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: Travis_Bickle who wrote (78032)	5/22/2007 4:54:43 PM
From: Tradelite	Respond to of 306849

OK. Keep believing that and be happy in your beliefs. Fiduciary responsibilies as defined by the (Virginia) people who have the power to put real estate licensees out of business (and contained in one of my earlier posts): fiduciary obligations that agents have to their clients in a transaction: confidentiality, loyalty, obedience, full disclosure, diligence, duty to account for all money, including safe handling of escrow deposits. So who is the buyer or seller going to sue when he's not treated right under the system you describe?

To: Travis_Bickle who wrote (78032)	5/22/2007 8:27:46 PM
From: Think4Yourself	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Seminole, I agree with your assessment of fiduciary duty. It matches what I learned in school years ago. That being said if you do a web search on "Realtor" and "Fiduciary Duty" you will find scores of hits where the courts said the Realtor DID have a fiduciary duty. It appears precedent has been set that contradicts what would normally happen. Here is one of many cases the search returned. It's short and very readable. metnews.com It also appears the definition of fiduciary duty has been expanded since I went to law school (never finished): en.wikipedia.org Interestingly, they say precedent has been set where stockbrokers have a fiduciary duty to their clients.