NAR addresses 're-listing' practice
White paper offers guidance on 'new listings'
By Inman News, Monday, November 10, 2008.ORLANDO -- A white paper introduced during a National Association of Realtors conference seeks to clear up the murky issues associated with properties that are "re-listed" by Realtors.
The practice of re-listing for-sale homes -- or temporarily pulling them off of the market and then reintroducing them as "new" listings -- has been a controversial topic in the industry, and the white paper offers guidance for Realtors' conduct while not mandating any new policies.
The paper notes that a "new listing" can have very different meanings for real estate professionals and consumers. Agents may refer to a home that they are working to sell as a "new listing" even if that home had previously been marketed by another agent but did not sell, for example, while consumers may view a new listing as a property that was offered for sale for the first time.
"In (a) broker's mind, 'listing' means house and contract. But to buyers, 'new listing' likely suggests a house that's just come onto the market," the paper states. "That can result in confusion and misunderstanding. And confusion and misunderstanding can mean trouble."
"Some multiple listing service participants have taken advantage of MLS rules and policies ... to draw extra attention to properties listed with them," the paper also notes, and listing brokers and agents sometimes re-list the same properties multiple times, causing those properties to appear as "new" listings over and over.
In these cases, "While the listing contract is technically 'new,' " each time "the relationship between the seller and the listing broker is ongoing and continuous, and the listed property -- in the eyes of reasonable consumers -- is certainly not 'new' to the market."
The paper, presented during a Professional Standards Forum and accepted by a committee at NAR's annual conference, reminds members that NAR's Code of Ethics requires all members to be "honest and truthful in their real estate communications" and "present a true picture in their advertising, marketing and other representations."
Realtors can refer to re-listed properties as "back on market," "price reduced," "reintroducing" or "recently re-listed," the paper suggests, and MLSs can choose to adopt classifications other than "new" for the listings of properties and use database technologies to automatically prevent the same for-sale properties from being identified as "new."
None of the recommendations are "intended to restrict vigorous, innovative or creative methods of drawing attention to clients' property," the paper also states, though "client advocacy and promotion of their property must be accomplished using methods that square with the Code (of Ethics)."
***
What's your opinion? Leave your comments below or send a letter to the editor.
All rights reserved. This content may not be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in part or in whole, without written permission of Inman News. Use of this content without permission is a violation of federal copyright law.
You must login or register to post a comment.
Submitted by Keith Byrd on November 10, 2008 - 2:02pm.
When did Move start displaying the days a property has been on Realtor.com? Seems like anti-marketing for the Listing Agent that has a listing on the market 30+ days, especially when it is displayed right above the Listing Agent's name.
Maybe if DOM isn't included on the Realtor.com listing detail, agents wouldn't be trying to figure out how to reset it. Actually it says "Listing added xx days ago and refreshed xx minutes ago". I wonder if you change the listing to inactive for a day and then change it back to active if Realtor.com's counter will reset?
My MLS uses CDOM which doesn't reset if a property is relisted within 90 days, even if it's listed with another brokerage. Rather than NAR coming out with a white paper how about implementing CDOM on Realtor.com if they really wanted to present a true picture in the advertising. Or better yet, just remove days on market from the listing detail.
Submitted by Ken Fisher on November 10, 2008 - 2:27pm.
NAR is an unacceptable excuse to reality. Re-listing a property is and always was fraud. Now it is a violation of Article 12 ... not presenting the true picture of a listing. Such a shame!
Submitted by Sam Smith on November 10, 2008 - 3:30pm.
The re-listing situation is a joke. It should probabaly be handleded by the Justice Department.
As far as the ""None of the recommendations are "intended to restrict vigorous, innovative or creative methods of drawing attention to clients' property," comment it is, I believe, a cop out by the NAR.
We are handling what is usually the largest part of a persons wealth and we should be required to pass much higher standards than just a beating heart and the ability to pay the local and national fees. If so we wouldn't have over a million REE AL Tors.
If I am not mistaken the NAR is the largest organized labor union in the world. We better be careful lest the federal government takes notice.
Submitted by Marc Rasmussen - Sarasota FL Real Estate on November 10, 2008 - 5:41pm.
These people have too much time on their hands. Don't we have bigger problems?
Bird Key Real Estate
Submitted by Doug Osgood on November 12, 2008 - 1:14am.
None of the recommendations are "intended to restrict vigorous, innovative or creative methods of drawing attention to clients' property,"
Wow! And we are proud to be REALTORS. What a farce.
Doug Osgood
Keller Williams Realty Westake
Submitted by Graham Duryee on November 14, 2008 - 10:00am.
We, Realtors, rely on the MLS as an accurate source of data and yet we become our own worst enemies at times.
Most MLS software calculates current days on the market (dom) and cummulative days on the market (cdom). Additionally most of us can "click" on the property history button and get info there too.
No matter what a "sly realtor" may do with an aging listing once the home sells the next door neighbor will always share the stories about the property!
Let's go out and find some ready, willing and able buyers and have fun like we used to!
Graham Duryee
Greenridge Realty
Holland, MI
Submitted by Lloyd Graves on November 14, 2008 - 12:32pm.
This is a good example of how laws get passed to "protect consumers". Vigorous marketing does not equal deceiving potential buyers.
Doing something to "help" the seller that in reality "hurts" the buyer, is not what I would describe as an ethical, professional practice.
I suggest that agents who are to lazy or just not good enough to market a property without resorting to deceit should find a new occupation more suited to their lack of character.
Lloyd Graves, President
RealAlliance Consulting, LLC
Submitted by Derek Eisenberg on November 15, 2008 - 7:12pm.
There's a difference between telling the truth and volunteering it. Days on market stigmatize a home. The value of a home should be based on comparable sales; not perceived desperation of the seller.
I have had listings with difficult tenants that took longer to sell because buyers could not get in. Similarly I have had sellers that refused to use a lockbox and could only show the house evenings and one of the two weekend days because they observed the sabbath. I have had sellers that needed to experience the market before they would bring their house down to the right asking prices. Houses with these types of situations take longer to sell but that does not make the seller desperate such that it should further buyer low balling.
DOM should be invisible until the property closes. If a buyer's agent wants to know the DOM, there is a simple way for him/her to find out....he/she can ask.
Derek Eisenberg
http://www.mls2u.com