site map

 

Thingnamer Banner

December 10, 2006 | Tate Linden
The National Association of Realtors - (The Voice of Realty) - has a page on which they tell potential home buyers and sellers How to Choose a REALTOR.

Let me summarize their guidance:
  • Make sure you hire a REALTOR because they are held to a "Code of Ethics (which in many cases goes beyond state law)."
  • Working with a REALTOR that has access to a Multiple Listing Service "will give you access to the greatest number of homes."
  • Make sure you ask your REALTOR to clarify state "regulations, so you know where you stand" on the duties for your type of agent.
  • Know the difference between a buyers and a sellers agent and make sure you know whether your agent is representing you or someone else.
  • Check that the agent has an active real estate license in good standing.
  • Check what real estate designations the agent holds.
  • Will your agent "show you homes that meet your requirements and provide you with a list of properties he or she is showing you" in exchange for your commitment to work with them?
I just don't get it. I'll respond to each item with an eye to how the REALTOR and/or consumer is affected or represented.
  • Use a REALTOR because they're held to a "Code of Ethics." First, why would anyone point out that people need to be trained in ethics. Does the REALTOR profession attract unsavory types? Second, I checked on the Code and found that it contains 17 unique articles and 81 standards of practice. That's a whole lot of stuff to assume that every single REALTOR in the world has memorized. Even with the Code hung on the wall where they can see it every day I'd wager than less than 1% of REALTORs could list every article and practice. If it near impossible to live and breathe by the Code then why have it at all? (Other than to tell people you have a code.) The required 15 hours of training per year (I think I have that number right) just isn't enough to memorize the code and keep current on other real estate issues. FWIW- I'd bet that Google's Code of Ethics is known by 99% of their employees - and they can probably recite it perfectly.
  • MLS access gives you access to the biggest number of homes. Okay. MLS does give you access to homes, and people do use it - but in many cases it doesn't give you access to homes that are listed by owner and most MLS services are restricted so that only agents can search them, meaning that if your agent uses one as the sole method of advertising your home then people without an agent won't be able to find you. In most cases MLS gets you access to REALTORs, not buyers. (I understand why NAR would want this - as it does help REALTORS... but it doesn't necessarily mean that the client will be best served.)
  • Have your REALTOR clarify state regulations/Buyer-Seller Agent Distinction. I've been in at least five real estate transactions and this has always happened without my prompting. I know I should care about it, but it isn't top of mind for me. REALTORs have it as part of their spiel - but repeat clients know the spiel - saying they either represent you, the other guy, or both... then you sign something and get a copy showing what that role is. Also, given that REALTORS (potentially) have a higher code isn't it more important to learn about that? Why is this the customer's responsibility?
  • Check that the agent has an active real estate license in good standing. This is common sense, but I know exactly no one that has done it. Ever. I've asked a dozen folks and everyone laughs at me. Yes it is the law, but it isn't the consumer's job to out the impostors. Seems like something NAR should be doing on behalf of its constituency, no? (I certainly don't check every restaurant for a liquor license when I buy a drink. Do you? And I certainly don't check for health-code violations online - even though they are available - because if I only ate at the clean places I'd never go out.)
  • Check what real estate designations the agent holds. What exactly does this mean? What kinds of real estate designations are there? What is the advantage of having one - or more than one? A search turned up at least twenty designations on NARs own site. Rather than checking on what the designations are doesn't it make more sense to ask what the designations give the client? Will they make more money? Will they save money? Will they have a smoother transaction? Will it be faster? Does a desgination that doesn't provide a material benefit to the consumer matter? Seems kinda like putting makeup on a pig. If designations are important then isn't it more important that an agent have a designation that specifically represents the situation the buyer/seller is in? Should a non-specialist recuse themselves if there are better options available to the buyer? (Certainly seems like the ethical thing to do, doesn't it?) Do they need to disclose that there are others that specialize in the area the client is interested in? (Again... ethical.) Do they need to disclose that designations exist at all?
  • Will your agent "show you homes that meet your requirements and provide you with a list of properties he or she is showing you?" If you are an agent and all you do for your clients is show homes and make lists then you don't deserve to have clients. If I told people that the reason they should work with me is that I make names that fit requirements and I show them candidate lists I can't imagine that anyone would ever hire me. This level of service is assumed. If you don't show houses and give lists you go out of business. So why ask the question?
If I were a REALTOR and found that my clients were being given guidance like that seen above I'd be calling up NAR and telling them to get their act together. The NAR is hurting the good REALTORs and doing no favors for the brand by allowing the bare minimum to be passed off as allowable.

I have heard from REALTORs that the annual training requirement can be fulfilled in a single marathon day - and that there is no test given to confirm that the information learned is actually learned. There's no follow-up weeks or months later to see if the information is retained. One REALTOR commented that a few people in the room had actually dozed off. (Apparently the only requirement is that you be physically in the room... coherency and consciousness are not mandatory.)

In my light reading of the Code of Ethics I couldn't find a rule against this, so it must be okay.

Why not figure out what actually makes a good REALTOR and focus on those qualities? Don't ask what people are looking for. Don't use focus groups. When people are asked what they look for in a REALTOR they don't know how to respond. And getting a whole group of people together gives you a whole lot of answers that are provided because they don't know how else to answer. Sure people want ethical REALTORS. We also want people who breathe, who are decidedly male or female, who like food, who speak our language, and who don't swear at us under their breath or launch into song when they get stressed. I'm guessing the latter options didn't show up on the surveys, but I'd wager that breathing would actually be found more important (and no less irrelevant) than ethics. Ethics is a given. People don't want to deal with unethical people in any business. So don't talk to us about whether or not you're ethical.

Training in ethics doesn't matter - being ethical matters - and you can't promise that. What can you promise? What about creative services? What about taking care of paperwork or fast transactions? What about a promise to never ask for a piece of information more than once? What about keeping track of what the strengths and weaknesses of each house visited are and helping clients keep things straight? What about restricting your services to areas in which you are qualified to deliver informed opinions - and referring business elsewhere when you're in an unfamiliar neighborhood?

I don't want a taxi driver, I want someone that can actually help me.

What about providing services that matter?

The NAR is sick. Once enough of their constituency notices and comments perhaps they'll take some medicine.

Prescriptions are available...

Tate Linden Principal Consultant Stokefire Consulting Group 703-778-9925
4 Comments
michael December 11, 2006 1:57 AM

My comments:
Use a REALTOR because they’re held to a “Code of Ethics.”
Everyone has a code of ethics. Heck, my kids had to get a food servers license to work at Dairy Queen and THEY have a Code of Ethics.
MLS access gives you access to the biggest number of homes.
I agree with what you said, but then there are also the "pocket listings" , what does the Code of Ethics say about them?
Have your REALTOR clarify state regulations/Buyer-Seller Agent Distinction.
Yea, CYA all the way.
Check that the agent has an active real estate license in good standing.
I dont't even check to see if my Doctor's license is in good standing, but maybe I should because the last time I went to the dermotologist he gave me a prostate exam.
Check what real estate designations the agent holds.
Doesn't really mean much to me really, I want a good REALTOR not a good test taker.
Will your agent “show you homes that meet your requirements...."
I agree, except in my experience they go "above" your requirements, so that when you see what you could have got compared with what you would get based on your requirements, you'll (hopefully) end up spending more.

Tate Linden December 11, 2006 10:36 AM

Interesting points Michael. I hadn't considered the pocket listings... I'm betting that there's no obligation to show 'em at all... and the fact that NAR provides no advice (or even admits that they exist) makes me wonder all the more...
Seems like the smart thing to do for a buyer is to go after pocket listings to reduce competition. Any buyers agent should suggest this, but because NAR represents both sides of the transaction they can't provide meaningful assistance.

FRANK LL0SA- Broker, Northern Virginia January 7, 2007 7:54 PM

What do you think of that NAR ad that they recently launched and have spent millions on. It goes something like "Now is the time to buy or sell a home." Um, how can you have a best time to buy while it is a good time to sell. I'm confused.
More details on that ad and a copy of is talked about on my blog at

Can you trust your Realtor? New NAR ad reviewed.
And then you can contribute to the Cheesiest Realtor Slogan Contest
Thanks again for your blog
FRANK LL0SA- Broker- Realtor, Northern Virginia

Blog.FranklyRealty.com

Tate Linden January 8, 2007 8:48 AM

I hadn't seen the advert you commented on, Frank... but I agree that it seems iffy that it could be the right time to both sell and buy. Sure, there *could* be something to incent both sides, but I certainly haven't seen it.
This actually underscores my point about the NAR having a conflict when they support both sides of the real estate transaction. They lose credibility because they can't truly represent the clients. They represent the transaction, and the only people to gain from the transaction itself are the lawyers, realty representatives, and finance types.
How many of you homebuyers or sellers out there think that helps you?