Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mepci who wrote (15250)	8/17/2002 3:50:37 PM
From: TimbaBear	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78516

mepci Real Estate industry did a thorough overhaul on how fiduciary responsibilities need to be handled. I have had a real estate license for many years(now inactive) and a mortgage broker's license (still active). The impact of the overhauls have been eroded. The intent was honest disclosure, the reality is that the real estate agent doesn't accept responsibility for being on either side of the fence, instead they often represent neither the buyer nor the seller. The result has been poorer service, in general, to both buyers and sellers. Another result has been higher incidence of owners selling directly and a general lowering of the commissions being commanded by realtors. Is the industry today any more or less honest than when the regulations were put in place? I don't think so. Is the end result quite what the reformers envisioned? I suspect it is somewhat different. Some overhauls were in the mortgage area. RESPA was an act intended to separate services like insurance, title, appraisal, financing, etc. so that areas of potential conflict of interest could be eliminated. RESPA has no teeth. Great Act, but very little enforcement action. The offshoot? Controlled business arrangements have mortgage companies within real estate offices paying the brokers to direct business to them (in a legally acceptable manner, of course)...that is...usually, referral fees for title work, etc., etc. Has anything gotten more "arms length" throughout this process? Doesn't appear that way to me. It is not fair to the CEOs to force them into mixing fiduciary responsibilities. You are asking too much of these people. And they are taking the easiest way out. I'm sorry, but if one chooses to accept a position of responsibility in a publicly traded corporation, then it is not too much to expect them to act in an honest, upright, fiduciarily responsible manner as part of their job title. If it is, no amount regulatory change or BOD set-up will help. I think we both want to see changes effected that will encourage appropriate behavior and accurate reporting of results. You are approaching the changes from a corporate structure standpoint and I from accounting regulation and enforcement standpoint. I hope that significant, effective changes will be made to both areas. I just don't want to kill the patient with the cure. Timba