 _BBCODE_WROTE: |
|
A Brampton real-estate broker has lost his real-estate licence after misleading four Woodstock-area landowners. On Nov. 7, The Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) ruled Gordon Simpson, 76, used unethical practices by obtaining separate purchasing agreements for the same property from two different developers during 2007 and 2008. The Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO), which regulates the trading of real estate in Ontario, issued a proposal to the LAT to revoke Simpson's licence as well as his brokerage, Diversified Development Realty. RECO cited Section 10 of the Real Estate and Business Brokers Act that states "… (There is) reasonable grounds for belief that the applicant will not carry on business in accordance with law and with honesty and integrity." Simpson had appealed the proposal. The tribunal was told that Simpson was representing both the buyers and sellers in relation to four large tracts of farmland near Woodstock. After facilitating an agreement of sale between the property owners and a developer, various clients were misled into entering into a deal with a new developer. As a result, the seller clients ended up in litigation for selling their properties to two separate developers. RECO's legal counsel, Robert Maxwell, also provided evidence Simpson did not co-operate during the investigation. Simpson also attempted to obtain commissions improperly by bypassing his brokerage at the time. In her decision, LAT vice-chair Jane Weary said Simpson had proven himself ungovernable and his clients had suffered horrendous experiences. "The uncontested evidence presented overwhelmingly demonstrates ongoing and repeated failures of the applicants (Simpson and Diversified Development Realty) to abide by the regulatory requirements," LAT ruled. |
现在关心的是后续法律纠纷如何解决,两个合同的有效性如何界定,好像暂时还没有判决结果。大家来讨论看?
但一点是肯定的,就像三木兄一直建议的,谨慎的客户无论作为买方还是卖方,都要尽量避免在同一宗地产交易中发生买卖双方共用一名地产经纪的情况发生,利益冲突的风险要高出许多。
@闪腰侠
@三木
@飞鱼
@garygao
@union
@许万克
@一步一脚印
@深呼吸
沙发。。。
Comment by 花落花开 — 2011-11-16 23:35:33 - 引用
同关心。
顺便。。。板凳。。。
Comment by Coconut — 2011-11-16 23:37:15 - 引用
吃果果的歧视啊
Comment by 焱焱猫猫 — 2011-11-16 23:39:20 - 引用
感谢不住的问题:
想到哪先说到哪...
作为买卖双方的经纪人理论上可行,实际市场上也有操作,但风险太大,不论是对经纪还是双方客户...记得培训的时候,几个师傅都不只一次的郑重提醒,尽量避免!!!这里还有一个误区,也是和朋友交流的时候了解到的,很多人认为--比方说买卖方,认为直接找了对方经纪自己就可以省下费用。
另外,有个师傅还建议,如果经纪自己买卖房,也最好找自己的PARTNER来操作。可很多经纪也不这样做,但是也都会在REMARK上面披露出来。
这行业有自身的独特性,监管机构和惩罚措施,一旦出了问题,轻则罚款,吊销执照,重则有官司,牢狱。
所以,做好自己,丰富经验,向客户提供 披露相关的一切信息...
同行们,共勉吧...
Comment by 深呼吸 — 2011-11-16 23:39:39 - 引用
抱歉,抱歉
8过谁叫侬满腔热情都投猪鸭上去了
Comment by 不住在这 — 2011-11-16 23:44:03 - 引用
抱歉,抱歉
8过谁叫侬满腔热情都投猪鸭上去了
两不误啊两不误
Comment by 焱焱猫猫 — 2011-11-16 23:48:11 - 引用
抱歉,抱歉
8过谁叫侬满腔热情都投猪鸭上去了
两不误啊两不误
那侬咋看这事
Comment by 不住在这 — 2011-11-16 23:50:11 - 引用
抱歉,抱歉
8过谁叫侬满腔热情都投猪鸭上去了
两不误啊两不误
那侬咋看这事
大半夜的俺的思维已经处于严重迟缓状态
Comment by 焱焱猫猫 — 2011-11-16 23:52:55 - 引用
这是知法犯法, 不仅是职业道德问题,估计麻烦大了.
做人要厚道.....
Comment by Steven YU — 2011-11-17 00:15:25 - 引用
想到哪先说到哪...
作为买卖双方的经纪人理论上可行,实际市场上也有操作,但风险太大,不论是对经纪还是双方客户...记得培训的时候,几个师傅都不只一次的郑重提醒,尽量避免!!!这里还有一个误区,也是和朋友交流的时候了解到的,很多人认为--比方说买卖方,认为直接找了对方经纪自己就可以省下费用。
另外,有个师傅还建议,如果经纪自己买卖房,也最好找自己的PARTNER来操作。可很多经纪也不这样做,但是也都会在REMARK上面披露出来。
这行业有自身的独特性,监管机构和惩罚措施,一旦出了问题,轻则罚款,吊销执照,重则有官司,牢狱。
所以,做好自己,丰富经验,向客户提供 披露相关的一切信息...
同行们,共勉吧...
每家地产公司的policy也不一样,经常看见同行卖自住屋的,但我现在的公司明确说不支持这样,所以我都是让同一office的同事代为挂牌,这样的确能规避不少风险,对普通买家来说也相对公平很多,信息更透明。
Comment by 不住在这 — 2011-11-17 00:21:43 - 引用