Slashdot Mirror

Cove Story for Realtor Magazine, 2007

http://realtormag.realtor.org/...

Mentioning that fact will probably reduce its value, however if they never find out then there's no harm at all, and even if they do, there's still no harm, other than maybe it bothers the buyer's religious view, but nonetheless all 50 states in the US have laws preventing civil suits against people who don't mention this (or other immaterial facts, like whether a previous resident had AIDS.)

Oh my, you must NOT have read the National Association of Realtor's Code of Ethics.

REALTORS® shall avoid exaggeration, misrepresentation, or concealment of pertinent facts relating to the property or the transaction. REALTORS® shall not,
however, be obligated to discover latent defects in the property, to advise on matters outside the scope of their real estate license, or to disclose facts which are confidential under the scope of agency or non-agency relationships as defined by state law.

But Disclosures are a fact of law, and while there are limits, your representation of the facts seem to be in error. There may be states that do not require a disclosure, but California, South Dakota, and Alaska do have some requirements.

So you're off by 3, if not more. And the code of ethics generally frowns on non-disclosure, for a reason.

There may be states that legally allow you to keep such information from potential buyers, but that doesn't make it right. It just means that the law is at risk of subversion.

Personally I dislike the tendency to walk around disclosures and push a caveat emptor approach, especially when it comes to hazards like lead paint and asbestos.

It's craven and greedy.

removing state governments would be the WORST thing in the world to happen to america.

Hyperbole.

I dont want some paper pushers in washington telling me how to live my life. I want the people I live with and me agreeing on how to live our lives.

Why do you make the distinction between "paper pushers" in washing or in your own states capital? Perhaps you are under the illusion that they are more interested in your personal needs and desires - only naïveté will lead down that path. California contains 38 million people. How responsive do you think the California state government is and/or can be to the individual needs of their residents? I would prefer nobody tell me how to live my life, but that's not the way the world works.

When the US was founded, the population is estimated to have been 2.5 million people total. This is less than the current population of Chicago. We are now over 300 million. There is no longer any personal representation anywhere, except perhaps in small municipal or county government situations.

Thats what this country was founded on. Im sorry but if you REALLY feel this way, you are unamerican, and not unamerican in the way politicians use it but unamerican as in you dont believe in the ideals what what make america great

I do not believe in separatism, xenophobia, nepotism, bureaucracy or corruption. If you REALLY feel that these are the ideals that make America great, I'd prefer that you move somewhere else, and leave America to myself and others who love it.

It started last summer, when patent trolls started messing with one of the biggest political donors of all time - the National Association of Realtors.

If you take a look at Patrick Leahy's donors, you can see real estate is down the list.

Summary - this issue got before Congress only when the NAR was bitten by it. I don't the issue is dead, not by a long shot. The NAR has deep connections in government and unless they somehow get the issue to go away for them personally, anti-patent troll legislation is likely to come back. Perhaps more quietly next time.

1) One of the big drivers behind patent reform was the National Association of Realtors. The reason why is in the link.

2) They are the 5th largest all time donor to federal politicians. They pay both political parties nearly equally.

3) They are the part of the Finance-Insurance-Real Estate (FIRE) sector, which as a group, "is far and away the largest source of campaign contributions to federal candidates and parties" per the link.

Hence the overwhelming numbers. I'd be curious to see what other goodies are buried in that bill.

They went after the National Association of Realtors. The fifth largest all-time donor to federal politicians since 1989.

When big political donors get upset, politicians will act.

Can't speak to the wine thing, does sound bogus, but the MLS in each city is essentially OWNED by the realtors, it is a private database. Hell the name "realtor" is a trademark of NAR - national association of realtors.

I do think we should have some sort of open MLS, I bet craigslist could make a dent there if they just beefed up the sophistication of their real-estate listings.

Where do you live? I live in Hawaii, and the cost of living here is simply atrocious.

Currently going to college and, because I prefer *not* spending all my money on housing, I live with my parents. Yes, yes, slacker, but I save a significant amount of my paycheck for not having to pay housing and can give a lot of it to my parents for their mortgage. Their home is modestly sized, and still costed about 400? 500? thousand or so. Still being paid off!

According to Yahoo Real Estate, the home details are as follows.

Residence: Single Family | Beds: 4 | Bath: 2.0 | Square Feet: 1,427
Lot Size: 6,835 | Year Built: 1993

Also, a pdf that shows average home prices per state.

Honolulu Hawaii 2010 = 620k for a single family.

US average 2010 = 177k.

Believe you me, if we lived anywhere *but* Hawaii, I'm sure your 48k per year would be comfortable, but it's not anywhere near that here.

I think you are confusing articles. Buying a house in San Francisco requires an incoming of over $160K (Or some other insane amount of money). This issue is a State-wide issues.

And remember-- San Francisco has many, many multi-millionaires. There are also many poor people, and 60% of the residents rent.

Houses here cost an average of $350,000
Off topic, and troll-feeding, I know, but this guy is way out of order.

According to this, U.S. house prices average less than $200,000.

The thing is that Lloyds is actually a marketplace of "syndicates", not exactly a monolithic institution (at least, this is how he explained it to me).

Here in Texas, Farmers Insurance recently cancelled thousands of homeowners insurance insurance policies in the wake of unfavorable court decisions, a spate of bad weather, and (unofficially) the bath they took in the stock market. We were among those who ended up with a "surplus line" Lloyd's policy that's not subject to state regulation.

Anyway... on my insurance documents, I recall that there was a page that listed the syndicates that were the actual underwriters for our house. There were more than a dozen, with varying percentages (none over 15%, IIRC). Most looked to be individuals, I think, but some of the names looked like companies or partnerships.

It was cool, in a way, to think that some dude in London had a personal stake in keeping my home from burning down.

Side note: I'd have probably kept some sort of real insurance if my agent had followed through. His father was great, but when Dad retired, things went into the crapper. If you're in Dallas, I'd avoid this agency -- but YMMV, of course. I've moved to a new house, and a new Farmers agent.