Is this a conflict of interest?

[Frank M. Carrio, CMI]

[quote=rray]

Originally Posted by fcarrio

No. It was done by the San Diego Union-Tribune using SDAR's membership rolls, which SDAR agreed to. Thus, it was done for the buying public.

I find it hard to believe. Send it to us.

[Russel Ray]

[quote=fcarrio]

Originally Posted by rray

Who is Art , and how can you verify this information. What are their names? When did they call?

ART records all of that, of course. You can see a portion of ART's system in this thread:

http://nachi.org/forum/showthread.php?t=11762

ART's the best friend I have when it comes to business and customer service. You should be so lucky to have such a good friend in business with you.

[Russel Ray]

[quote=fcarrio]

Originally Posted by rray

I find it hard to believe. Send it to us.

The San Diego Union-Tribune won the 2006 Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting for the investigations into former Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham's fraud. He's in prison for 8 years or so. The Union-Tribune is a hard-axxed paper, not one that I would want investigating me. I'll see if I can find the article for you; I'm sure I still have it somewhere amongst all these margarita bottles.

[Frank M. Carrio, CMI]

Originally Posted by rray

Unless it is legal in one's state and one practices full disclosure and does an excellent job for his Clients, regardless of which hat he is wearing. Some states that allow it don't even require full disclosure, but as the major brokerages teach their agents, "When in doubt, disclose." They don't teach, "When in doubt, don't."

As you stated "the major brokerages teach their agents" this does not mean that it is written into any "Code of Ethics" and that they are OBLIGATED to disclose anything at all.

Real Estate agents are in the business of "Selling". They do not earn a commission on a lost sale, or an inspection conducted by a "Deal Killer".

I will put this as politely as I can.
It is way to convenient for a Realtor who is married or shacking up with another Realtor / Inspector to rip off a potentail buyer.

It is ludicrous for any Realtor / Home Inspector to say "Trust me! Even though I spend the majority of my time selling Real Estate out of this office and my wife or partner works in this office I am Impartial"

• I don't see how anyone can expect to defend this position.

[Frank M. Carrio, CMI]

[quote=rray]

Originally Posted by fcarrio

[/size][/font]
ART records all of that, of course. You can see a portion of ART's system in this thread:

http://nachi.org/forum/showthread.php?t=11762

ART's the best friend I have when it comes to business and customer service. You should be so lucky to have such a good friend in business with you.

Russ,

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, after the first 15-posts I stopped reading this link. From your comments about Ms. Margarita & Dr. Cuervo getting in bed I gather that "ART" is an imaginary friend from your childhood days.

On that cheerful note.... This is a "Thread Drift"

I have had one hell of a busy month. I am extremely tired and going to take some time off. So have a nice weekend!


</IMG>

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by fcarrio

As you stated "the major brokerages teach their agents" this does not mean that it is written into any "Code of Ethics" and that they are OBLIGATED to disclose anything at all.

Didn't say that it was. However, agents who don't follow the rules laid down by their brokers can lose their real estate licenses, very easily.

Originally Posted by fcarrio

Real Estate agents are in the business of "Selling".

That's such a ludicrous statement and shows that you have no idea what a Realtor does.

Originally Posted by fcarrio

They do not earn a commission on a lost sale, or an inspection conducted by a "Deal Killer".

Another ludicrous statement. Good real estate agents, and I think that's about 95% of them, about the same percentage as good home inspectors, do indeed earn a commission on a lost sale or an inspection conducted by a deal killer because they know that the only person who can lose a sale is the Realtor himself by not working in the best interests of his Clients.

Originally Posted by fcarrio

I will put this as politely as I can.
It is way to convenient for a Realtor who is married or shacking up with another Realtor / Inspector to rip off a potentail buyer.

I apparantly have more faith (such a beautiful word that has been trashed by organized religion) in humanity than do you. I certainly don't believe that all of humanity is out to rip off the rest of humanity, as you, JB, JM, and JB II seem to believe.

Originally Posted by fcarrio

It is ludicrous for any Realtor / Home Inspector to say "Trust me! Even though I spend the majority of my time selling Real Estate out of this office and my wife or partner works in this office I am Impartial"

• I don't see how anyone can expect to defend this position.

Well, first, I believe that one should never be impartial. One should always be extremely partial and biased in favor of one's Clients. If one does that, then one would practice full disclosure, and if full disclosure of such positions is allowed in one's states, than I'm all for it. The simple fact that one practices full disclosure indicates to me that one is not out to rip off society.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by fcarrio

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, after the first 15-posts I stopped reading this link.

Well, that explains it. As much as I like helping people, I really don't like helping certain people, so I'm glad you quit reading it.

Originally Posted by fcarrio

I have had one hell of a busy month.

So have I. Unlike you, however, I'm always interested in continuing to help people, so I never take time off. I know that causes some severe feelings of "envy, jealousy, hate, spite, and shallowness" in some members here at NACHI, but that's their problem, not mine. I cannot control their emotions, only the extent to which I try to help people.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by fcarrio

On that cheerful note.... This is a "Thread Drift"

Frank...I gotta tell you...putting the guy on your "ignore list" solves the thread drift issue and eliminates over 8000 moronic soliloquies to weed through, as well (except when you mess it up by quoting him in you posts).

Your point is valid and right on target. Some people have a difficult time making the distinction between what is "legal" and what is "the right thing to do".

The ethics of business would dictate to one wanting to present an ethical image to the public that he eliminate so much as the appearance of wrongdoing. It would be unethical for this person mentioned in the orginal post to inspect a house he is selling.

[Jae Williams]

[quote=fcarrio]

Originally Posted by jschulte

I get A LOT and I repeat A-LOT of calls from clients that tell me that the seller's agent referred them to an inspector that was on their "Preferred Vendors" list.

My clients tell me that they felt really uncomfortable using the "Realtors Inspector".

Most people can see an ambush coming from a mile away.

PS: This issue has been debated before. Someone even posted a link to a video on this subject.

Man, I could have written that...that's all so true for me.

[jschulte]

How is this situation different from the post a couple days ago about inspecting your husband/wife's sales? I did not see anyone jumping in on that.

Personally, I see this as a clear conflict of interest (and on the other post). How you deal with that conflict is a personal business decision.

[James H. Bushart]

Originally Posted by jschulte

How is this situation different from the post a couple days ago about inspecting your husband/wife's sales? I did not see anyone jumping in on that.

Personally, I see this as a clear conflict of interest (and on the other post). How you deal with that conflict is a personal business decision.

Correct.

When something is "illegal", a choice has already been made for you.

The question of "ethical behavior" takes into account that some wrong activities can actually be legal in certain jurisdictions. Professionals who agree to be bound by a code of ethics will agree to comply with that code so as to bring credit (and public trust) to their profession.

Many will go so far as to avoid even the appearance of unethical behavior for the sake of public opinion and how it may reflect upon their profession and their business.

Ethics allows for choices, to which we are accountable. In certain respects, we are accountable to the public for the choices of others. This is why we all cringe when a television station films the horror story of the "terrible home inspector" who ripped off a poor single mom trying to raise her kids, or stories to that effect. We know that when the report is on a "home inspector", that it represents all of us in the minds of the viewer.

So...we have a forum and a means of discussing with one another what some of our choices might be/should be in certain circumstances. I think we all benefit from these discussions, no matter which position we may take.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by jbushart

Frank...I gotta tell you...putting the guy on your "ignore list" solves the thread drift issue and eliminates over 8000 moronic soliloquies to weed through, as well (except when you mess it up by quoting him in you posts).

Your point is valid and right on target. Some people have a difficult time making the distinction between what is "legal" and what is "the right thing to do".

The ethics of business would dictate to one wanting to present an ethical image to the public that he eliminate so much as the appearance of wrongdoing. It would be unethical for this person mentioned in the orginal post to inspect a house he is selling.

Each Friday night I go out to eat with about 50 attorneys. We go to On The Border for Mexican food and margaritas (had one of their new pomegranate margaritas last night--yummmmmmmy). As one of the attorneys told me, "A conflict of interest only exists if one wants the conflict of interest to exist." For those four people whose reading comprehension is poor, that means that disclosure, disclosure, disclosure to the Client, with the Client acknowledging in writing that someone somewhere thinks there could be a conflict of interest, trumps any actual or perceived conflict of interest. Provide one's Clients with

choices, choices, choices,

and let them decide.

I like my attorney friends.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by jschulte

How you deal with that conflict is a personal business decision.

Very good point.

Disclose, disclose, disclose, and get acknowledgement of that disclosure in writing indicating that the Client acknowledges that someone somewhere thinks there could be a conflict of interest.

[Russel Ray]

Originally Posted by jbushart

When something is "illegal", a choice has already been made for you.

However, one can also practice civil disobedience. King George II does that quite often with his signing statements. The best civil disobedience that comes to mind is Rosa Parks.

Originally Posted by jbushart

The question of "ethical behavior" takes into account that some wrong activities can actually be legal in certain jurisdictions.

Fortunately, JB isn't the only one in the world who gets to define what are "wrong activities." Thank God (and I don't even believe in God, but I'll thank him anyway for this one!)

Originally Posted by jbushart

This is why we all cringe when a television station films the horror story of the "terrible home inspector" who ripped off a poor single mom trying to raise her kids, or stories to that effect.

Well, apparently not all of us. I seem to remember a recent thread where you were recommending that someone else set up home inspectors to get media exposure:

Originally Posted by jbushart

It's too late for February sweeps, but May is coming up and local news stations are always looking for shocking and suprising stories. Why not do what the licensed inspectors in Arizona do to each other..but with a twist?

Show yourself to the media as an independent inspector who avoids the bias, politics and conflict of interest that surrounds the referral of home inspectors by real estate salespeople. Help them set up a "sting" with hidden cameras and a person pretending to be a home buyer (or a real home buyer with a hidden camera) and see what the salespeople are pushing.

Show them this.

Give yourself some free publicity and exposure.

Trash in, trash out.

[jschulte]

Originally Posted by rray

Each Friday night I go out to eat with about 50 attorneys. We go to On The Border for Mexican food and margaritas (had one of their new pomegranate margaritas last night--yummmmmmmy). As one of the attorneys told me, "A conflict of interest only exists if one wants the conflict of interest to exist." For those four people whose reading comprehension is poor, that means that disclosure, disclosure, disclosure to the Client, with the Client acknowledging in writing that someone somewhere thinks there could be a conflict of interest, trumps any actual or perceived conflict of interest. Provide one's Clients with

choices, choices, choices,

and let them decide.

I like my attorney friends.

You may want to avoid that attorney. He seems to be a bit loose in the ethics area.

Disclosure does not resolve the conflict of interest, you still have a conflict of interest, it just means your customer is OK with it.

Before you go attacking reading comprehension again (I take mine very seriously ), you may want to realize that your ethical positions may not be the same as everyone else's, and so we may all disagree as to how we would operate our businesses. I find it very interesting how someone who disagrees with you does so because we ain't read'n so well.