Part 4: MLS Antitrust Litigation – Q & A

• Question: I ran my business on the basis that the agents were sharing the listing agent fee so it wasn’t clients. Was that correct?
• Answer: Well, it really doesn’t matter what I think or what you think. What matters is what the Court thought.
• The Court held that the structure of the MLS kept real estate commissions artificially high.
• The plaintiff-homeowners-sellers argued that they never understood they were also paying the buyer’s agent – that there was no informed consent.
• Even when the Northwest MLS eliminated mandatory offers of compensation, there was little change in commission splits.
• Next question involved use of auctions and how many jurors owned homes.
• Not sure although does it really matter? Interesting that all the plaintiff homeowners spoke highly of their REALTORS.
• NAR did not have a decent chance in court to say all the good things the agents do, the pro-consumer services, the marketplace the MLS provides, etc
• Final message was to not let the negative press stop you from conducting business in ways that consumers want and need in buying and selling the right property.

Share This Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Stay connected.

Get up to the minute updates and resources.

Search
Other Articles

Agency by Ratification

Real Estate Word of the Day – Learning real estate one word or phrase at a time… Agency by Ratification Agency by ratification refers to

Read More »

Stay Connected.

Get up to the minute updates and resources.