from a US broker blog…….

they like us! they really like us!

I think we all agree that the information (DOM) isn’t controlled. Its easily accessible. Chooch’s complaint seems to be that it is that it isn’t published on Realtorlink, not that it isn’t accessible. There is no “dovetailing” of legal interpretations to restrict access to information to which access isn’t restricted. Sorry if that sounds condescending, but how many times can we re-visit that particular point?

cc:

The Board profits from providing service and info to both sellers and buyers. I’m not protecting an amoral and profit seeking entity when I point that out. I’m just pointing out that your appraisal of what is in the Board’s profit making interest is flawed. I think you’re stretching to argue that I’m protesting too much. Chooch is making (and you’re accepting) a weak argument based on some flawed assumptions.

Chooch:

In regards to who pays the commission, you’re simply re-stating your original position. It is a vaild interpretation of sub-agency, but not agency. Point blank question for you: do you understand the difference that I’m alluding to between sub-agency and agency? (You’re making an argument here that was settled 10 years ago).

Your opinion on the difference between personal information personal information that is subject to privacy legislation and confidential information that is the subject of agreements and business policy is great, but its irrelevant. You (like me) aren’t the one who decides these issues. ThePrivacy Comissioner does. When you say “Sale price is confidential information until it is public” your’re correct, but when you say it becomes public “[o]nce the Form A Transfer is filed (not even registered) in the LTO” and imply that the Board can therefore publish it you go too far. The Board, in consultation with the Privacy Commissioner, has passed a Rule of Cooperation that prevents members from disclosing the information before a public authority has disclose it, unless the member has a valid busines reason (and the Board’s example is a CMA); if you know a Realtor who is disclosing this information early, and if you suspect that the Realtor does not have a valid business case, you’ve possibly discovered a situation where a Realtor is breaching Board rules and privacy guidelines. You haven’t proven that the rules and privacy guidelines don’t exist. (You’re making the argument that speed limits don’t exist because you’ve seen David Richardson speeding).

In terms of lawyers drafting contracts that conflict with legislation, you’re not making a point. You’re arguing that a good lawyer won’t draft a contract that conflicts with legislation. I agree that a good lawyer won’t purposely draft a contractual term that conflicts with legislation, but I will say that a lawyer can be sufficiently good and various acts of legislation sufficiently complex and sufficiently changing that a good lawyer can draft a contractual term that, in the fullness of time, ends up being in conflict with legislation. Do you disagree with that?

I’ll go further: a lawyer can draft a contractual term that permits one party to do something that may or may not be prohibited by legislation. That’s because enforcement of legislation isn’t always clear and happens after the fact. Do you disagree with that?

Whether DOM is subject to privacy legislation or not is a red herring. I simply said that I think the reason it doesn’t appear Realtorlink is that I assume that it is privacy protected. I made that assumption because DOM does turn up in reports that contain other information that I know is privacy protected. I assumed (and made full disclosure that its an assumption), that DOM was information of the same nature as sales price. I may be wrong about DOM’s nature as far as privacy goes, but all I was doing, from the start, was trying to explain why the info doesn’t apear on Realtorlink. We both agree that the information is accessible to the public from other places, and that the Board has a way for members to share the info with the public provided the member follows some simple rules. Whether my assumption about why the info doesn’t appear on Realtorlink is correct or not isn’t the point. The info is accessible.

You’ve argued that Realtors want to control DOM info because its very valuable to buyers, and damaging to sellers (or potentially so). Let’s for a moment, agree that the value of the information is high as you say. You’re ignoring a couple issues. One, the information is accessible. Its not restricted. Second, for every listing agent there is a buyer agent. The buyer agent is Board member in equal standing to the listing agent. The DOM info is important to the buyer agent and the buyer. Board rules and agency law require that the buyer agent provide the info to the buyer. In other words, the info isn’t restricted, and its not in the Board’s interest to restrict it.

Let’s see if we have any agreement:

-is the information really restricted?

(every other disagreement we have depends on that, no?)

Questions:
-do you know the difference between agency and sub-agency?
-are you aware that public information (such as property owners names) that are accessible in person from tax rolls are restricted online? I can’t for example, do a tax search to see who the owner of a particular property is. Its public information, but its privacy protected.

http://vannumbers.wordpress.com/

where the action is!

Your welcome.

I also heard if you have a dealer who doesn’t allow a Canadian to purchase a new car in the U.S. or a dealer who doesn’t honour warranties to use an autobroker to get around this. You would have to speak to an autobroker for more details on how this all works.

Canadian dollar follows 99.96
(we almost got to 1.01 yesterday)

http://tinyurl.com/2enj7x

August “is still absolutely awful, confirming that the existing homes market is now in freefall,” says High Frequency Economics.
Its view is that there is no sign yet that the bottom of the housing market is near. “With price declines accelerating, real mortgage rates are very high and rising further. The downside from here is still substantial.”

no bottom in sight….. unspin that!