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 : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bobby is sleepless in seattle who wrote (21258)	6/3/2004 3:15:19 PM
From: X Y Zebra	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

hold on to those stripes of yours,,,not good to be left standing bare waving a dumb flag... ya sure... here is the homework I did for you... (as I usually do for the Real Trolls©) -instead of your dumb and dumber style post... ________________________________________ Re: Liabiity of a licensee (versus a principal acting for his own account, WHO IS NOT Licensed as a RE broker (or agent for a broker) For starters.... Washington Law. (each state may be different) lakeunion.com SECTION 9 VICARIOUS LIABILITY. (1) A principal is not liable for an act, error, or omission by an agent or subagent of the principal arising out of an agency relationship: (a) Unless the principal participated in or authorized the act, error, or omission; or (b) Except to the extent that: (i) the principal benefited from the act, error, or omission; and (ii) the court determines that it is highly probable that the claimant would be unable to enforce a judgment against the agent or subagent. (2) A licensee is not liable for an act, error, or omission of a subagent under this chapter, unless the licensee participated in or authorized the act, error or omission. This subsection does not limit the liability of a real estate broker for an act, error, or omission by an associate real estate broker or real estate salesperson licensed to that broker. in 1.b.ii if principal IS licensed, then regardless if an agent would be involved or regardless if probable or not that claimant could recover from such agent, then since principal IS licensed, claimant may recover directly from principal (i.e. 'would be investor with a license') in (2) liability is expanded to the knowledge of others... or indeed to that of general industry standard "should have known" knowledge base... Then.... SECTION 10 IMPUTED KNOWLEDGE AND NOTICE. lakeunion.com 18.86.100. Imputed Knowledge and Notice. (1)Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, a principal does not have knowledge or notice of any facts known by an agent or sub-agent of the principal that are not actually known by the principal. (2)Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, a licensee does not have knowledge or notice of any facts known by a sub-agent that are not actually known by the licensee. This subsection does not limit the knowledge imputed to a real estate broker of any facts known by an associate real estate broker or real estate salesperson licensed to such broker. then.... in (2) the would be investor with a license could be made liable for knowledge of his associates or that of the general industry that the licensee "SHOULD HAVE KNOWN" just a difference.... (not necessarily small) that's just for starters... who knows what other crap a sharp and creative attorney can dream of... lol... so, moral of the story... go ahead sleepless-moron, get your RE license and become a [would be] investor in RE I'll wave you bye bye as they take you to the cleaners for being dumb... -roflol stupid is as stupid does....