Comments on: Ummels Talk - You Decide

By: REALonomics

REALonomics — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:50:38 +0000

COMMENT FROM REALONOMICS: Our purposes for covering this case is purely to examine the emotional side of this issue and to extract from BOTH the real estate industry’s side and the consumer side any flags of change that might redefine the relationship between the parties. Although REALonomics does not believe there is a case, we don’t sit in possession of the facts, either. We have learned to never underestimate the power of the consumer in what we have repeatedly called “The Third Economic Wave – the Consumer-Centric Era” of our industry. We are receiving well groomed feedback on this issue from all of you; online and offline. Thanks! REALonomics

By: clyde ellingwood

clyde ellingwood — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 05:25:43 +0000

Greed is the reason buyers buy in a hurry without checking all the facts. Being afraid they will lose out and miss all the profit in a hot market and not be able to get the house for such a good price as they can today. The agents job is to provide them with current comparables at time of the offer. If that was not done, there may have been an oversight or for some reason the information was not readily available at time of the offer, but making an error or not having access to important information is not necessarily fraud. There would have to be proof of intent to defraud in order to support her claim. The fraud would definitely require specific proof in order for the court to rule in her favor.It sounds like she (or they) made an emotional decision and are trying to blame the agent. He did get their offer presented and accepted, so he must have been working in their behalf. The proof of fraud regarding an incorrect appraisal amount would also have to be proved. Value is what a willing buyer and a willing seller agree on and if the value was also confirmed by a licensed appraiser it would seem that that would deflate the credibility of their claim. In Southern California Real estate market it is NOT unusual to have a variation of hundreds of thousands of dollars in price in homes of close proximity, due to numerous factors. some of these would be ocean views, larger lot, privacy, square footage, condition, amenities, builder improvements and others. She seems arrogant and pampered and her husband is allowing her to make a fool of him as well, to the whole world. I’d be surprised to see them win the case based on the information presented.

By: Mike Kelly

Mike Kelly — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 18:49:51 +0000

I’m not without empahty for this woman. Her husband seemed a bit resigned to the lawsuit and not very passionate about pursuing his wife’s “cause”. They’ve spent $75,000 so far so maybe he has lawsuit fatigue! However, her premise needs some work. I could take you down rows of homes where the prices varied by MORE than that amount when the market was roaring right along. Every Realtor/licensee can tell you at the price point her home resides ($1,000,000) variances of the amount she dicusses is very common. In San Francisco and our area of Sonoma County we had legendary “bidding wars” where prices were driven sky high over the asking price. And it wasn’t so much WHAT features between two properites which drove the price bidding frenzy but that it was just ON the market!! Scarcity coupled with huge demand leads to these type of price variances.
However, the expert witness hired by the RE/MAX agent has a very lame excuse. His explanation that as a “sophisticated buyer” the Ummels didn’t do THEIR due diligence is not a viable defense. Ain’t no caveat emptor in the great state of California. As we all know the fiduciary relationship is one built upon Trust and owing our clients a high level of accountability. Should make for an interesting trial. I don’t think it makes the threshold of fraud as we are seeing some real estate cases shake-out. If he had purchased this home the day before and flipped it to them for the difference Mrs. Ummel is claiming THEN we’d have some issues. But a variaton of 10% in a hot market will not win the day.

By: Stephen O'Hara

Stephen O'Hara — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 18:49:15 +0000

Have these people checked out http://www.parentrelocationcouncil.org ? PRC’s existence is to help matters like this. In truth, I do NOT believe the agent had the INTENT to hurt these people - what I believe is that ALL agents need to realize that times have changed. It is no longer Buyer Beware. Our value as REALTORS NO LONGER lies in being the ‘gatekeepers’ to the MLS, our commissions will be earned by do that which the buyers USED to be expected to do!

By: steve lewis

steve lewis — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 17:33:28 +0000

that bitch is crazy