Prince George's County Association of REALTORS®

REALTOR^® A, on his way to his office, noticed the deteriorated condition of a "For Sale" sign posted on an unimproved site bearing the name of REALTOR^® B. He remembered that REALTOR^® B's "For Sale" sign had been on that site for a considerable period of time. REALTOR^® A decided to call REALTOR^® B to determine the status of the property. In response to several questions, one of which was, "Do you have an exclusive listing on that property?" REALTOR^® B replied that he was not obligated to disclose the nature, status, or the type of listing. After considerable conversation, REALTOR^® A stated his intention to contact the property owners for this information, citing Standard of Practice 16-4 as the basis for his action. REALTOR^® B warned REALTOR^® A not to "cross his sign" and refused to discuss the matter further. A few days later, REALTOR^® B had a telephone conversation with the property owners and learned of their decision to list their property with REALTOR^® A when their current listing with REALTOR^® B expired the following week. REALTOR^® B filed a complaint against REALTOR^® A with the Board, stating that REALTOR^® A's actions in contacting his client had been inconsistent with REALTOR^® B's agency.

The Grievance Committee reviewed the complaint and the response to the complaint filed by REALTOR^® B. The case was referred to the Secretary to schedule a hearing by a Hearing Panel of the Board's Professional Standards Committee.

During the hearing, REALTOR^® B repeated his complaint and his conversation with REALTOR^® A. He also advised the Hearing Panel of his telephone conversation with the property owners and of their decision, as a result of REALTOR^® A's direct contact, not to relist the property with him, REALTOR^® B. "Not only did REALTOR^® A fail to respect my agency with the property owners by contacting them directly," said REALTOR^® B, "but he violated Article 16 by taking the opportunity to relist the property away from me!"

REALTOR^® A defended his actions by stating that he had requested information on the nature and status of the listing from REALTOR^® B, as required by Article 16, and that REALTOR^® B had refused to divulge the information; and that he had contacted the property owners only after this refusal, citing as his authority the principle established in Standard of Practice 16-4. "The sellers were happy to discuss listing their property with me, once I described the services my firm could offer," said REALTOR^® A. "They said they hadn't had an interested customer since the first week of their listing with REALTOR^® B."

After giving careful consideration to all of the evidence and testimony, the Hearing Panel concluded that REALTOR^® A's actions had not been inconsistent with the agency of REALTOR^® B. The panel advised that REALTOR^® B's refusal to disclose the nature and status of his listing had freed REALTOR^® A to contact the property owners.

The Hearing Panel's decision noted that Article 16 requires a REALTOR^® to respect the agency of another REALTOR^®. But, in order to respect the listing broker's agency, the REALTOR^® must be able to determine if a listing really exists. If the listing broker refuses to disclose the existence, type, and duration of his listing, Standard of Practice 16-4 recognizes the REALTOR^®'s right to contact the seller directly to get that information. Once the REALTOR^® secures information on the type and duration of the listing, Standard of Practice 16-4 also permits him to discuss the terms of a future listing or to enter into a listing that becomes effective upon the expiration of the current listing. The panel's decision also indicated that REALTOR^® B could have barred REALTOR^® A's contact with the sellers by simply providing him with information on the nature and status of the listing.

The panel found REALTOR^® A not in violation of Article 16 of the Code of Ethics.