She is not uncomfortable with any comfy relationship the broker may have with any AMC; rather, she's concerned about the disposal of personal property which has a value and for which there are laws regarding the disposal of personal property. The broker caused doubt by saying he'd take it off her hands. What's not to understand that the broker violated the law? For the sake of argument, let's say the property (boat) went directly to a charity, that under the law is illegal in California!

my point is that the broker's actions are really not her concern, if her employer directs her to act in a certain manner. she only needs to be concerned that her company's actions are legal.

definitely, if she is concerned, she should report the incident to her employer, but the employer makes the decisions. if she (believes) a crime has been committed, she has the right to contact law enforcement.

neither you nor I nor Linda can determine that the broker violated the law, which you appear to be stating as fact. only a court of law can make that determination.

whether the broker has put his license in jeopardy, created a conflict of interest, or engaged in unethical conduct, is largely irrelevant to a third-party contractor.

no offense to Linda, but she appears to be attempting to "manage" the entire situation with the bank, AM and broker, while speculating about legal issues, which is completely beyond the scope of her authority as a contractor.

no legal advice intended

Linda is the owner of her company. The broker supplied her with instructions from the bank, written instructions. Those instructions did not say that the broker was to take the boat; from what can be gleened from reading her posts, she was to take possession and store it. The broker countermanded those instructions.

The broker hired her (by accepting her bid to perform the work) and her company, the bank supplied written instructions based on her bid.

If the owner wanted his boat back pursuant to proper procedures, who is to say that the broker wouldn't say that it was trashed out by Linda and her company. That creates a situation for Linda that was created by the broker misappropriating the boat.

Go back and read her posts. Did I mention that she is the owner of her own company? By the way, when a broker takes personal charge of personal property without following the law, that's illegal. You seem to think that only a court can determine if something is illegal. No...kind of like running a red light. I don't need to be a judge or sit in a court to know that that is illegal. Will you get caught? Maybe, maybe not. It doesn't matter if you're caught or not, it's still not legal.

The way I read this, linda bid the job through the Broker, the AM approved her low bid, and she received authorization to proceed per the bid specifications. If this were one of my properties, the T/O bid would have a line item "tow and store 1 boat and trailer". That's the bid, those are her written instructions and if that boat comes up missing there's no doubt in my mind this broker will throw her under the bus. If the broker wants the boat let him countermand the written instructions (again in writing) and tow and store the boat himself. Linda needs to protect herself. If the Broker's instructions cause injury to Linda; well that's a question for counsel to advise on. I'd suggest you document to the AM the liability associated with improper disposition of the boat, the agents coersion and let the chips fall where they may.
Linda: Regarding my risk if the bank doesn't reimburse. That's MY problem, not my contractor's problem. They're small business people and as such can't afford to take the loss. It's the risk agents take when they enter this lovely REO arena. When I call these folks in the wee hours to handle an emergency they jump right on it. One thing I learned in the Army; Loyalty up, loyalty down. I need these contractors every bit as much as they need me. The quality of their work reflects on me more than it reflects on them.

Shana ~ no offense taken.

I'm thinking you may not have read all of my posts or may not have understood what you read. If you go back and read in detail, you'll understand this topic is about a broker interfering with a trashout and that he's attempting to remove personal property for his own gain.

I don't manage anyone but my own crew. I own my own business and had specific instructions to do a job.

There is a procedure to follow regarding removal of property, personal or otherwise. The broker overstepped his bounds on my job. I'm now dealing with the bank regarding this property.

By creating this topic, my intent was to get feedback from others who hold the same position as, or work with, brokers who deal with REO properties and see what their take is on this situation.

Thanks for your input, Shana. Even those who don't understand the situation can bring up new things to think about and that's what my request for opinions is all about.

Linda

Do not rock the boat.

Next time, look the other way.

Corporations do not like fighting and controversy; it is bad for business.

Corporations like things to proceed in a smooth and timely manner.

Why didn’t the management broker cherry pick through the trash before calling you for an estimate?

Why didn’t the management broker just tell you to leave the boat in place with no other explanation?

I would warn the broker that he needs to go through the DMV to remove a titled item like a boat or car.

I would warn the broker that he must abide by the proper personal property eviction procedures.

If the broker wants to risk all this trouble over a $350 item that is his problem.

This broker needs to decide if he is running a real estate sales office or a thrift store.

This broker should realize his time is better spent selling houses than picking through trash.

I would tell the broker not to cherry pick through the junk after you have given an estimate as it cuts into your expected profit.

I know one trash-out company that separates all metal from the junk including door hinges to maximize their income.

If the boat is missing, change your final invoice to indicate that you did not remove it so that you are not blamed for an improper removal.

I am sorry, but I think it is our duty - as ethical professionals and citizens - to be concerned about illegal actions on anyone's part. It starts with a boat and the next thing you know this guy is helping himself to anything and everything in his wake.

Were it me, I wouldn't have stopped when I reported it to the bank; the next call would have been to the local Board of Realtors to file a complaint there.

Thank you, Linda, for doing your part to keep Realtors honest and ethical. That is what should be expected of us, and dirty Realtors just negate everything NAR is doing to try to clean up the perception the public has of us.

BPO Drone ~ I can't tell whether you're serious about the first two lines you wrote or whether you're injecting a little humor into the situation.

You brought up a good point, though, regarding removing the boat before I did the estimate. If it had never been there, I would never have bid its removal and there would be no issue to discuss now.

Thanks!

Linda

It was a bad attempt at a pun.

There is a lot of crookedness in the world, but we can only control our own actions.

The bank does not want to get bogged down moderating what they will consider a fight over scraps between you and the broker.

The bank wants the house cleaned out fast and cheap so it can be sold in a timely matter at the best price possible.

Getting the news media involved will only make a mountain out of a mole hill as the media already has a built-in bias against the big bad banks kicking out innocent homeowners who were tricked into buying more than they could afford.

I am not in the trash-out business, but I realize that some items can be recycled or donated for a tax deduction, and that is all figured out in your estimate.

The broker has no right meddling in your end of the business.

I will bet there is something wrong with the boat, otherwise the previous occupant would have sold it on Craigslist.

BPO Drone. Thanks. I must not be awake enough, otherwise I would have understood the pun.

I agree there's no time in this industry for fighting. And I don't want to waste my time [or the bank's] on something inconsequential. This situation, however, is not inconsequential since it concerns [IMO] questionable ethics by a broker.

If he's in the wrong but allowed to do as he pleases, what effect would that have on other brokers who might be contemplating the same thing? Would it give a big thumbs up to them to do as they please, too?

Every segment of this business from the banks to the preservation vendors, and everyone in-between, have a particular job to do. There are guidelines in place for all of us that are there to keep the industry from becoming more chaotic than it is.

I stay within my guidelines and have certain rules in place for my business that keep me from exposing myself to unnecessary liability and placing my company at risk for lawsuits.

The news media was involved before this happened, not after. NBC was doing a story on the preservation process. It was supposed to be a normal, routine trashout. How it ended up felt more like a 3-Ring Circus.

It will be interesting to see how it all turns out. I'm not a troublemaker, by any stretch. All I want to do is the job I agreed to do....... without interference and without the exposure to liability.

Linda

I was driving down the road the other day and a police officer passed me going 80 miles an hour. I got off at the next exit to get some gas and coffee and the same officer was there sitting drinking coffee. Was the police behavior unethical/illegal? Probably. Am I going on tv to make an issue about it? No. If I was a CA broker and saw how you dealt with this whole issue I would never let you near a property I had management of again cause you turned a minor business dispute into public laundry. If this broker is doing shady stuff he will be caught eventually but you sullied your own professional rep by making public accusations instead of directing the complaint thru the proper channels.

Having a News crew present was probably the worst thing for this particular situation - it is sickening how they can create so much out of nothing to make it 'News Worthy'.

As much as I feel it was probably wrong for the broker to do what was stated - as step backwards would have been in order and hard to do with the News there.

Getting all the facts through the principles involved and the subsequent exchange of information and intel, and let that take it's course.

Next you'll be seeing a News Worthy story about a preservation company ripping off personal belongings before they were inventoried and stored for lawful and proper distribution, all according to what some agent reports.

The Old Saying is: 'Live by the Sword, Die by the Sword.'

Linda, I really think you're putting yourself in the shoes of the client and/or titleholder of the property.

I understand this type of situation very well, from a legal point of view, including contract law, abandonment/eviction of personal property, etc. I've been directly involved in these types of disputes as a principal. I might add that the BROKER is charged with the management of the REO property, as long as he has a valid listing with the bank. as such the broker has responsibility and liability for EVERYTHING that happens at the property. as a PP vendor, you are not the property manager. If the broker has received some type of ad-hoc authorization to change the terms of the original agreement and act accordingly, you are not in a position to dispute that authority, and the client will not appreciate it. but you seem to have a need to do that. if someone has in fact overstepped their boundaries or duties, that will have to be sorted out later. this is clearly a battle for control (and the disposition of personal property), and this is precisely why we have courts to resolve such disputes.

hypothetically, if the broker takes control of the property, he may in fact be following the correct procedures for abandonment, pursuant to a new authorization by his client. In many states the property owner or designated property manager can remove personal property and place it in storage in order to secure it.

ultimately, the broker may or may not have exceeded his authority in this situation. so what, he doesn't answer to you. you get instructions from your client, do your job and document your actions. end of story.

no legal advice intended

She's better off without your business. This is NOT a minor business dispute. How a broker deals with a personal property isn't governed by what side of the bed they get out of that morning. It is governed by the various state laws. This arose in California. Our laws say that personal property is inventoried and stored if there is a value of over $300 for x amount of days, at the owner's expense (the former homeowner). It does not say well we'll donate these belongings to charity before we hold them for redemption. It does not say that we can make any decision as to the disposition of belongs other than what is legally required.

Finally, Linda didn't invite the media to the party, the broker did. The broker probably gambled (and lost) on the fact that the media would be there and Linda wouldn't rock the boat. Well, guess what? Linda didn't rock the boat, she's protected herself against an unscrupulous person. Can you see how this would have played on TV? News crew is there, former owner recognizes his former house and his stuff and sees his boat. He wants his boat back which is he is legally entitled to. He calls the broker to get it back by paying the storage fees and the broker says "Oh, that was donated to charity by Linda.". Or the broker says "Oh, that boat was sent to the junk yard." Do you think the broker will accept any responsibility for that boat? I don't.

In your analogy regarding the police car, the speeding and the doughnut, the fly in your ointment is that we don't know that the officer eating the doughnut is the same one who was speeding. In this case we do know (if we are in California) that the broker is wrong, legally wrong. They chose to fight on tv, not Linda. The dirty laundry isn't Linda's, it's the brokers.

I still think Linda did the right thing, like I said before, not only are Realtors but also outside vendors act as the eyes and ears of the bank, its their way of checks and balances. I don't think if the bank would just say to the Broker, sure take the boat and don't worry about the consequences because we own the property now, and with the law, forget about it, everyone will overlook it and you can have the boat. Good job Linda!