her more money, but she already had a contract, and a buyer, with broker #1, and she doesn't want to post that.


----------



## 6scoops

DeniseM said:


> I read it all - but several things aren't clear:
> 
> 1)  Did you contact another broker AFTER signing a contract with the first broker (in the next hour?)
> 
> 2)  Did you try to cancel AFTER she informed you that she had a buyer?
> 
> 3)  How much were you getting from the original broker?
> 
> 4)  What price did the 2nd broker claim that he/she could get for you?
> 
> 5)  Did the 2nd broker actually make you an offer?  (i.e. have a buyer for you at a higher price?)​



First of all sorry for delay, I started to repost yesterday, but had to pick up a sick kid and run to doc.  

1) Saturday, Left messages with a couple brokers and also called.  I got a hold of _<Broker>_, that is when we had the conversation about price, she emailed me contract I signed (without doing my due diligence admittedly) and snail mailed it to her.  The only other broker I spoke  was on Monday or Tuesday morning, that is when I heard his recommendation for pricing.  At that time it was still not listed on _<Broker's>_ website.  So as far as I knew she did not receive contract yet.  I called her and left a message that  I needed to talk to her because I think it was priced to low, soon after within a hour contract was listed as sale pending, and she was calling me to tell me it was sold.    

2) she tried to talk me into taking the offer because she had just sold a larger contract for the same price.   $55.00 per point is the number in question for my stripped contract.  I told her I would get back to her. that I feel this went way to fast, apparently priced to low, considering the fact that I did let her know I was not in a hurry to sell and I told her I felt misinformed by her sales price recommendation.  Then I told her I wanted to cancel or ask for a higher price when she was pushing me to accept.  (cancel partly because I felt uncomfortable with the way this was playing out considering the conversation we had about pricing) That is when she started saying I would owe her a fee no matter what.  So I emailed her to cancel.  

3)$55.00

4)List at 63.00 but may get offers as low as 58- 61.

5) NOPE


----------



## larryallen

I see the money now but how many points?


----------



## 6scoops

larryallen said:


> I see the money now but how many points?



300 points


----------



## MichaelColey

So you're upset because you got a quick, easy $16,500 when you might have been able to hold out for $17,400?

With the size of your contract (larger contracts go for less) and the fact that it's stripped (stripped vs. loaded makes a big difference), I think $55 is at least reasonable.

Looking on one resale site, I see a 450 point SSR contract listed for $58/point and a 300 point one listed at $59/point.

FWIW, I just looked up the details on my 25 point (loaded) contract, and I bought that for $64 per point.


----------



## larryallen

6scoops said:


> 300 points



So we are talking about $1,500 at the MOST, right?  I suppose anything over $1,000 is worth some discussion so I can't fault you there.


----------



## bnoble

Having read the entire thread, I don't see where you have anything to complain about.  You signed the contract, at an agreed-upon listing price, and a full-price offer came in.  That it wasn't listed on the web site isn't material; most of the brokers will email clients who are looking for something specific before ever putting it on the site.  You can't know whether the offer did or did not come in before leaving the voice mail, and I'm not even sure that matters, depending on the terms of the contract with respect to canceling the listing.

You can decide not to perform on the sale, but you owe the broker the commission.  The lesson isn't that the broker is shady.  The lesson is: take your time before signing a contract.  You admit that you didn't do your due diligence, and that's not the broker's fault.


----------



## 6scoops

larryallen said:


> So we are talking about $1,500 at the MOST, right?  I suppose anything over $1,000 is worth some discussion so I can't fault you there.



Yes I was leaving some money on the table.  It is worth quite a bit depending on what I got.. but I would survive and deal with it.    I don't like the conversation about pricing, she had me price low so it would guarantee a quick sale, when I told her I was in no hurry and wanted best price.  My own fault for not checking prices better.  But I thought she was giving me a honest price based on my needs and concerns.  There is nothing wrong with her recommending that price if I said I wanted to sell as quick as possible.  When you combine her recommendation with the fact that all she has to do is present full priced offer to earn a commission to me that is questionable.  Based on that alone I have no desire to do business with someone who, I felt deliberately mislead me on pricing.


----------



## presley

Buyers can get very irate, too.  I've read several threads on other forums from a buyer's perspective.  They get infuriated when a seller backs out.  I remember one where the buyer was planning on having a lawyer go after the seller and broker.  Hopefully, she never did.  There is a huge surplus of DVC on the resale market, especially SSR.  I think money and time is much better spent in other ways than defaulting on a signed contract or going after someone else who did.  Imagine being the broker getting reamed from both ends.

_<Broker>_ is a legitimate and honest seller.  Maybe another broker would list the contract higher, but asking isn't getting.   Here's a thread that gives an idea of what other DVC owners think that type of contract is worth.  
http://www.mouseowners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=75066


----------



## SueDonJ

Granted, the OP admittedly hadn't done due diligence and the contract terms are legally enforceable so by all accounts she's on the hook for the commission.  But other than the "tone" she's used in her posts, what's the problem with her mentioning the specifics of why other TUGgers might choose to not do business with the broker?  It's obvious in all the replies from regular joes as well as folks in the business that the terms can be varied and some might be undesirable from a seller's point of view.  So why keep hammering on the OP at this point?  She knows now that it's an uphill battle she's facing.  Why not acknowledge as well that the thread at least contains a warning for others to be on the lookout for these certain contract terms?


----------



## DeniseM

SueDonJ said:


> Granted, the OP admittedly hadn't done due diligence and the contract terms are legally enforceable so by all accounts she's on the hook for the commission.  But other than the "tone" she's used in her posts, what's the problem with her mentioning the specifics of why other TUGgers might choose to not do business with the broker?  It's obvious in all the replies from regular joes as well as folks in the business that the terms can be varied and some might be undesirable from a seller's point of view.  So why keep hammering on the OP at this point?  She knows now that it's an uphill battle she's facing.  *Why not acknowledge as well that the thread at least contains a warning for others to be on the lookout for these certain contract terms?*



Sue - It's because the contract terms she is calling "unethical", are the standard in the industry.  If you sign a contract and then back out, you owe the broker her commission.  If anything, her message should be not to sign a contract, before you do your due diligence.  IMNSHO, blaming the broker for this is unreasonable.  YMMV


----------



## Beefnot

larryallen said:


> So we are talking about $1,500 at the MOST, right?  I suppose anything over $1,000 is worth some discussion so I can't fault you there.



$1500 ($60/pt) at most, but probably not more than $900 ($58/pt) given that it was stripped.  Still, $900 is $900.  OP also had said earlier that s/he no longer wanted to sell at any price, but it sure seems like it's about the money when it comes down to it.


----------



## BocaBum99

SueDonJ said:


> Granted, the OP admittedly hadn't done due diligence and the contract terms are legally enforceable so by all accounts she's on the hook for the commission.  But other than the "tone" she's used in her posts, what's the problem with her mentioning the specifics of why other TUGgers might choose to not do business with the broker?  It's obvious in all the replies from regular joes as well as folks in the business that the terms can be varied and some might be undesirable from a seller's point of view.  So why keep hammering on the OP at this point?  She knows now that it's an uphill battle she's facing.  Why not acknowledge as well that the thread at least contains a warning for others to be on the lookout for these certain contract terms?



This is a good thread because it has information that can help other people.

1) When you sell with a broker, make sure you read and understand the listing agreement.  It is very common in timesharing to have open agreements meaning they are not exclusive.  However, a broker must do work to get offers and they don't get paid upfront.  Therefore, brokers have clauses in the agreements protecting their commission if they perform their duty and get a full price offer that meets the terms of the seller.

2) Always talk to several brokers to get an idea of what happens in the sales process.  No broker can guarantee an offer price unless they are buying it themselves.  A discussion of offer price is much different than a bonafide offer.

3) Buyers violate contracts just as do sellers.   If you do violate a contract and a broker earns a commission, they can sue you to pay it or lien your property so that you can't sell it until you do pay it.   If a broker misrepresents anything, that is a violation of the law.   

Right now, we are only getting one side of this story.  However, I know for a fact that the other party knows about this thread.  It would be interesting to see the other side of the story.  I look forward to seeing it play out.

I know if this were my client, I would respond on this thread, I would sue for my commission and I would lien the property if I received a judgement in my favor.   Then, I would offer a settlement of 1/2 of the commission which would include a retraction of all the negative comments about me in this thread.


----------



## BocaBum99

One more point.  TUG is all about recommending that people never pay an upfront fee to sell their timeshare.  Brokers do exactly that.  However, because there are no exclusive agreements in timesharing, they can do work and not get paid.  Therefore, brokers only focus on a very small number of resorts to earn a living.   A minimum commission needs to be at least $1000-2000 per sale to make it worthwhile.  With so many properties selling for lower than that, the availability of brokers who will accept listings has dwindled to near nothing.  When sellers act like the OP, this reduces the motivation for brokers to stay in the business.


----------



## SueDonJ

DeniseM said:


> Sue - It's because the contract terms she is calling unethical, are the standard in the industry.  If you sign a contract and then back out, you owe the broker her commission.



I know, but it just seems to me that despite her initial vehemence she now pretty much understands the situation.  She acknowledged her mistakes almost as soon as others pointed them out, but the thread is now four pages long and still she's being hammered for asking if her feelings that something isn't quite right are justified.  Sure, the timing might have worked perfectly to conspire against her, but I think I'd question things, too, in her shoes.

She signed a contract, mailed it off, learned before her listing was posted, before she knew whether the agent had received the signed contract, that her agent may have advised her to low-ball the listing price.  She then called the broker to say she had concerns, and bam! the broker has a signed buyer and there can't be any leeway.  Yeah, I'd question that sequence.  I wouldn't start by throwing out accusations of unethical action but I can understand the frustration that might lead to someone doing that.

I just don't understand why some here are so adamant that she had no cause to question the broker's actions and no good reason to post about her experience, and why it's necessary to keep hammering away at her.  A good reason to post is to warn others who may not know such varied contract terms might exist, and to be aware of which brokers might be using those terms.


----------



## DeniseM

Sue - the other issue is that she did not reveal the details of what happened until today (price and sequence of events.)  So she was accusing the broker of wrong doing, without telling us the whole story.  Because of that, other posters kept asking for more info., because her story was very unclear.  

As I posted earlier, if the OP had just stated that she didn't think she'd gotten good advice from the broker, this thread would have gone down a different road.


----------



## BocaBum99

SueDonJ said:


> I wouldn't start by throwing out accusations of unethical action but I can understand the frustration that might lead to someone doing that.



Just because you are frustrated, it does not give you the right to call a reputable broker unethical.  Had that not happened, this thread would have taken a much different tone.

Also, the OP was sure that she was being wronged.  When she has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that she is wrong, she still won't agree to make amends for her own wrong doing.  As a result, she is getting exactly what you would expect when that happens.  Don't you see that?


----------



## SueDonJ

DeniseM said:


> Sue - the other issue is that she did not reveal the details of what happened until today (price and sequence of events.)  So she was accusing the broker of wrong doing, without telling us the whole story.  Because of that, posters kept asking for more info., because her story was very unclear.
> 
> As I posted earlier, if the OP had just stated that she didn't think she'd gotten good advice from the broker, this thread would have gone down a different road.



Of course.  But isn't it also true that if some of the questions that were asked of her hadn't been asked in a negative manner, or if she hadn't been roasted and toasted to well-doneness, then that also might have made a difference in how the thread progressed?  

I'm not trying to say that anybody participating in this thread is either right or wrong.  Nothing is that black and white here and many posts are helpful and respectful.  But when I put myself in the OP's shoes it doesn't leave me feeling very good about TUG.  That's all.


----------



## SueDonJ

BocaBum99 said:


> Just because you are frustrated, it does not give you the right to call a reputable broker unethical.  Had that not happened, this thread would have taken a much different tone.
> 
> Also, the OP was sure that she was being wronged.  When she has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that she is wrong, she still won't agree to make amends for her own wrong doing.  As a result, she is getting exactly what you would expect when that happens.  Don't you see that?



I really don't, no.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  I don't know anybody who can manage to keep their heads cool in every frustrating situation, and I don't know what you mean by saying she needs to make amends.  She's acknowledged her blame in the situation and has made it clear in many of her posts that she's continuing to post to warn others about her experience.  She didn't object to the title of her thread being changed so as to remove her unfair accusation against the broker.  What more is she supposed to do?


----------



## DeniseM

SueDonJ said:


> Of course.  But isn't it also true that if some of the questions that were asked of her hadn't been asked in a negative manner, or if she hadn't been roasted and toasted to well-doneness, then that also might have made a difference in how the thread progressed?
> 
> I'm not trying to say that anybody participating in this thread is either right or wrong.  Nothing is that black and white here and many posts are helpful and respectful.  But when I put myself in the OP's shoes it doesn't leave me feeling very good about TUG.  That's all.



I think the OP expected to get support from Tuggers for her position, but the facts don't support her claims.  

Accusing someone of unethical business practices, and then refusing to back down when you are presented with the facts, is sure to be a losing argument on TUG.

However, I agree that some of the posts near the middle of the thread were pretty ugly...


----------



## presley

Yeah, there is no reason to be mean.  Stating facts is okay, but name calling, etc. isn't needed to get a point across.


----------



## SueDonJ

DeniseM said:


> I think the OP expected to get support from Tuggers for her position, but the facts don't support her claims.
> 
> Accusing someone of unethical business practices, and then refusing to back down when you are presented with the facts, is sure to be a losing argument on TUG.
> 
> However, I agree that some of the posts near the middle of the thread were pretty ugly...



You could be right about what she was expecting but I'm sure we both agree that what she got was probably completely unexpected!  It was a difficult thread to follow because, as you say, so many details came out in dribs and drabs which led to a lot of posters maybe reading into things that just weren't meant, or putting the focus where the OP didn't intend.  In any event, it was a learning experience.

I still think she raised at least one good point that may have gotten lost in all this, concerning the ambiguity of the exclusive v. non-exclusive nature of this broker's contracts as they pertain to sellers.  If nothing else that's information which may be helpful to someone down the road.


----------



## BocaBum99

SueDonJ said:


> I really don't, no.  Two wrongs don't make a right.  I don't know anybody who can manage to keep their heads cool in every frustrating situation, and I don't know what you mean by saying she needs to make amends.  She's acknowledged her blame in the situation and has made it clear in many of her posts that she's continuing to post to warn others about her experience.  She didn't object to the title of her thread being changed so as to remove her unfair accusation against the broker.  What more is she supposed to do?



call the broker and agree to a settlement on the commission.


----------



## Beefnot

BocaBum99 said:


> call the broker and agree to a settlement on the commission.



My spouse is a realtor and there have been times where issues like the OP raised have come up.  I see both sides.  Although OP does bear some responsibility for lack of due diligence, some of the arguments raised are valid.

Honestly, I feel I was manipulated or mislead by the broker for that broker's express benefit, I would be hard-pressed to do pony up the commission, irrespective of whether I should have done my own due diligence.   Although I might prepare for the possibility of having to pay, I might not choose to do so willingly.


----------



## bnoble

I don't think whistling Zip-A-Dee-Do-Dah while writing the check is a requirement...


----------



## MichaelColey

bnoble said:


> The lesson is: take your time before signing a contract. You admit that you didn't do your due diligence, and that's not the broker's fault.


I think that's a lesson we can ALL learn.

I always read any contract I'm signing very carefully and make sure I understand it before signing.  People look at me look I'm strange when I do that.  I think most people will sign just about anything without even looking at it.

We had a credit card processor come in to our shop promising incredible rates, virtually no fees, free equipment, and a bunch of other great stuff.  It sounded great.  She handed me the contract.  I looked through it, and the rates were all different, there were tons of fees, and some really onerous clauses.  I told her I couldn't agree to this contract.  She told me that the way it works was that customers signed the contracts, then they corrected the contract.  If I didn't believe her, I could cancel for 30 days (despite the fact that the contract clearly said I couldn't).  I started going through the contract marking out the things I didn't agree to.  She said I couldn't do that.  I told her I would take the contract (20+ pages) home and look over it.  She left it with me, but came back about 15 minutes later and said her boss said she couldn't leave the contract because it had proprietary information.  I scribbled over all my personal information and gave it back to her.


----------



## Beefnot

bnoble said:


> I don't think whistling Zip-A-Dee-Do-Dah while writing the check is a requirement...



True, nor is writing the check to begin with without, say, a judgment, levy, or lien.  If I felt I was wronged, I would say if you want it, come and get it.


----------



## DeniseM

One more point - It's also a good idea to get advice from Tuggers, if you are unsure.


----------



## SueDonJ

BocaBum99 said:


> call the broker and agree to a settlement on the commission.



How do you know it's not being considered?  I don't believe that the OP or the broker is beholden to let any of us know, any more than I believe that the OP owes amends for this thread.


----------



## Beefnot

I wonder what's the over/under on this thread being eventually deleted at request of the OP....


----------



## Miss Marty

*Contract of Sale*

RE:  6scoops

Per the contract I signed, I also had the right to cancel and I did.  
The timing of her offer and my canceling was very close and very quick.  
  Literally the same time.  

Q: 
Did you received a signed & dated contract of sale via
email or fax with date & time - prior to your telephone 
call to cancel listing (or call to adjust your sales price).


----------



## 6scoops

Miss Marty said:


> RE:  6scoops
> 
> Per the contract I signed, I also had the right to cancel and I did.
> The timing of her offer and my canceling was very close and very quick.
> Literally the same time.
> 
> Q:
> Did you received a signed & dated contract of sale via
> email or fax with date & time - prior to your telephone
> call to cancel listing (or call to adjust your sales price).



A: No, after, and what I received is not dated or signed!


----------



## Shontell1

*The facts*

This will be my only post on the subject matter pending legal conclusion.

_<6scoops - "OP" (Original Poster)>_ contacted _<Broker>_ on 2/24/13 asking for information regarding the sale of her 300 point Disney Vacation Club at Saratoga Springs property, at which time I sent her our standard listing agreement which has been in effect for approximately 10 years.

When _<OP>_ called to discuss pricing I told her recent sales of Saratoga Springs ranged between $55 to $65 per point, with the main variable in pricing being the amount of points in the account when it went on the market and the other variable being the size of the points. (300 being a little larger than average)    She advised me she only had 10 points in the account until 2014 at which time I suggested a sales price of $55 per point, having just sold an almost identical property at the same price within the prior 2 week period, not to mention the trend of Saratoga Springs pricing.  I still maintain this to be the value of her property and have evidence to support it.  She also told me she had a mortgage and it would be in her best interest to sell the property soon since she was paying interest.  I notice she hasn't mentioned the mortgage in this thread and suddenly claims she isn't in a hurry.

_<OP>_ returned her signed listing agreement on 2/28/13 with the listed price at $55.00 per point.   At that time I contacted Disney to verify the amount of points in the account.  When the report came back from Disney Vacation Club verifying that only 10 points remained for the 2013 allocation, I listed the property on 3/2/13.  Three days later - not one hour later, as _<OP>_ claims - the property sold at the listed price after much discussion with the buyer who was at one point considering making an offer below the listed price.  When I assured the buyer it was fair market value, they agreed to proceed accordingly.

I drew up the contract and emailed it to _<OP>_ on 3/5/13 at 1:14pm.  I called _<OP>_ immediately after sending the contract to notify her of the good news.  When I told her it had sold, she said, "Oh, I just talked to another broker and he told me I could get at least $60 per point.  I don't want to sell it at the $55 per point price anymore....I was just about to call you. It must be worth more if it sold that fast."     I told _<OP>_ that the price it sold for was extremely fair since she had essentially no points for the buyer until 2014 and that 300 points was a larger than average package for a typical family buying in the Disney Vacation Club.  I also suggested that another broker can "suggest" any price but that doesn't mean they can actually sell it at that price.  She said that she'd been "reading a lot on the internet" and accused me of misleading her.  I assured her that after 15 years in the resale business, misleading was never and will never be a practice in our office.   I encouraged her to consider her options, read the contract and think it over.    I stressed that having a contract sold versus the "assurances" of another broker (looking for their own commission) was a big risk.  I intentionally did NOT mention her obligation to cover our commission as already agreed to, in writing, per the standard listing agreement that myself and other brokers use in their listing agreements, at that time.  I wanted her to have time to fairly weigh everything, being confident she would conclude to move ahead with the sale at the $55 per point price if she did her research.

_<OP>_ called on 3/8/13 at 12:36pm to advise me she "no longer wanted to sell at all".  I told her that was certainly her choice and asked her how she would like to handle the commission she agreed to pay when she listed the property with us since we had completed our job as contractually obligated.  She proceeded to claim there was no way she was paying our commission when she knew she could sell it for more money and again accused me of misleading her in the pricing of her property.  She went so far as to say "all your listings are priced less than the other brokers so you probably do this to people all the time".  I told her we had actually also been accused of our prices being higher than other brokers and it was always a matter of timing and perspective of the person viewing the website, the day, the property, the amount of points in the account, etc.  and ultimately the sellers always determine their price.  I told her we indeed needed to discuss the commission to avoid any legal situation at which time she started yelling at me and said she would "put it on Mouseowners and all over the internet" that I was a scammer and ruin my reputation.  She said there was no way she would ever pay the commission and she hung up on me.

I immediately emailed her with the facts, including a copy of  the signed listing agreement she and her husband had signed agreeing to pay the commission as detailed above and encouraged them to contact me if they would like to work out an amicable solution. 
She sent an email that she would now like to raise her price to $65 per point or take it off the market. 

I also reached out to the other brokers who sell DVC, including the one with whom _<OP>_ had communicated to make him aware of her stance and actions concerning the sale.

Since that day, _<OP>_ has posted defamatory comments about me and the company online and now has posted on the BBB.  She even attempted to convey completely false claims such as "upfront fees" - which we have never and will never charge - along with miscellaneous other accusations...simply because she does not want to pay the commission nor sell the property as she agreed to do so, in writing.   Interestingly enough, I can gratefully say the company and I have been defended over and over again by people who we have assisted in the past.  After 15 years of dealing honestly and ethically with people for the greater good of an industry that doesn't have the best reputation, I am extremely grateful for the support and acknowledgement from the Disney Vacation Club community and associates in the industry with whom it has been my pleasure to serve time and time again.

It is rare that one does a good job and instead of receiving a thank you, one receives a proverbial slap in the face as is the case in this instance.  While I do not claim to be perfect, and I can't please everyone all the time....I maintain I did a FANTASTIC job in selling _<OP's>_ property in 3 days at the listed price of $55 per point and find it a shame she now wants to ruin our reputation. 
I have evidence to support every single item I have listed here, including the newsletter that went out to our subscribers on March 2, 2013 prior to the contract sale on March 5, 2012 wherein she claims the property sold in "one hour".  Along with her signed listing agreement, the contract signed from the buyer, the email sent to _<OP>_ with the contract as well as the two following our final conversation.  Nothing about her "facts" can actually be proven while every single one I listed here is documented accordingly.

Online, she also went so far as to accuse me of having a buyer "in the wings", but then she also claims the property sold in one hour, not 3 days, as is the truth. The buyer can easily be a witness if necessary since they decided to call to purchase the property after "watching our site for a while now". I'm pretty sure that's called great marketing and I couldn't be happier about it!

Another interesting note in all this is that _<OP's husband>_ has never once communicated with us so we aren't sure if he is even aware of his wife's "position" but he will certainly be included in the potential repercussions since his signature is also on the agreement (assuming it is not forged).

Fortunately for us, we have hundreds, if not thousands of clients who have reached out and said "Thank you for helping me sell my property and get us out of this financial bind!" after we completed our end of the agreement when they listed their Disney Vacation Club property with us. We have numerous emails and referrals for anyone who would care to communicate with them.

Having worked hand in hand with Disney Vacation Club Members for over 15 years in this resale business, my reputation stands on its own, as does that of _<Broker>_. Perhaps that is why she contacted us FIRST to help her in the resale of her Disney Vacation Club.

My final communication  to _<OP>_ via email on 3/8/13 after her yelling at me and hanging up on me was:

"I would strongly encourage you to pause and consider everything at hand. If you wish to further dialogue the situation and come to a mutually beneficial solution for all parties in an amicable manner, please know I welcome the exchange."

Neither she nor _<OP's husband>_ have tried to communicate with me since, but have instead started placing defamatory statements online.  

Respectfully yours,

Shontell Crawford
Lic. Real Estate Broker
_<Broker's firm>_


----------



## Beefnot

I have now heard both sides of the story and it is pretty clear to me that _<Broker>_ acted honorably and in good faith, and has every moral right to pursue the legal recourse that they are afforded. Although I think it may be against TUG rules to post with one's business name, I do appreciate the company taking the time to clearly articulate the facts and vigorously defend the company's actions and position.


----------



## DeniseM

Beefnot said:


> I have now heard both sides of the story and it is pretty clear to me that _<Broker>_ acted honorably and in good faith, and has every moral right to pursue the legal recourse that they are afforded. Although I think it may be against TUG rules to post with one's business name, I do appreciate the company taking the time to clearly articulate the facts and vigorously defend the company's actions and position.



Plus one...


----------



## SueDonJ

<thinking on it ...>


----------



## csxjohn

I thought I was through here until I read _<Broker's>_ response.  I now have another comment after reading this line.

"I  told her we indeed needed to discuss the commission to avoid any legal situation at which time she started yelling at me and said she would "put it on Mouseowners and all over the internet" that I was a scammer and ruin my reputation."

_<6scoops>_ and her husband will be lucky if they only have to pay the commission to _<Broker>_.  I would not be surprised to see a lawsuit for libel.  Stating you are going to try to ruin someones reputation then going out and trying doesn't sound like a good plan to me.

I congratulate the TUG community for spotting this for what it is, someone whining over a few dollars because the grass looks greener on the other side of the fence.


----------



## bnoble

I'm now even more convinced that this is accurate:



> Having read the entire thread, I don't see where you have anything to complain about. You signed the contract, at an agreed-upon listing price, and a full-price offer came in. That it wasn't listed on the web site isn't material; most of the brokers will email clients who are looking for something specific before ever putting it on the site. You can't know whether the offer did or did not come in before leaving the voice mail, and I'm not even sure that matters, depending on the terms of the contract with respect to canceling the listing.
> 
> You can decide not to perform on the sale, but you owe the broker the commission. The lesson isn't that the broker is shady. The lesson is: take your time before signing a contract. You admit that you didn't do your due diligence, and that's not the broker's fault.



I've also added a new entry in my Ignore List.


----------



## drbeetee

If this does go to court and this dialogue is subpoenaed I'm sure the admission of her not doing her due diligence can't help her!


----------



## MichaelColey

My only suggestion would be to redact _<Broker's>_ post to remove the OP's real name.

If I ever want to buy or sell a DVC contract, I know who I will be using.  They have demonstrated a lot of professionalism, a good knowledge of the market, and the ability to deliver results.


----------



## JudyS

MichaelColey said:


> My only suggestion would be to redact _<Broker's>_ post to remove the OP's real name....


I second this!


----------



## csxjohn

MichaelColey said:


> My only suggestion would be to redact _<Broker's>_ post to remove the OP's real name...
> 
> No Way should her name be deleted.
> 
> If _<OP>_ is going to use _<Broker's>_ name and business name then she should expect her name to be used in this discussion also.
> 
> You can't just try to ruin someone's reputation and not expect to have repercussions.


----------



## larryallen

As a lawyer I am just glad this is small potatoes we are arguing about. Both sides have made horrendous errors in judgement in posting some of the information that they have posted in my professional opinion. Both sides should probably delete everything and pretend this never happened.


----------



## Beefnot

csxjohn said:


> No Way should her name be deleted.
> 
> If _<OP>_ is going to use _<Broker's>_ name and business name then she should expect her name to be used in this discussion also.
> 
> You can't just try to ruin someone's reputation and not expect to have repercussions.



Agree, kind of. Only because I have sided with the business in this dispute. If it was selltimeshare.org ineffectively trying to defend their [supposedly] sloppy and unprofessional practices, I would have a problem with it.


----------



## csxjohn

Beefnot said:


> Agree, kind of. Only because I have sided with the business in this dispute. If it was selltimeshare.org ineffectively trying to defend their [supposedly] sloppy and unprofessional practices, I would have a problem with it.



My thoughts are that if one party wants to come on a public forum and say something about someone and their business, either good or bad, they should not be immune from having their names used also.

If you want to remain anonymous, don't start naming names and just give us the warning about a clause to watch for when signing a contract like this.(we need an emoticon of someone shooting themselves in the foot to insert here.)


----------



## BocaBum99

larryallen said:


> As a lawyer I am just glad this is small potatoes we are arguing about. Both sides have made horrendous errors in judgement in posting some of the information that they have posted in my professional opinion. Both sides should probably delete everything and pretend this never happened.



From a legal point of view, you are correct.  Showing your cards too early can be deadly in a law suit.

However, from a marketing and reputation point of view, this speaks volumes as to the honesty and integrity of the broker.  If you don't speak out to defend your reputation online, then the accuser gets to define you as the villain when indeed just the opposite is true.

The amount in dispute is so small that I would be surprised if this went on much longer. Once the reality of legal action is internalized by the seller, she will probably come to her senses and settle up with the broker.  It's the right thing to do and if it doesn't happen, maybe we will see this on an episode of Judge Judy.


----------



## SueDonJ

This is my opinion as a TUG participant:  There aren't any cut and dried TUG rules specific to what the OP or the broker has posted.  As was expected by many in the thread eventually enough details were posted to allow all the participants to form an opinion.  There also aren't clear rules about posting personal info such as names and contact info but there is an established policy that I believe has been violated here.  IMO the thread should be cleaned up to remove all traces of the company name, the broker's name and the OP's name.  I don't know the reasoning behind the "usual TUG policy" being that company/broker names are allowed to stand when questions about them are posted, but I can also understand the circumstances here that might make folks call for something different.  Again IMO, removing all the names in this particular situation is a better solution than allowing the thread to stand as is, effectively changing TUG's usual policy to one where any- and everybody's name can be "outed" by anyone who has a problem with them.  Would any of us want this to be the new TUG policy?  I sure wouldn't, whether I'm in the right or wrong.

Now as a TUG moderator:  The TUG Posting Rule concerning timeshare professionals choosing TUG User Names that can serve as advertisements for their business IS cut and dried, and TUG would stand to suffer more by it being changed than what I talked about above.  For that reason the broker's TUG User Name should be changed.  But my opinion doesn't count for more or less than anybody else's, so (because I participated in the thread and am not impartial) I'm asking TUG admin to review the thread, consider all the opinions, and make a determination that will hopefully put an end to all this.


----------



## BocaBum99

SueDonJ said:


> This is my opinion as a TUG participant:  There aren't any cut and dried TUG rules specific to what the OP or the broker has posted.  As was expected by many in the thread eventually enough details were posted to allow all the participants to form an opinion.  There also aren't clear rules about posting personal info such as names and contact info but there is an established policy that I believe has been violated here.  IMO the thread should be cleaned up to remove all traces of the company name, the broker's name and the OP's name.  I don't know the reasoning behind the "usual TUG policy" being that company/broker names are allowed to stand when questions about them are posted, but I can also understand the circumstances here that might make folks call for something different.  Again IMO, removing all the names in this particular situation is a better solution than allowing the thread to stand as is, effectively changing TUG's usual policy to one where any- and everybody's name can be "outed" by anyone who has a problem with them.  Would any of us want this to be the new TUG policy?  I sure wouldn't, whether I'm in the right or wrong.
> 
> Now as a TUG moderator:  The TUG Posting Rule concerning timeshare professionals choosing TUG User Names that can serve as advertisements for their business IS cut and dried, and TUG would stand to suffer more by it being changed than what I talked about above.  For that reason the broker's TUG User Name should be changed.  But my opinion doesn't count for more or less than anybody else's, so I'm asking TUG admin to review the thread, consider all the opinions, and make a determination that will hopefully put an end to all this.



Very well articulated position.


----------



## JudyS

SueDonJ said:


> This is my opinion as a TUG participant:  There aren't any cut and dried TUG rules specific to what the OP or the broker has posted.  As was expected by many in the thread eventually enough details were posted to allow all the participants to form an opinion.  There also aren't clear rules about posting personal info such as names and contact info but there is an established policy that I believe has been violated here.  IMO the thread should be cleaned up to remove all traces of the company name, the broker's name and the OP's name.  I don't know the reasoning behind the "usual TUG policy" being that company/broker names are allowed to stand when questions about them are posted, but I can also understand the circumstances here that might make folks call for something different.  Again IMO, removing all the names in this particular situation is a better solution than allowing the thread to stand as is, effectively changing TUG's usual policy to one where any- and everybody's name can be "outed" by anyone who has a problem with them.  Would any of us want this to be the new TUG policy?  I sure wouldn't, whether I'm in the right or wrong.....


Very good points! I previously said I'd like the OP's name removed, but I also would like the broker's identifying information removed. It could be done, it would just be a little harder. 

The ideal thing would be for a moderator to clean up this thread so that both the OP's real name and the broker's identifying information would be removed. I don't know exactly how to handle the post that was done by the broker (since the broker's business name is being used as their TUG User ID), but I'm sure there's a way. Worse case scenario, the post by the broker could be deleted and a moderator could repost it at the end of the thread with identifying information removed and a note explaining why the original post had been deleted. 

I'd rather not see this whole thread deleted because it contains good information about when broker commission are due.

Once the broker's information was removed, the title of the thread could be changed to something more specific, such as "Dispute over real estate broker's commission."


----------



## MichaelColey

csxjohn said:


> My thoughts are that if one party wants to come on a public forum and say something about someone and their business, either good or bad, they should not be immune from having their names used also.
> 
> If you want to remain anonymous, don't start naming names and just give us the warning about a clause to watch for when signing a contract like this.(we need an emoticon of someone shooting themselves in the foot to insert here.)


I strongly disagree.  An anonymous forum member and/or a customer of a company should have a reasonable expectation that their private information be kept private.

A business is a whole other matter.  A business is expected to be held to public scrutiny.

Do you think timeshare owners will speak as freely about problems they have if they know that the companies they are dealing with are free to reveal this private information, and that TUG will be complicit in that action by allowing it to remain?

In this case, some may not care because they feel like the OP is wrong.  I feel like the OP is wrong, too, but I still feel like she deserves privacy and respect.  I think we need to look beyond this particular incident and be careful of what precedents we set.


----------



## Beefnot

MichaelColey said:


> I strongly disagree.  An anonymous forum member and/or a customer of a company should have a reasonable expectation that their private information be kept private.
> 
> A business is a whole other matter.  A business is expected to be held to public scrutiny.
> 
> Do you think timeshare owners will speak as freely about problems they have if they know that the companies they are dealing with are free to reveal this private information, and that TUG will be complicit in that action by allowing it to remain?
> 
> In this case, some may not care because they feel like the OP is wrong.  I feel like the OP is wrong, too, but I still feel like she deserves privacy and respect.  I think we need to look beyond this particular incident and be careful of what precedents we set.



Yes, agree.


----------



## DeniseM

This thread was submitted to Admin for review, and TUG would be happy redact the name upon request - it hasn't been requested to my knowledge.

_<Broker>_ has been asked to change their user name, per TUG policy.

However, it's also our policy to let a company (briefly) defend themselves, if they have been "challenged" on TUG, and in my opinion, their post was perfectly appropriate.


----------



## Jay324

I don't normally post on this board (regular on MO) but I have been watching DVC resale prices since 2010 as I have purchased 3 contracts in such time.

To the OP, you should consider yourself very lucky that _<Broker>_ was able to find you a buyer at 55 a point for your rather large 300 point stripped SSR contract for I would consider that a great price.    Yes there has been a slight uptick in pricing for DVC over the past couple of week but lets face it your contract is a complete dog.  There are just so many better contracts available right now and I don't know why someone would make on offer at 55 for I would have never even considered to make an offer on such a terrible contract.  If someone where to ask my opinion on a price, I would tell them 40 a point is the highest one should pay.  If this contract was listed just a year ago, I am sure you would have been waiting for months with a lot of 35-40 offers being sent your way.  So instead of bashing _<Broker>_, you really should have congratulated her on moving your horrible contract so quickly when there is just so many other better contracts available.

To list a few of them:

Saratoga Springs	08 - Aug	150	$55.00 	$8,250.00	
Aug. 13-300, 14-150	

Saratoga Springs	08 - Aug	150	$55.00 	$8,250.00	
Aug. 14-150, 15-150	

Saratoga Springs	04 - Apr	160	$56.25 	$9,000.00	
April 13-301, 14-160	

Saratoga Springs	12 - Dec	250	$58.00 	$14,500.00	
DEC. 12-10, 13-250

Saratoga Springs	06 - Jun	250	$58.00 	$14,500.00	
Jun. 12-74 13-135 14-250	


Almost every contract that is listed at a comparable price, has at least current points and the stripped one that is similar to yours is listed at 55 (although it has half the points which is much more desirable)

I have never purchased through _<Broker>_ and the only reason for this is that she just seems to get her sellers top dollar for DVC contracts (much like your deal).  But, if I ever decide to sell, she will receive my first call.  And if I am lucky enough to receive a full price offer at such a great price in a couple of days, I would thank her up and down.

She knows what she is doing and her starting price point is right on the money.  As to the other broker who you told you that the contract should have been listed higher and they would be able to get you a better price, they were lying.


----------



## csxjohn

MichaelColey said:


> I strongly disagree.  An anonymous forum member and/or a customer of a company should have a reasonable expectation that their private information be kept private.
> 
> ...



I agree with you.  The "reasonable expectation" is where we probably disagree.  

In this case a person set out to ruin the reputation of an individual and her company.  I'm not basing that on the broker's statements but on the tone of and the details of the OP's posts which seemed obvious to a lot of us before _<Broker>_ even posted.

I feel that we will continue to post complaints about companies to help warn each other about thieves and scammers. 

People can't expect to call out someone trying to make a living and not expect to be exposed for spreading falsehoods.

As long as TUG doesn't give out the personal info I'm OK with the way this is being handled.



DeniseM said:


> ...However, it's also our policy to let a company (briefly) defend themselves, if they have been "challenged" on TUG, and in my opinion, their post was perfectly appropriate.



I think this is the correct response.


----------



## JudyS

Jay324 said:


> ...
> To list a few of them:
> 
> Saratoga Springs	08 - Aug	150	$55.00 	$8,250.00
> Aug. 13-300, 14-150
> 
> Saratoga Springs	08 - Aug	150	$55.00 	$8,250.00
> Aug. 14-150, 15-150
> 
> Saratoga Springs	04 - Apr	160	$56.25 	$9,000.00
> April 13-301, 14-160
> 
> Saratoga Springs	12 - Dec	250	$58.00 	$14,500.00
> DEC. 12-10, 13-250
> 
> Saratoga Springs	06 - Jun	250	$58.00 	$14,500.00
> Jun. 12-74 13-135 14-250...


Stop it, stop it, you're making me want to buy more DVC points! :rofl:


----------



## Jay324

JudyS said:


> Stop it, stop it, you're making me want to buy more DVC points! :rofl:



Sorry about that.....No need to buy more.....Look away.....

But really, isn't that the average price for SSR (50-60 range).  And in reviewing the thread it also seems that the OP's use year is August (mentioned somewhere in the thread) so not only is the contract stripped of all the current points (don't forget contracts with August use years are still in 2012) but also stripped of next years points as well.

The purchasers can't even make a reservation until August 1, 2013 and they would have to use 2014 points to do so putting them in a bigger hole.  But if people are buying direct at 115 (soon to be 130), I guess they got a decent deal compared to Direct pricing but certainly not compared to other SSR contracts that can easily be found loaded in the 50's.

Once again OP you were offered a great price and you have been on MO so you know the current market for SSR points.  Did you really need _<Broker>_ to tell you something (what price to list the contract) that can be found quite easily online.  I mean its not like you are tying to sell a house for there is nothing unique about any DVC contract.


----------



## Amy

Jay324 said:


> Sorry about that.....No need to buy more.....Look away.....
> 
> But really, isn't that the average price for SSR (50-60 range).  And in reviewing the thread it also seems that the OP's use year is August (mentioned somewhere in the thread) so not only is the contract stripped of all the current points (don't forget contracts with August use years are still in 2012) but also stripped of next years points as well.
> 
> The purchasers can't even make a reservation until August 1, 2013 and they would have to use 2014 points to do so putting them in a bigger hole.  But if people are buying direct at 115 (soon to be 130), I guess they got a decent deal compared to Direct pricing but certainly not compared to other SSR contracts that can easily be found loaded in the 50's.
> 
> Once again OP you were offered a great price and you have been on MO so you know the current market for SSR points.  Did you really need _<Broker>_ to tell you something (what price to list the contract) that can be found quite easily online.  I mean its not like you are tying to sell a house for there is nothing unique about any DVC contract.



I just want to echo these remarks.  I, too, am a long time DVC owners who has been watching listing and actual resale prices (posted on DIS and MO boards) over the past year as I've been thinking of adding on.  I pay a lot of attention to SSR contracts because of SSR's lower m/fs.  

I would also not have agreed to buy a 300 points stripped SSR Aug. contract for $55/pt.  The "going" rate for informed online DVC owners seem to be in the $50-$55+ range only for fully loaded contracts with banked points and current year's points.  And that's generally for the more valuable smaller (less than 300 points) contracts.  The most I would pay for a 300 points Aug. stripped contract like this one -- nothing for the current (2012) use year, almost nothing for the soon-to-start 2013 use year -- is in the low $40s per point range with seller paying both the current year's m/fs and either all or 50% of the closing costs.  The OP did well getting $55 point in 3 days.  At the very least it was an extremely fair result given today's market, notwithstanding what another broker may have suggested as a starting offering price.

With these #s and the information about the type of contract the OP had, I simply don't understand the basis for going around the internet to accuse this realtor of charging the equivalent of an upfront fee or scamming consumers.  The OP changed her mind.  But, as many TUGgers have stated, changing your mind after you've signed a contract agreeing on a listing price has financial consequences.  

Finally, the OP, with the number of post counts on TUG, isn't a typical uninformed DVC owner who lacks the resources to research ROFR and current selling prices on MO and DIS or elsewhere online (and even post questions to ask advice) before signing the contract agreeing to the $55 listing price.  That makes this dispute all the more unreasonable IMO.


----------



## dbs1228

I agree with Amy and Jay when I posted about my resale it was 130 point contract Oct UY all points coming this year and it sold for 63.00PP. Happy about that 

  There is a frenzy over the past 3 weeks only because Disney has been exercising their ROFR and buyers are coming out of the wood work due to the DVC increase in direct sale prices!  Not sure what the panic is but many buyers have gone on a wait list to buy direct for older properties due to price increase.  DVC is taking the contracts back  since they have buyers (wait listed) and over inflating the resale market prices and creating a panic!:annoyed:  It is crazy but Disney seems to know how to sell!


----------



## benyu2010

Jay324, OP's contract date is OCT.

You are absolutely correct that large and striped contract shows distress and often discounted, particularly flood of SSRs in the market. OP was very lucky that broker found her a casual buyer. Serious buyers would only offer 40ish and this broker was clearly a buyer's broker based on my observation and experience. Some brokers try to broker a deal, and some try to win business. The other broker who quoted 60ish may just try to win business and never able to locate a buyer.

OP, I do not know what makes you changed your mind and scratched the deal. It was indeed a good, quick and perfect one for a striped large contract with a loan balance. You have received all sorts of balanced information and you yourself are an informed owner. I'm buffed how the matter could come down this route. Instead of 'thank you' and nice chat, you attempted to kill the deal for a few ( perceived) more dollars, with intend of pressuring broker to back off with public opinions and damage of reputation. Several generic terms you threw onto the tables were more than over the top, even with a one sided story. After all, you cared about your bottom line and nothing was wrong about that. Since it was a good deal and you got nothing to gain, but everything to lose. Why not swallow your own pride, calm down yourself, and have a nice talk with (maybe via third party) the brokerage. It was such small matter that should be easily resolved with satisfaction of all sides. You may still have chance to salvage the deal, which was very good...You would save the legal fees, chance of settlement and unload the striped contract without paying more interest.

I do not have a dog in the fight. After read whole thread 7am on vacation, it was itchy not to leave my two cents on the table. it might be a little too late though


----------



## icydog

I've both purchased and sold my DVC points using this broker without a hitch. 

Unfortunately, if you search for her name+ scam on Google you'll get directed to this thread.  

I can't figure out why this thread is still active. The OP was vastly mistaken on the value of a 300 point, stripped, SSR contract.  That's a given!

*PLUS*

She didn't read her contract.  The onus is on her for that.. The broker has a perfect right to her fees. She is not running a charity! 

The broker probably had a buyer who asked her to keep on the lookout for a high point SSR contract for X$$.   What's wrong with that?  It's good business for both the buyer and the seller

The broker made it clear she represents both the buyer and the seller.  Also clearly stated in the contract she provides. 

Again, why is this thread still open?


----------



## DeniseM

> Again, why is this thread still open?


-Because it doesn't violate any posting rules....


----------



## benyu2010

I don't know the broker, nor Ruth Hunt in the other thread. JMO, it's very unfair and detrimental to them, personally and professionally. Both threads ranked first in Google search by respective names. I can't imagine how much damage it may cause to this type of service business conducted over internet that vastly relied on reputation and WoM. Many potential buyers, sellers or renters are first-timers, and what they would do if they Google the name? takes an hour or two to read through 100+ posts thread? If it is me, why bother, move on to the next one


----------

