In Connecticut, if a real estate agent is selling their own property (not on MLS), do they have to notify the potential purchaser that they are a licensed real estate agent? If it not a legal requirement, is it ethically "required"?
The thought is that if two private individuals are discussing a non-agency linked, non-MLS sale and the seller is a licensed real estate agent, should that be disclosed.
In Connecticut, if a real estate agent is selling their own property (not on MLS), do they have to notify the potential purchaser that they are a licensed real estate agent? If it not a legal requirement, is it ethically "required"?
The thought is that if two private individuals are discussing a non-agency linked, non-MLS sale and the seller is a licensed real estate agent, should that be disclosed.
Please and thank you.
Trace
Under the code of ethics of the National Association of Realtors, agents who self-list have a duty to disclose their ownership in the property. Not all agents are Realtors. Some choose not to be. So, mileage will very.
"Article 4 ... <snip> ... In selling property they own, or in which they have any interest, Realtors® shall reveal their ownership or interest in writing to the purchaser or the purchaser’s representative."
The exact scenario is that a real estate agent owned a piece of property that he was selling. The purchaser dealt with the real estate agent without knowing that the seller was a real estate agent.
Arguably, the real estate agent enjoyed an advantage due to his education, license, and experience. The purchaser may have behaved differently had the purchaser know the seller was a real estate agent. The purchaser may have secured representation for himself upon learning that the seller was a licensed real estate agent.... or perhaps looked more carefully at the seller's representations.
The Code of Ethics citation above seems to deal with selling as a known agent and revealing an ownership interest. The case at hand seems to be a bit off as the seller is known to have an ownership interest but not known to be a real estate agent.
Again, thank you for the reference. I'll continue to look through it but I can't seem to find the exact situation anywhere.
The disclosure isn't about whether the person is a professional or not. It's about the relationship. In this case, it was already known that the person was the seller. Since the agent didn't disclose, there is no suggestion that the agent was representing the buyer.
The disclosure is an issue when an agent is representing someone and convinces them to take a lower price while not disclosing they represent the seller in some way. That wouldn't fit in this case.
An example from an actual case is an agent representing a buyer and convinces them that they are getting a good deal on a property without disclosing that they have a relationship with the seller.
As a seller going FSBO, as long as they aren't making misrepresentations about the property, nothing changes.
Yes sir, I think I see that in the Code also. The FSBO scenario where the Seller happens to be a licensed agent is not, seemingly, relevant. I guess if an FSBO seller was an attorney, there would be no compunction for the FSBO seller/attorney to reveal that.
Just seemed like there was an 'uneven playing field' with the agent having more knowledge (perhaps) of the market and the process than the buyer.
Thanks for hanging with the question. There doesn't seem to be any real, demonstrable foul here so ... onward and upward!