I'm at the office today. The same agent [on the updesk] (from my previous post ((agent writing offers on properties the agent had never seen))) tells me that he made a significant drive (40+ miles) to show a property ($25,000) and wrote an offer. He continues that the offer on the incoming FAX was another offer on the same property but for $50.00 MORE than his original offer. He says "I called my buyer and we raised the offer price by $100.00 and it's been submitted."

I immediately said, "You have no idea the ethics you have just trampled over"

NOW... I'm 2 years in the business and have a clue. I'd like input from those more experienced.

Thanks

So the concensus is that there's nothing grossly amiss?

Who is the listing agent?

OK... now I REALY feel like an idiot!!!

The listing agent is on our office.
(Hence the reason for the "other offer" fax on the machine.

thanks

That is a hazzard of having a shared fax machine as you cannot guarantee of privacy or confidentialty. I always had offers faxed to my eFax number so it would go directly to my e-mail to print out.

If the other agent also was the listing agent and a "sellers agent", his responsibility was to his seller to get the highest sales price possible. He should not have disclosed any offer amount to either buyer, but let them offer their best and final with the sellers authorization.

I would think reading another agent's fax would be an ethical violation.

Dan,
What specific section of the COE does this violate?

If you went snooping to find the contract then there is a problem. If on the other hand you pulled it off the fax and looked at the contract to determine whose box it should go in and notice the price do you then keep quiet or do you have an obligation to your client to tell them if they want the house they need to up the offer?

It is all a matter of context in how the agent learned of the other contract price.

The competing offer was left on the incoming fax while this agent's offer was submitted. So there's a possible "fairness" question.

The listing agent was not the same agent.

Since it was an in-house / intermediary I feel as though there is a higher stanard of care needed to assure proper ethics.

I've been in the same situation - though the temptation is strong I've always resisted. Submit all offers fairly and allow the "multiple offer scenario" to evolve.

Generally faxes have cover sheets that specify which agent gets the fax that do not have any more information. You would have to be snooping to go any further than that. To me it doesn't really matter what is in NAR's COE. Ethics and fair play mean that you should inform the listing agent that you inadvertedly saw the fax and keep all of your Broker's clients (dual agency) informed and treated fairly.

Dan,
Dual agency may not even apply depending on the state that this transpired in as in IL if both listing agent and buyers agent have the same broker it is not dual agency at all.

Wow! You get a cover sheet for every fax that arrives in your office? Your office must be special!

"To me it doesn't really matter what is in NAR's COE." That translates to you were unable to find a section that applies.

Your comment about Ethics and Fairplay is simply your opinion. Definitions of Ethics and fairply will vary which is the reason NAR has the COE. Just because something violates your own "Personal" Ethics does not make it a reality for everyone.

This all comes down to context and how the other offer was discovered.

Actually it means what it said. My ethics are not defined by NAR. I didn't bother to look. Right is right. If you ask the Broker in question what to do I would be suprised if he wouldn't want all parties to know that they were now involved in an auction rather than a sealed bid process. The agent is a sub-agent of the broker and the way the broker wants to do it is the way it must be done.

And my post includes a line that says that all of my posts are my opinion, as are yours.

Dan,
Being a sub-agent of your broker do you go running to him seeking guidance on all your activities? Or do you make decisions on your own?

I can see that you have your blinders on about this and cannot even differentiate between accidental discovery of information and snooping to aquire information.

Snooping is bad and unethical! Accidential discovery is only unethical if you do not use it to your clients advantage!

Paul,
About 20 years ago when I was a new agent and worked in the brokers office (rather than at my home office), I witnessed a new agent who was talking to someone on the phone about listing her house. An agent who sat near her overheard the conversation (including the address) and called the potential seller and told her that the new agent hadn't sold any houses in her neighborhood and he had sold 30 in the last 12 months. He went over and got the listing.

Was he acting ethically? (Without sticking his fingers in his ears he couldn't help hearing!)

I just don't buy that it was accidental. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: It is easy not to look at another agents fax if you actually respect the other person's privacy. I'm sorry but IN MY OPINION the agent who read the other agents fax and ran out and beat the offer was acting unethically. It was probably legal and may not have qualified for sanctions from NAR but he was a sleaze bag nonetheless.

And that's why I work from a home office!

The last 3 paragraphs of the Preamble of the code of ethics says it pretty clearly. Sounds like an inducement of profit caused this person to report on a private communication to a third party.

"The term REALTOR® has come to connote competency, fairness, and high integrity resulting from adherence to a lofty ideal of moral conduct in business relations. No inducement of profit and no instruction from clients ever can justify departure from this ideal.

In the interpretation of this obligation, REALTORS® can take no safer guide than that which has been handed down through the centuries, embodied in the Golden Rule, “Whatsoever ye would that others should do to you, do ye even so to them.”

Accepting this standard as their own, REALTORS® pledge to observe its spirit in all of their activities whether conducted personally, through associates or others, or via technological means, and to conduct their business in accordance with the tenets set forth below. (Amended 1/07) "