Category Archives: Washington Real Estate

Effective Immediately: Discriminatory Speech and Conduct Outside of REALTORS® Practice is Prohibited

The NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® Board of Directors approved a change today expanding the Code of Ethics’ applicability to discriminatory speech and conduct outside of members’ real estate practices.

OnlineEd Blog

(November 13, 2020)

 

Salem, Oregon November 13, 2020 – NAR’s Board of Directors today strengthened REALTORS®’ commitment to upholding fair housing ideals, approving a series of recommendations from NAR’s Professional Standards Committee that extend the application of Article 10 of the Code of Ethics to discriminatory speech and conduct outside of members’ real estate practices.

Article 10 prohibits REALTORS® from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender identity in the provision of professional services and in employment practices. The Board approved a new Standard of Practice under the Article, 10-5, that states, “REALTORS® must not use harassing speech, hate speech, epithets, or slurs” against members of those protected classes.

The Board also approved a change to professional standards policy, expanding the Code of Ethics’ applicability to all of a REALTOR®’s activities, and added guidance to the Code of Ethics and Arbitration Manual to help professional standards hearing panels apply the new standard.

Finally, Directors approved a revision to the NAR Bylaws, expanding the definition of “public trust” to include all discrimination against the protected classes under Article 10 along with all fraud. Associations are required to share with the state real estate licensing authority final ethics decisions holding REALTORS® in violation of the Code of Ethics in instances involving real estate-related activities and transactions where there is reason to believe the public trust may have been violated.

The Board made these changes effective immediately, though the changes cannot be applied to speech or conduct that occurred before the effective date. NAR has produced training and resource materials to assist leaders with understanding and implementing the changes and will be rolling those out in the coming weeks.

###

OnlineEd® is a Registered Trademark. For more information about OnlineEd and their education for real estate brokers, principal brokers, property managers, and mortgage brokers, visit www.OnlineEd.com.

OnlineEd blog postings are the opinion of the author. Nothing posted in this or any other article is intended as legal or any other type of professional advice. Be sure to consult an appropriate professional when professional advice is needed. Excerpts from articles not originating with Jeff Sorg/OnlineEd are reprinted with permission; remain the sole property of the author; no permission to reprint articles or portions thereof not arising from this blog but reprinted here is given or implied. Information in this posting is deemed correct as of the date of publication. Still, it is not guaranteed by the author to be accurate, or information may have been obtained from third-party sources and cannot be further verified for correctness. Due to the fluid nature of the subject matter, regulations, requirements and laws, prices, and all other information may or may not be correct in the future and should be verified.

First American Title/Financial Corp. May Have Leaked 885 Million Customer Records

Title company faces class action lawsuit for its apparent negligence

By Jeff Sorg, OnlineEd Blog

(May 29, 2019)

A class-action lawsuit is already filed in California after Brian Krebs, a cybersecurity expert, reported 885 million First American files were available without authentication to anyone with a web browser. The data allegedly included bank account numbers, social security numbers, and financial and tax records.

First American was ultimately notified by Brian Krebs of KrebsOnSecurity, who was contacted by a real estate developer in Washington state who said he’d had little luck getting a response from the company when told by him that a portion of its Web site (firstam.com) was leaking tens if not hundreds of millions of records. He said anyone who knew the URL for a valid document at the Web site could view other documents just by modifying a single digit in the link. Brian Krebs posted on his web site, “KrebsOnSecurity confirmed the real estate developer’s findings, which indicate that First American’s Web site exposed approximately 885 million files, the earliest dating back more than 16 years. No authentication was required to read the documents.” *

In their complaint**, Gibbs Law Group alleges, “First American made it incredibly easy for the public to access this private information by failing to implement even rudimentary security measures. Suppose that you are a First American customer. The company provides you with a URL to access your documents on its website. That URL might end in “DocumentID= 000000075.” Now suppose you want to access someone else’s personal file. Type the same URL but alter the Document ID number by one digit—say, “DocumentID=000000076”—and someone else’s personal file will appear. Change the numbers again (and again), and you will reveal still more personal files.”

* Read the entire Brian Krebs posting available on his website here: https://krebsonsecurity.com/2019/05/first-american-financial-corp-leaked-hundreds-of-millions-of-title-insurance-records/

** Class action lawsuit Gritz v. First American Financial Corp., 19-cv-01009, U.S. District Court, Central District of California (Santa Ana).

###

OnlineEd blog postings are the opinion of the author and not intended as legal or other professional advice. Be sure to consult the appropriate party when professional advice is needed.

For more information about OnlineEd and their education for real estate brokers, principal brokers, property managers, and mortgage brokers visit www.OnlineEd.com.

All information contained in this posting is deemed correct as of the date of publication, but is not guaranteed by the author and may have been obtained from third-party sources. Due to the fluid nature of the subject matter, regulations, requirements and laws, prices and all other information may or may not be correct in the future and should be verified if cited, shared or otherwise republished.

OnlineEd® is a registered Trademark.

National Association of REALTORS® Moves to Dismiss Price-Fixing Lawsuit

Class action lawsuit claims real estate broker franchisors and National Association of Realtors conspire to require home sellers to pay buyer broker fees

By Jeff Sorg, OnlineEd Blog

(May 23, 2019)

CHICAGO (May 18, 2019) – The National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) moved to dismiss the Moehrl v. NAR lawsuit on the basis that the complaint misrepresents NAR rules for the operation of Multiple Listing Services (MLSs), which have long been recognized by the courts across the country as protecting consumers and creating competitive, efficient markets that benefit home buyers and sellers. The filing was made in federal court in Chicago.

“In today’s complex real estate environment, REALTORS® and Multiple Listing Services promote a pro-consumer, pro-competitive market for home buyers and sellers, contrary to the baseless claims of these class action attorneys,” said John Smaby, President of NAR. “Our filing today shows the lawsuit is wrong on the facts, wrong on the economics and wrong on the law.”

NAR’s brief points out that, as the centerpiece of their case, the seven class action law firms who represent one plaintiff have resorted to fundamentally mischaracterizing NAR’s rules. That mischaracterization, according to the NAR’s filing, led the class action attorneys to “dream up” purportedly anticompetitive rules that simply do not exist in NAR’s Handbook or Code of Ethics. In reality, NAR rules specifically direct listing brokers to determine – in consultation with their clients – the amount of compensation to offer buyers’ brokers in connection with their MLS listings. Furthermore, under NAR rules, a buyer’s broker is free to negotiate a commission from the listing broker that is different from what appears in the MLS listing. Neither NAR nor any MLS has any say in setting broker commissions.

Ultimately, these rules create a system of highly competitive markets where consumers receive superior service.

Beyond misreading the facts, NAR’s filing to dismiss demonstrates the shaky legal grounds of the plaintiff’s case, pointing out that the lawsuit disregards legal precedents that have upheld the pro-competitive benefits represented by the MLS system. For example, past court rulings have noted that NAR rules provide a more transparent marketplace, and encourage REALTORS® to share listing information and cooperate in the sale of real estate.

In fact, when considering the structure of commission payments, NAR’s filing notes that listing brokers’ offers of commission to buyers’ brokers on MLSs has been shown to actually increase the number of potential buyers. “When a seller elects to permit their brokers to pay compensation to the buyer’s broker, it frees up buyer cash thereby potentially increasing the number of buyers able to bid for that home and the amount of funds available for the purchase price,” the filing states.

“The MLS system is designed to create competitive markets to facilitate the sale of residential property in a way that benefits both buyers and sellers,” said Smaby.

Contrary to the career class action attorneys’ manufactured rules and claims, the plaintiff’s transaction was subject to the same rules as all transactions facilitated via an MLS: commissions are agreed upon up front by the seller and listing broker – independent of NAR – and commissions are negotiable. These rules have been proven to promote competition and ensure that brokers act in the best interests of their clients.

On the basis of these fundamental arguments that refute the plaintiff’s allegations and reading of legal precedent, as well as a failure to demonstrate harm, NAR is seeking to dismiss the lawsuit “with prejudice.”

[Source – NAR Press Release]

DEFENDANT: The National Association of Realtors, Realogy Holdings Corp., HomeServices of America Inc., RE/MAX Holdings Inc., Keller Williams Realty Inc.
CASE NUMBER: 1:19-cv-01610
COURT: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

The National Association of REALTORS® is America’s largest trade association, representing more than 1.3 million members involved in all aspects of the residential and commercial real estate industries

 

###

OnlineEd blog postings are the opinion of the author and not intended as legal or other professional advice. Be sure to consult the appropriate party when professional advice is needed.

For more information about OnlineEd and their education for real estate brokers, principal brokers, property managers, and mortgage brokers visit www.OnlineEd.com.

All information contained in this posting is deemed correct as of the date of publication, but is not guaranteed by the author and may have been obtained from third-party sources. Due to the fluid nature of the subject matter, regulations, requirements and laws, prices and all other information may or may not be correct in the future and should be verified if cited, shared or otherwise republished.

OnlineEd® is a registered Trademark

All About Easements: The Easement in Gross

The easement in gross gives the owner of the easement the right to use real property for a particular purpose

By Jeff Sorg, OnlineEd Blog

(April 9, 2019)

(PORTLAND, Ore.) OnlineEd – The easement in gross gives the owner of the easement the right to use real property for a particular purpose. An easement in gross does not attach to or benefit a parcel of land and is usually created for the benefit of a legal person such as a utility company or railroad. The important characteristic of an easement in gross is that it gives the limited right to use another’s land and it is not created for the benefit of any land owned by the owner of the easement.

The land over which the easement in gross crosses is burdened by the easement and is known as the servient tenement. Since the easement right is personal and does not benefit another parcel of land, there is no dominant tenement.

Most easements in gross are for commercial purposes, are not revocable, (the servient tenement landowner cannot revoke the easement), and can be assigned to another legal entity. Some common examples of easements in gross are sewer lines, gas lines, electric lines, cable lines, etc.

Commercial easements in gross provide for the right to cross a property with the physical cable, pipe, power line or the like, as well as the right to re-enter the property after the initial installation to perform maintenance, repairs, and updates.

###

OnlineEd blog postings are the opinion of the author and not intended as legal or other professional advice. Be sure to consult the appropriate party when professional advice is needed.

For more information about OnlineEd and their education for real estate brokers, principal brokers, property managers, and mortgage brokers visit www.OnlineEd.com.

All information contained in this posting is deemed correct as of the date of publication, but is not guaranteed by the author and may have been obtained from third-party sources. Due to the fluid nature of the subject matter, regulations, requirements and laws, prices and all other information may or may not be correct in the future and should be verified if cited, shared or otherwise republished.

OnlineEd® is a registered Trademark

All About Easements: The Easement Appurtenant

An easement appurtenant gives a property owner a right of usage to portions of an adjoining property

By Jeff Sorg, OnlineEd Blog

(April 5, 2019)

(PORTLAND, Ore.) OnlineEd – An easement appurtenant gives a property owner a right of usage to portions of an adjoining property owned by another party. Stated another way, an easement appurtenant is an easement over one parcel that benefits another parcel of land. The property benefiting from the usage right to travel over the easement is called the dominant tenement, or dominant estate. It is called the dominant estate because it is the parcel of real property that has an easement over another piece of property – it dominates. The property that includes the physical easement, that is, the land over which the dominant tenement can travel, is called the servient tenement since it must serve the dominant estate by providing the easement for its use.

The term appurtenant means “attaching to.” An easement appurtenant, then, attaches to the estate and transfers with it unless expressly stated otherwise. More specifically, the easement attaches as a beneficial interest to the dominant estate, and as an encumbrance to the servient estate. Accordingly, the easement appurtenant becomes part of the dominant estate’s bundle of rights and an obligation or encumbrance of the servient estate.

Transfer. Easement appurtenant rights and obligations automatically transfer with the properties, either the dominant or servient estate, whether or not mentioned in the deed.

Non-exclusive use. Both the servient tenement and dominant tenement can use the easement, provided the servient’s usage does not unreasonably obstruct the dominant’s use.


The exhibit shows a conventional easement appurtenant. The driveway marked A belongs to Parcel #2. An easement appurtenant, marked B on the diagram, allows Parcel #3 to use #2’s driveway. Parcel #3 is the dominant tenement, and Parcel #2 is the servient tenement.

Easement by necessity. An easement by necessity is an easement appurtenant legally granted by a court to a property owner because of necessity. Usually, the necessary condition that precipitates the granting of the easement is the need to provide ingress and egress to a property. Ingress means a way to travel into the property, and egress means a way to travel out of the property. Since a property cannot be landlocked and must have access to a public thoroughfare, the court will grant an owner of a landlocked property an easement by necessity over an adjoining property that already has access to a thoroughfare. When this is the case, the landlocked party becomes the dominant tenement, and the land over which the easement is granted is called the servient tenement. In the exhibit, Parcel #1, which is landlocked, owns an easement by necessity, C, across Parcel #2.

Party wall easement. A party wall is a common wall shared by two separate structures along a property boundary. Party wall agreements generally provide for severalty ownership of half of the wall by each owner, or at least some fraction of the width of the wall. Ownership in severalty means individual ownership; ownership is “severed” from all others. Also, the agreement grants a negative easement appurtenant to each owner against the other owner’s wall. A negative easement gives each party the right to restrain or control the use of the other party’s use in some way, such as unlimited use of the wall or a destructive use that would jeopardize the adjacent property owner’s building. The party wall easement also establishes responsibilities and obligations for the maintenance and repair of the wall.

Other structures that are subject to party agreements are common fences, driveways, and walkways. Common means they are shared between the properties – they are of common or shared ownership and on the property line between the affected properties.

++ Remember: A negative easement appurtenant does not allow the owner of the dominant estate to cross over the servient estate. Instead, the dominant estate has the right to restrict some activity or use of the servient estate.

(Image ©Copyright, OnlineEd, Inc. All Rights Reserved)

 

A negative easement appurtenant does not allow the owner of the dominant estate to cross over the servient estate. Instead, the dominant estate has the right to restrict some activity or use of the servient estate. Example: Developer Jovan purchased a tract of land abutting Oceanfront Lake and divided it into two parcels. Lot A is on the shoreline, and Lot B is farther back from the shore. Lot B has a good view of the lake because it is situated on higher ground that overlooks Lot A, but it is located behind Lot A and could be lost if Lot A builds a two-story house. Because Jovan wants the best price for each parcel, the view of the lake from Lot B is protected by adding a deed restriction in Lot A’s deed to limit any structure built on Lot A to a single story.

In the example above, the owner of Lot B is the owner of a negative easement appurtenant. The dominant estate, Lot B, can prohibit specific activity on Lot A, the servient estate, that could block or restrict the view of the lake. In this situation, Lot B’s owner does not have an affirmative easement appurtenant and cannot cross over the land of Lot A to reach the lake, since only the view is protected. Though not applicable to the above example, it is possible to have both an affirmative and negative easement at the same time. If an easement was created for access to the lake and to limit the height of any structure, then the owner of Lot B would have both negative and affirmative easements.

Easements appurtenant are created in these ways:

By grant or reservation – An easement created by grant or reservation is created by the express written agreement of the landowner. This is most frequently done in the deed but can be done in a separate recorded instrument. When done by grant, the owner of a property gives to someone else the easement right. When done by reservation, the owner of the property retains an easement on land conveyed to another. For example, you sell your property but keep the right to travel over the sold parcel to walk to the ocean.

By intent or necessity – The right to ingress (entry) and egress (exit) is required by law. Any property that is landlocked, meaning it has no ingress and egress, has these rights. A landlocked landowner has a right to an easement to cross the land of another to reach a public right-of-way. This type of easement available to a landlocked owner is called an easement by necessity and is outlined in Oregon Revised Statutes, specifically ORS 376. The servient estate in the easement by necessity may be entitled to compensation for the easement.

By prescription – An easement by prescription is the use of the land of another that meets these requirements;

  • Open and notorious (obvious to anyone);
  • Actual, continuous (uninterrupted for the entire required period);
  • Adverse to the rights of the true property owner;
  • Hostile (in opposition to the claim of another, not “hostile” in the ordinary sense); and
  • Continuous for a statutorily defined period (10 years in Oregon).

An easement by prescription gives the dominant tenant the right of use of the property, not ownership of the property.

By implication – An easement by implication arises out of the conduct of the parties. This means it is an implied easement, not a written easement. An easement by necessity is distinguished from an easement by implication in that the easement by necessity arises only when “strictly” necessary. In contrast, the easement by implication can occur when “reasonably” necessary. For example, the right lot owners have in a subdivision to use a roadway on the approved subdivision plan without requiring a specific grant or easement to each new lot.

By condemnation – The government’s right to use the land of an owner is created by the exercise of the government’s right of eminent domain. Eminent domain includes not only the right of the government to obtain an ownership interest in the property of a private owner; it also provides for the right of the government to create a use easement over the land of a private property owner to benefit the government-owned land. For example, the US Bureau of Land Management uses its power of eminent domain to create an easement of right of way over private property to access government-owned, but landlocked forestland.

Easements appurtenant can be terminated by one of these ways:

  • Release of the easement by the dominant owner
  • Merging the dominant and servient lands into one tract
  • Abandonment of the easement by the dominant owner
  • The reason the easement was created no longer exists
  • Expiration of the time for which the easement was given

©OnlineEd; All rights reserved.

 

###

OnlineEd blog postings are the opinion of the author and not intended as legal or other professional advice. Be sure to consult the appropriate party when professional advice is needed.

For more information about OnlineEd and their education for real estate brokers, principal brokers, property managers, and mortgage brokers, visit www.OnlineEd.com.

All information contained in this posting is deemed correct as of the date of publication, but is not guaranteed by the author and may have been obtained from third-party sources. Due to the fluid nature of the subject matter, regulations, requirements and laws, prices and all other information may or may not be correct in the future and should be verified if cited, shared, or otherwise republished.

OnlineEd® is a registered Trademark

Four Common Listing Agreements Used by Real Estate Agents

Each type of listing agreement allows an agent to market the seller’s property, but they differ when it comes to who else can market it and how the brokerage fee is earned

By Jeff Sorg, OnlineEd Blog

(April 4, 2019)

(PORTLAND, Ore.) OnlineEd – Each type of listing contract allows the real estate agent to market a seller’s property, but the agreements will differ when it comes to who else can market the property or how the brokerage fee is earned. In this post, we discuss the open, exclusive agency, exclusive right to sell, and net listings.

Open – The open listing allows the seller to employ any number of agents at the same time. However, the seller will only owe a commission to the agent who sells the property (the procuring cause of the sale). The open listing agreement also allows the seller to sell the property without owing any commission.

Procuring Cause, as defined by the National Association of REALTORS®, is “the uninterrupted series of causal events that leads to a successful transaction.” It is the way to determine disputes about who deserves a real estate commission for causing a sale. 

The open listing agreement is rarely used in residential real estate because there is little motivation for an agent to promote the property; there is no motivation to cooperate with other agents; and the agent is competing directly with the seller to find a buyer.

Exclusive agency – The exclusive agency listing gives one agent the right to sell the property, but no commission is owed if the seller sells the property. The advantage of the exclusive agency listing over the open listing is that competition from other agents for the listing contract is eliminated. However, the listing agent is still competing with the seller when selling the property and is at a disadvantage because the seller can sell the property for less than the broker, and no commission has to be paid to the agent.

Exclusive right to sell – With the exclusive right to sell listing, the seller employs just one agent. The agent earns their commission if the property is sold by another agent, the seller, or the listing agent.

This is the most used type of listing agreement in residential real estate brokerage. Because the listing agent is assured of a commission if the listing sells during the term of the agreement, the agent is likely to spend time, money, and other resources necessary to market the property, thereby resulting in a more timely sale for the seller. With the exclusive right to sell listing, the agent earns the fee when a ready, willing and able buyer is produced who meets the agreed upon terms of sale stated in the listing agreement, whether or not the seller accepts such an offer.

The exclusive right to sell listing agreement also usually contains a due diligence clause. A due diligence clause requires the principal broker to exercise due diligence in attempting to locate a buyer for the property. The agreement will also include a clause that requires the seller to pay the fee if the property is sold to anyone introduced to the property during the listing period, even after the listing has expired. The period for which this fee is due after the listing expires is negotiated with the seller and becomes a part of the contract at the time of the listing agreement. The purpose of the clause is to prevent a buyer who was introduced to the property during the listing period from purchasing the property directly from the seller minus any commission due to the listing agent.

Net – A net listing is a listing agreement that allows the listing agent to keep everything over the minimum (net) price set by the seller, however, there wouldn’t be any fee owed to the agent if the seller sold for the net amount. Some states and many brokerages do not allow the net listing, and its use is discouraged even in states where it is legal because of its potential for misuse.

 

###

OnlineEd blog postings are the opinion of the author and not intended as legal or other professional advice. Be sure to consult an appropriate party when professional advice is needed.

For more information about OnlineEd and their education for real estate brokers, principal brokers, property managers, and mortgage brokers visit www.OnlineEd.com.

All information contained in this posting is deemed correct as of the date of publication, but is not guaranteed by the author and may have been obtained from third-party sources. Due to the fluid nature of the subject matter, regulations, requirements and laws, prices and all other information may or may not be correct in the future and should be verified if cited, shared or otherwise republished.

OnlineEd® is a registered Trademark

IMPORTANT DEADLINE FOR REALTORS® – Get Your Ethics Course Completed!

The National Association of REALTORS® has moved their Code of Ethics requirement to a 2-year cycle ending December 2018.

By Jeff Sorg, OnlineEd Blog

(November 8, 2018)

(PORTLAND, Ore.) OnlineEd – REALTORS® are required to complete ethics training of not less than 2 hours, 30 minutes of instructional time within two-year cycles. The training must meet specific learning objectives and criteria established by the National Association of REALTORS®. This current cycle began on January 1, 2017, and ends December 31, 2018.  Training must be repeated each cycle to help all members understand and follow NAR’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice.

OnlineEd has courses approved in many states to be used to satisfy the NAR requirement and for continuing education for license renewal. These courses emphasize the standards of ethical conduct in the practice of real estate based on the National Association of Realtors® Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice and on federal and state laws governing conduct applicable to the practice of real estate.

For more information about OnlineEd course offerings, please view the course catalog for your state at www.OnlineEd.com.

###

OnlineEd blog postings are the personal opinion of the author and not intended as legal or other professional advice. Be sure to consult the appropriate party when professional advice is needed.

For more information about OnlineEd and their education for real estate brokers, principal brokers, property managers, and mortgage brokers visit www.OnlineEd.com.

All information contained in this posting is deemed correct as of the date of publication, but is not guaranteed by the author and may have been obtained from third-party sources. Due to the fluid nature of the subject matter, regulations, requirements and laws, prices and all other information may or may not be correct in the future and should be verified if cited, shared or otherwise republished.

OnlineEd® is a registered Trademark

Stats Say The Best Time to List is in Early May

On average homes listed in early May sell nine days faster and for one percent more 

OnlineEd Blog

canstockphoto1864187moneywoman(March 2, 2017) – Zillow– Listing a home toward the end of spring significantly increases a seller’s chances of selling their home faster and for more money, according to new analysis from Zillow. Nationally, homes listed from May 1 through May 15, sell around nine days faster and for nearly 1 percent more than the average listing. In 20 of the 25 largest metro areas, the best month to list is late spring, in either April or May.

Housing market dynamics, including low inventory, make the buying season more pronounced in some parts of the country. Sellers in the highly competitive Seattle, Portland, Ore., and Denver markets saw between a 1.5 and 2.5 percent boost to final sale prices when they listed in early May. The lack of new homes for sale in these markets elongates the home-buying season as many buyers are forced to consider several homes and make multiple offers. Less than half of buyers got the first home on which they made an offer, according to the Zillow Group Report on Consumer Housing Trends.

Weather patterns also affect the exact best window to sell in different areas. Sellers in Texas, California and Florida will find themselves with more flexibility in list timeframe, as many regions without distinct climate changes show little variation in sale price based on listing month.

“With 3 percent fewer homes on the market than last year, 2017 is shaping up to be another competitive buying season,” said Zillow Chief Economist Dr. Svenja Gudell. “Many home buyers who started looking for homes in the early spring will still be searching for their dream home months later. By May, some buyers may be anxious to get settled into a new home— and will be more willing to pay a premium to close the deal.”

Additionally, listing on different days of the week can impact the number of buyers who will view the new listing. Listings that appear on Zillow on Saturday earn an average of 20 percent more views in the first week on market than early-in-the-week listings; similarly, Friday listings on Zillow earn 14 percent more views that those published on Monday.

To apply this analysis to individual homes, homeowners can use Best Time to List, a tool that estimates how much the timing of a listing will influence the final sale price for their home and their own market. Registered Zillow users access the tool by clicking the “Sell Your Home” tab on the home details page of their home, and obtain valuable information to pair with the expertise of a local real estate agent when determining the best time to put their home on the market.

Metro Area Ideal
Timeframe to
List Home
Days Sold
Faster than
Average
Average Sales
Premium (%)
Average Sales
Premium ($)
Ideal Day of the
Week to  List
United States  May 1 – 15 9 0.8% $1,500 Saturday
New York/Northern New Jersey May 1 – 15 7.5 0.7% $2,600 Saturday
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA  April 16 – 30 15 1.0% $5,600 Friday
Chicago, IL  May 1 – 15 12.5 1.3% $2,500 Friday
Dallas-Fort Worth, TX  May 1 – 15 9 1.3% $2,400 Saturday
Philadelphia, PA  May 1 – 15 9.75 1.0% $2,000 Friday
Washington, DC April 1 – April 15 15 1.2% $4,500 Thursday
Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL  March 1 – 15 8 0.7% $1,500 Saturday
Atlanta, GA  April 1 – April 15 19 1.4% $2,200 Friday
Boston, MA  April 16 – 30 13.5 1.2% $4,500 Wednesday
San Francisco, CA  May 16 – 31 5.5 1.3% $10,200 Friday
Detroit, MI  March 16 – 31 17.5 1.5% $1,900 Sunday
Riverside, CA  April 1 – 15 15 1.1% $3,400 Friday
Phoenix, AZ  April 16 – 30 14.5 0.8% $1,700 Saturday
Seattle, WA  May 1 – 15 15 2.5% $9,300 Thursday
Minneapolis-St Paul, MN  May 16 – 31 6 1.4% $3,200 Friday
San Diego, CA  April 1 – 15 13 1.3% $6,200 Saturday
St. Louis, MO  May 1 – 15 10.5 1.3% $1,800 Saturday
Tampa, FL  March 1 – 15 10.5 0.9% $1,500 Saturday
Baltimore, MD  April 1 – 15 21.5 0.9% $2,300 Saturday
Denver, CO  May 1 – 15 8 1.7% $5,600 Friday
Pittsburgh, PA  March 16 – 31 17 0.9% $1,100 Saturday
Portland, OR  May 1 – 15 16.5 2.0% $6,300 Friday
Charlotte, NC May 1 – 15 12.25 1.1% $1,700 Saturday
Sacramento, CA April 1 – 15 17.5 2.0% $6,600 Saturday
San Jose, CA May 1 – 15 9 1.6% $14,900 Wednesday

[Source: Zillow media release]

###

For more information about OnlineEd and their education for real estate brokers, principal brokers, property managers, and mortgage brokers, visit www.OnlineEd.com.

All information contained in this posting is deemed correct as of the date of publication, but is not guaranteed by the author and may have been obtained from third-party sources. Due to the fluid nature of the subject matter, regulations, requirements and laws, prices and all other information may or may not be correct in the future and should be verified if cited, shared or otherwise republished.

OnlineEd® is a registered Trademark

Real Estate and Mortgage Continuing Education with OnlineEd

Free Friday: 3- Core Credit Hours, Current Issues in Washington Residential Real Estate

OnlineEd offers their 3-hour 2016-17 Current Issues in Washington Real Estate for free to Washington real estate licensees

By Jeff Sorg, OnlineEd Blog

free friday (1) – Okay, so we took some flak here at OnlineEd last Friday for not including Washington when we offered our free Oregon Law and Rule Required Course. So, here you go Washington! Have this one on us. Claim your free course here. Spread the word if you like – we’ll leave it up for free over the weekend.

The Washington Department of Licensing requires real estate brokers in Washington to complete a law update course at each license renewal. This course covers many important topics that a real estate licensee should be aware of such as the latest Washington RCW changes, a reminder of agency duties, the DOL’s advertising guidelines, and additional topics.

This course will cover the following nine topics:

  1. Legislative and Legal Update
  2. Agency Duties
  3. REO Sales
  4. Advertising and Social Media Guidelines
  5. Fair Housing Issues
  6. Multiple Offers Best Practices
  7. Property Management
  8. Licensed and Unlicensed Assistants
  9. Professional Conduct, Pocket Listings, and Personal Safety

Students will be required to complete the nine topics of study before being presented with a 10-question final exam. A course completion certificate for real estate continuing education credit will be issued after the student successfully passes the final exam with a minimum passing score of 70%.

This school is approved under chapter 18.85 RCW; inquiries regarding this or any other real estate school may be made to the: Washington State Department of Licensing, Real Estate Program, P.O. Box 9015, Olympia, Washington 98507-9015.

Claim your free course here.

 

###

For more information about OnlineEd and their education for real estate brokers, principal brokers, property managers, and mortgage brokers, visit www.OnlineEd.com.

 All information contained in this posting is deemed correct as of the date of publication, but is not guaranteed by the author and may have been obtained by third-party sources. Due to the fluid nature of the subject matter, regulations, requirements and laws, prices and all other information may or may not be correct in the future and should be verified if cited, shared or otherwise republished.