Canada's gov't pushes for MLS changes

Realtors accused of restricting consumer choice

Inman News®

Canadian Realtors are restricting consumer choice and limiting the scope of alternative business models, the Competition Bureau of Canada has reportedly concluded after wrapping up a two-year investigation and issuing proposed remedies to a trade association.

The Bureau wants the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) -- Canada's version of the National Association of Realtors -- to drop a rule that prevents Realtors from placing for-sale listings in the national Multiple Listing Service (MLS) system without providing other services, CREA President Dale Ripplinger said in an Oct. 29 letter to members.

Ripplinger said Canadian regulators also want CREA to drop a rule that prohibits listing the seller's name and contact information in the public remarks section of the MLS or on Realtor.ca, the Canadian equivalent of Realtor.com.

The bureau reportedly also wants CREA to drop a rule requiring that the listing Realtor receive and present all offers and counteroffers to the seller.

If CREA does not make the recommended changes to its MLS policies, the Competition Bureau will take the matter before the Competition Tribunal, a quasi-judicial body that can issue administrative monetary penalties and prohibition orders, Ripplinger said in the letter.

Ripplinger said CREA's Board of Directors is pursuing a settlement agreement with the Bureau, subject to support by CREA's Realtor members.

Greg Scott, a spokesman for the Competition Bureau, said that because the letter was "a communication between the president of CREA and the membership and not sent to us directly, it would be inappropriate for us to discuss its contents."

But Scott said the Competition Bureau's concerns about restrictions imposed by CREA on the MLS system date to 2007.

"We have complaints from Realtors that the CREA restrictions require consumers to pay for services that they do not want or need so their Realtors can list their homes on the MLS," Scott said in an e-mail to Inman News. "The Multiple Listing Services account for the vast majority of real estate transactions in Canada and (the MLS system) is controlled exclusively by CREA."

In March 2007, the Competition Bureau -- Canada's equivalent of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and U.S. Justice Department's antitrust division -- served CREA with a court order seeking documents and other information as a part of a formal investigation (see story).

Around the same time, the Bureau was meeting with limited-service brokers in the U.S. -- a practice that apparently continued into this year (see story).

In his letter to members, Kipplinger said the Bureau has completed its inquiry, and met with CREA in October to share its conclusions and proposed remedies.

CREA agrees with regulators that the marketplace and competition should dictate what business models exist, Ripplinger said, but disagrees with their conclusion that its rules create restrictions or barriers.

CREA maintains that although Canada has one MLS system that operates under a national trademark, more than 100 MLSs are locally owned and operated, and there are no restrictions on business models.

After Ripplinger's letter became public, CREA denied as inaccurate a Canadian media report that the group had agreed to allow sellers to place listings in the MLS.

A CREA spokeswoman, Alyson Fair, reiterated the group's position that the MLS is a system "for our members ... only."

The Bureau has a "fundamental misunderstanding" about the way the MLS rules are applied to operating the system, which is the central focus of ongoing discussions, Fair told Inman News.

She said the group hoped to have the framework of a settlement in place by Dec. 11, when CREA's board of directors meets next.

Without commenting on the discussions with CREA, Scott said that in general, when the Bureau identifies a potential violation of Canada's fundamental competition law, the Competition Act, it "is prepared to work with organizations to reach a voluntary resolution that will fix the competitive problem."

***

What's your opinion? Leave your comments below or send a letter to the editor.

Share with REmessenger

You must login or register to post a comment.

 
Submitted by Joe Loomer on November 24, 2009 - 6:18am.

"...Canadian regulators also want CREA to drop a rule that prohibits listing the seller's name and contact information in the public remarks section of the MLS or on Realtor.ca..."

So on planet Canada they want the public to be able to contact (and contract with) the seller directly, bypassing the agent - AND they want the agent to be responsible for providing the public with the means to do so in the first place? Sucks to be you, eh...

Augusta GA Homes

Joe Loomer, USN Ret.
Associate Leadership Council, Growth Chair
Keller Williams Realty Augusta Partners

 
Submitted by Don Stewart on November 24, 2009 - 6:34am.

The villain here is not the Competition Bureau or the DOJ – they are trying to speak on behalf of the consumer. If it seems like then have a grudge against the real estate industry it may be because we fight like the devil to resist any change. It has to get wearing. Also, let’s not forget that the data regarding any home sale begins with the seller – it is their information that we gather and treat as our own.

It would seem to me that our industry is fighting for the survival of an infrastructure that made sense 50 years ago and makes much less sense today. Local MLS was needed when it was a paper based system that was labor intensive and expensive to operate. Today the agents capture the data, enter it into their computer and distribute it in seconds.

The consumer and the agents are the important parties here – everyone else is overhead. Agents feel good about by the cover provided by their associations valiantly defending their “rights” and it makes the associations feel like they are doing their job, but really, I think many agents might prefer to get as much unproductive cost out of the system as we can and just let things evolve.

As the world moves on we should relax our death grip on the past and make a positive contribution.

Don Stewart
Agent Invitation
don@agentinvitation.com
http://blog.agentinvitation.com/

 
Submitted by Victor Lund on November 24, 2009 - 7:55am.

Matt -

This only impacts MLS.ca - not all of the MLSs of Canada.

At jeopardy here is one of the three pillars of MLS - the pillar of agency restricted to MLS.ca.

Today, there are three pillars - membership, offer of compensation, and agency.

Without agency, there is no responsible party representing the listing. This would create chaos in mls.ca and not be helpful to members or consumers.

The blessing in all of this is that the ruling is unlikely to disturb local MLSs. Provencial law governing local MLSs usually supersedes national law in these cases.

I believe that the Canadian media is reporting on a topic that they do not clearly understand - the facts in the article do not seem well understood or researched. Seems like some writer grabbed a press release and went with it. It would be great if you could write a piece that gets them up to speed.

 
Submitted by James Miller on November 24, 2009 - 11:42am.

I see this as the direction of most regulation over real estate models. In most areas owner and contact information is easily obtained, so restricting that information is provincial, however allowing anyone to present to the seller, when the listing agent has a contract or agreement with the seller, opens the seller to all types of fraud exposure.

Government is stupid and frequently regulates to assert power and control to the benefit of their own ego and not to protect the consumer.

The end may be inevitable because we stupidly place the stupid officials in power. Our only salvation may be better education of the public we serve. There is no law, yet, that says the unsophisticated seller must agree to an offer presentation without representation.

 
Submitted by John Rakoci on November 24, 2009 - 3:55pm.

WoW! It sounds even more rediculous than the strange things the DOJ wants.