Exit Realty Success

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted] , and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because: [Your Answer Here] UNFORTUNATELY, THE BUSINESS HAS ASSERTED CLAIMS THE FORMS WERE MANIPULATED AFTER THEY WERE SIGNED IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM WAS THE TERM OF ONE (1) YEAR AGREED TO BY SELLER THE STANDARD TERM OF A LISTING AGREEMENT IS DAYS APARTMENTS IN THE AREA ARE ON OTHE MARKET FOR NOT LONGER THAN THAT PERIOD NO COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE AREA WAS PROVIDED TO SELLER NO COPIES OF ANY DOCUMENTS WERE PROVIDED UPON SIGNING, WHICH IS REQUIRED PURSUANT THE CODE OF ETHICS AFTER DAYS, THE EFFORTS OF THE BUSINESS WHICH WERE LACKLUSTER AT BEST DID NOT PRODUCE FRUITFUL RESULTS, AND THE SELLER REQUESTED THE LISTING BE CANCELLED SELLER DID NOT AGREE TO LIST FOR YEAR, AND WAS NOT ADVISED OF THE TERMS OF ANY AGREEMENT UNTIL AFTER REQUESTING THE LISTING BE CANCELLED THE REALTORS, BROKER AND OFFICE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE UNETHICAL PRACTICES OF ENTERING IN TERMS TO THE CONTRACTS WITHOUT SELLER'S CONSENT AND WITHOUT SELLER'S KNOWLEDGE THE BUSINESS ALLEGING THAT SELLER HAD A PURCHASER AND DID NOT WISH TO PAY COMMISSION IS ENTIRELY FALSE SELLER HAD NO SUCH PURCHASER AND NO INTENTION OF SELLING THE APARTMENT ON HER OWN THE BUSINESS IS ALLEGING THIS BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID THAT THEY HAVE FRAUDULENTLY MANIPULATED CONTRACTS SELLER CAN ATTEST TO THE FACT THAT THE CONTRACTS WERE NOT PROVIDED IMMEDIATELY AFTER SIGNING (AND HAS CORRESPONDENCE AS PROOF) BECAUSE THE REALTOR ASSURED SHE WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE DETAILS AND SEND COPIES OF EVERYTHING, WHICH SHE DID NOT THIS MATTER WILL BE INVESTIGATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND ETHICS BOARD, AS CLIENTS THAT EXPECT THAT THEY WILL BE DEALT WITH HONESTLY SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BECAUSE OF THEIR TRUST The realtors were dishonest, misleading and breached their duty to protect and promote Seller's interests (1) by suggesting a higher listing price in order to obtain the listing, (2) by fraudulently manipulating the agreements in order to lock Seller into a year term, (3) by failing to explain the contractual relationship being established in each agreement, (4) by failing to provide fully executed and completed forms at the time of signing of the same, and (5) by failing to present all offers to Seller The brokers of the realty should also be held accountable for the transgressions of their agents, as well as for their failure to respond or to value Seller's business Seller wishes to document the maltreatment and unscrupulous practices of the business by filing this complaint The business has not only failed in protecting and promoting the Seller's interests, but has caused additional stress and an undue burden on Seller with their flagrant disregard for truthful client service, and the business has used the fraudulent agreement as a shackle in order to prevent the Seller from listing with another realty that would better serve her needs There is absolutely no merit to the business' claims regarding Seller's attempt to "defraud" the business of commissions, as Seller agreed that any person who was introduced to the property and who later expressed interest therein would result in commission to the business, but the business refused this and refused to give a list of such persons to Seller in order to make things difficult for Seller The business has refused to cooperate or preserve good will even after the commission of fraud on their part This business should be rated very poorly for these practices and this complaint should be published for the general public In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above Sincerely, [redacted]

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# ***, and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:
Unfortunately, the business continues to put forth statements and assertions that do not address the issues of their fraudulently filling in the term of the listing contract without the seller’s consent or knowledge, which is the key reason why Seller no longer wishes to do business with this company at all or at any time in the future. In addition to this, Seller was also affected by the agents’ failure to agents to communicate at any point regarding the marketing of the property or feedback on any showing or open house; failure of the brokers to respond to e-mail and phone communications regarding the client’s dissatisfaction; refusal of the brokers to work with the Seller and provide an electronic copy of a release form acceptable to Seller and instead required Seller to travel hours and take time off from work to find that the brokers had already left the office; and refusal to release the client from contract due to the client’s disappointment and desire to find another brokerage that conducts itself in an honest and trustworthy manner. As stated previously, the point of this complaint is to notify the community that customers should be wary of this business as they will likely force you to continue to work with them when you are unhappy, and claim they are entitled to commissions for underperforming, being unethical, non-responsive and argumentative. Unlike reputable brokerages, this business does not offer easy release from contract and does not work to satisfy clients; instead this business uses the contract, though fraudulently and haphazardly put together, as proof of their entitlement to any commissions. The Seller/client/complainant would like for the complaint to be closed and published on the record
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above
Sincerely,
*** ***

1. [redacted], owner of said property, entered into an exclusive right to sell agreement with our company through our associates Ms. Aida C[redacted] and Ms. Oliva R[redacted], on June [redacted],...

2015. Such agreement is due to expire on June [redacted], 2016. 2. [redacted] was provided copies of signed listing agreement; it was left on her dining room table. 3. Our company and associates acted in good faith, conducting open houses, and presented offers from buyers that were ready, willing and able to purchase the property. 4. After producing offers, [redacted] expressed that she had her own purchaser and had no intention of paying a commission. 5. Only after expressing her intent, did [redacted] refuse to cooperate any further. 6. According to Multiple Listing Service Rule 605.11: “If a listing is not to be shown for three (3) or more days, but less than 10, this must be entered in the MLS system along with the dates it will not be available to be shown. If the listing is to be Temporarily Off the Market for longer than 10 days it must be withdrawn from the system. (4/**)”. As a result, we had no other choice but to withdraw the property from Multiple Listing Service seeing as how [redacted] was no longer cooperating. Soon there after, [redacted] also had a mortgage broker become involved and interfere with our existing listing agreement.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

[Your Answer Here]
UNFORTUNATELY, THE BUSINESS HAS ASSERTED FALSE CLAIMS.  THE FORMS WERE MANIPULATED AFTER THEY WERE SIGNED.  IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM WAS THE TERM OF ONE (1) YEAR AGREED TO BY SELLER.  THE STANDARD TERM OF A LISTING AGREEMENT IS 90 DAYS.  APARTMENTS IN THE AREA ARE ON OTHE MARKET FOR NOT LONGER THAN THAT PERIOD.  NO COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE AREA WAS PROVIDED TO SELLER.  NO COPIES OF ANY DOCUMENTS WERE PROVIDED UPON SIGNING, WHICH IS REQUIRED PURSUANT THE CODE OF ETHICS.  AFTER 90 DAYS, THE EFFORTS OF THE BUSINESS WHICH WERE LACKLUSTER AT BEST DID NOT PRODUCE FRUITFUL RESULTS, AND THE SELLER REQUESTED THE LISTING BE CANCELLED.  SELLER DID NOT AGREE TO LIST FOR  YEAR, AND WAS NOT ADVISED OF THE TERMS OF ANY AGREEMENT UNTIL AFTER REQUESTING THE LISTING BE CANCELLED.   THE REALTORS, BROKER AND OFFICE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE UNETHICAL PRACTICES OF ENTERING IN TERMS TO THE CONTRACTS WITHOUT SELLER'S CONSENT AND WITHOUT SELLER'S KNOWLEDGE. 
THE BUSINESS ALLEGING THAT SELLER HAD A PURCHASER AND DID NOT WISH TO PAY COMMISSION IS ENTIRELY FALSE.  SELLER HAD NO SUCH PURCHASER AND NO INTENTION OF SELLING THE APARTMENT ON HER OWN.  THE BUSINESS IS ALLEGING THIS BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID THAT THEY HAVE FRAUDULENTLY MANIPULATED CONTRACTS.  SELLER CAN ATTEST TO THE FACT THAT THE CONTRACTS WERE NOT PROVIDED IMMEDIATELY AFTER SIGNING  (AND HAS CORRESPONDENCE AS PROOF) BECAUSE THE REALTOR ASSURED SHE WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE DETAILS AND SEND COPIES OF EVERYTHING, WHICH SHE DID NOT.  THIS MATTER WILL BE INVESTIGATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND ETHICS BOARD, AS CLIENTS THAT EXPECT THAT THEY WILL BE DEALT WITH HONESTLY SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BECAUSE OF THEIR TRUST.   
The realtors
were dishonest, misleading and breached their duty to protect and promote
Seller's interests (1) by suggesting a higher listing price in order to
obtain the listing, (2) by fraudulently manipulating the agreements in order to
lock Seller into a year term, (3) by failing to explain the contractual
relationship being established in each agreement, (4) by failing to provide
fully executed and completed forms at the time of signing of the same, and (5)
by failing to present all offers to Seller.  The brokers of the realty should also be held
accountable for the transgressions of their agents, as well as for their
failure to respond or to value Seller's business.  Seller wishes to document the
maltreatment and unscrupulous practices of the business by filing this complaint.  The business has not only failed in protecting and promoting the Seller's interests,
but has caused additional stress and an undue burden on Seller with their flagrant disregard for truthful client service, and the business has used the
fraudulent agreement as a shackle in order to prevent the Seller from listing
with another realty that would better serve her needs.  There is absolutely no merit to the business' claims regarding Seller's attempt to "defraud" the business of commissions, as Seller agreed that any person who was introduced to the property and who later expressed interest therein would result in commission to the business, but the business refused this and refused to give a list of such persons to Seller in order to make things difficult for Seller.  The business has refused to cooperate or preserve good will even after the commission of fraud on their part.  This business should be rated very poorly for these practices and this complaint should be published for the general public.   
 
 
 
 
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Review: I LISTED WITH THE FOLLOWING REAL ESTATE AGENTS: AIDA C[redacted] AND OLIVA R[redacted] (TOGETHER, "REALTOR"), WHOSE MANAGER'S NAME IS JOSE J[redacted] ("BROKER") OF EXIT REALTY SUCCESS ("AGENCY"). I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE LISTING WOULD BE FOR A PERIOD OF 90 DAYS. I WOULD NEVER AGREE TO LIST FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR. THE REALTOR ADDED VALUES AND INFORMATION ON THE FORMS I SIGNED AFTER I SIGNED THEM. I DID NOT RECEIVE COPIES OF THE LISTING AGREEMENT (OR A FULL SET OF ALL THE DOCUMENTS I SIGNED AFTER EXECUTION, WHICH IS A BREACH OF THE DUTY OF A REAL ESTATE AGENT), EVEN AFTER REPEATED REQUESTS FOR THE SAME. I DID NOT KNOW THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENTS. I CORRESPONDED WITH THE BROKER AND, IN ADDITION TO MANY OTHER COMPLAINTS ABOUT THE REALTOR, I REQUESTED THE LISTING BE CANCELLED FOR FAILURE OF THE AGENT TO DUTIFULLY PROVIDE COPIES OF ALL SIGNED DOCUMENTS AND FOR FRAUDULENTLY ENTERING IN VALUES AFTER I EXECUTED THE DOCUMENTS. UNBEKNOWST TO ME, THE LISTING WAS REMOVED, BUT I DID NOT SIGN ANY AGREEMENT ALLOWING THE LISTING TO BE "WITHDRAWN" WITH COMMISSION STILL DUE TO THE REALTOR/AGENCY, BUT RATHER REQUESTED THAT AS THE LISTING WAS DEFECTIVE, THAT THE LISTING BE "CANCELLED" WITH NO FURTHER OBLIGATION OR COMMISSION DUE. MY FRIEND SPOKE TO THE BROKER AND TOLD ME THE BROKER WOULD CANCEL THE LISTING AND FOLLOWED UP WITH AN EMAIL. I RECEIVED NO RESPONSES TO MY CALLS OR E-MAILS TO BOTH THE BROKER AND AGENCY. I AM FILING THIS COMPLAINT AS THE FRAUDULENT AND UNPROFESSIONAL PRACTICES OF THE REALTOR, BROKER AND AGENCY HAVE UNDULY BURDENED ME, AND TO HAVE A COMPLAINT OF RECORD AS I PROCEED WITH THE SALE OF MY APARTMENT. I HAVE ALSO FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE DEPT. OF STATE.Desired Settlement: I would like the my listing to be CANCELLED without commission due and for me to be RELEASED from the agreement as of September **, 2015.

Business

Response:

1. [redacted], owner of said property, entered into an exclusive right to sell agreement with our company through our associates Ms. Aida C[redacted] and Ms. Oliva R[redacted], on June [redacted], 2015. Such agreement is due to expire on June [redacted], 2016. 2. [redacted] was provided copies of signed listing agreement; it was left on her dining room table. 3. Our company and associates acted in good faith, conducting open houses, and presented offers from buyers that were ready, willing and able to purchase the property. 4. After producing offers, [redacted] expressed that she had her own purchaser and had no intention of paying a commission. 5. Only after expressing her intent, did [redacted] refuse to cooperate any further. 6. According to Multiple Listing Service Rule 605.11: “If a listing is not to be shown for three (3) or more days, but less than 10, this must be entered in the MLS system along with the dates it will not be available to be shown. If the listing is to be Temporarily Off the Market for longer than 10 days it must be withdrawn from the system. (4/**)”. As a result, we had no other choice but to withdraw the property from Multiple Listing Service seeing as how [redacted] was no longer cooperating. Soon there after, [redacted] also had a mortgage broker become involved and interfere with our existing listing agreement.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

[Your Answer Here]UNFORTUNATELY, THE BUSINESS HAS ASSERTED FALSE CLAIMS. THE FORMS WERE MANIPULATED AFTER THEY WERE SIGNED. IN NO WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM WAS THE TERM OF ONE (1) YEAR AGREED TO BY SELLER. THE STANDARD TERM OF A LISTING AGREEMENT IS 90 DAYS. APARTMENTS IN THE AREA ARE ON OTHE MARKET FOR NOT LONGER THAN THAT PERIOD. NO COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE AREA WAS PROVIDED TO SELLER. NO COPIES OF ANY DOCUMENTS WERE PROVIDED UPON SIGNING, WHICH IS REQUIRED PURSUANT THE CODE OF ETHICS. AFTER 90 DAYS, THE EFFORTS OF THE BUSINESS WHICH WERE LACKLUSTER AT BEST DID NOT PRODUCE FRUITFUL RESULTS, AND THE SELLER REQUESTED THE LISTING BE CANCELLED. SELLER DID NOT AGREE TO LIST FOR YEAR, AND WAS NOT ADVISED OF THE TERMS OF ANY AGREEMENT UNTIL AFTER REQUESTING THE LISTING BE CANCELLED. THE REALTORS, BROKER AND OFFICE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE UNETHICAL PRACTICES OF ENTERING IN TERMS TO THE CONTRACTS WITHOUT SELLER'S CONSENT AND WITHOUT SELLER'S KNOWLEDGE. THE BUSINESS ALLEGING THAT SELLER HAD A PURCHASER AND DID NOT WISH TO PAY COMMISSION IS ENTIRELY FALSE. SELLER HAD NO SUCH PURCHASER AND NO INTENTION OF SELLING THE APARTMENT ON HER OWN. THE BUSINESS IS ALLEGING THIS BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID THAT THEY HAVE FRAUDULENTLY MANIPULATED CONTRACTS. SELLER CAN ATTEST TO THE FACT THAT THE CONTRACTS WERE NOT PROVIDED IMMEDIATELY AFTER SIGNING (AND HAS CORRESPONDENCE AS PROOF) BECAUSE THE REALTOR ASSURED SHE WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE DETAILS AND SEND COPIES OF EVERYTHING, WHICH SHE DID NOT. THIS MATTER WILL BE INVESTIGATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND ETHICS BOARD, AS CLIENTS THAT EXPECT THAT THEY WILL BE DEALT WITH HONESTLY SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BECAUSE OF THEIR TRUST. The realtors

were dishonest, misleading and breached their duty to protect and promote

Seller's interests (1) by suggesting a higher listing price in order to

obtain the listing, (2) by fraudulently manipulating the agreements in order to

lock Seller into a year term, (3) by failing to explain the contractual

relationship being established in each agreement, (4) by failing to provide

fully executed and completed forms at the time of signing of the same, and (5)

by failing to present all offers to Seller. The brokers of the realty should also be held

accountable for the transgressions of their agents, as well as for their

failure to respond or to value Seller's business. Seller wishes to document the

maltreatment and unscrupulous practices of the business by filing this complaint. The business has not only failed in protecting and promoting the Seller's interests,

but has caused additional stress and an undue burden on Seller with their flagrant disregard for truthful client service, and the business has used the

fraudulent agreement as a shackle in order to prevent the Seller from listing

with another realty that would better serve her needs. There is absolutely no merit to the business' claims regarding Seller's attempt to "defraud" the business of commissions, as Seller agreed that any person who was introduced to the property and who later expressed interest therein would result in commission to the business, but the business refused this and refused to give a list of such persons to Seller in order to make things difficult for Seller. The business has refused to cooperate or preserve good will even after the commission of fraud on their part. This business should be rated very poorly for these practices and this complaint should be published for the general public.

In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

Sincerely,

Business

Response:

As stated in previous correspondence: Since the seller no longer wished to cooperate, the property was removed from the market and has not been offered for sale by our company in accordance to Multiple Listing Service Rule 605.11: “… If the listing is to be Temporarily Off the Market for longer than 10 days it must be withdrawn from the system”. The seller previously stated that she was looking to “re-occupy her apartment”. If, in fact, the seller has no negotiations underway, and if in fact, the seller is looking to “re-occupy her apartment”, then the terms of the withdrawal of the property from the market would not affect her; a re-list obligation date and commission obligation date, would be of no consequence if the seller is not looking to move forward with any transaction during this time. The only time these terms would be put into effect is if the seller is undergoing negotiations for the sale of such property during the time the listing would have been in effect. Having a mortgage broker contact us regarding the unconditional release of her property, as well as the seller providing release documents that are only attainable to other realtors does not instill good faith on the seller’s behalf. Now the seller indicates that she is looking to “work with any other real estate...” in her most recent correspondence. The brokers were only contacted by the seller and her mortgage broker when requesting a release. At this time we are still open to discussing other amicable options which we are certain would result in a suitable outcome. Our listing contract and documentation are in order. As stated in previous answers; we have not had nor do we currently have issues cooperating with any other broker and moving forward with a sale. Nor do we have any issues marketing the property; we are certain we are capable of producing purchasers that are ready, willing and able to purchase at current fair market value given that we were already to do so during the time the seller was cooperative. We are also open to and welcome any offers the seller may already be in the process of negotiating.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and have determined that my complaint has NOT been resolved because:

Unfortunately, the business continues to put forth statements and assertions that do not address the issues of their fraudulently filling in the term of the listing contract without the seller’s consent or knowledge, which is the key reason why Seller no longer wishes to do business with this company at all or at any time in the future. In addition to this, Seller was also affected by the agents’ failure to agents to communicate at any point regarding the marketing of the property or feedback on any showing or open house; failure of the brokers to respond to e-mail and phone communications regarding the client’s dissatisfaction; refusal of the brokers to work with the Seller and provide an electronic copy of a release form acceptable to Seller and instead required Seller to travel 2 hours and take time off from work to find that the brokers had already left the office; and refusal to release the client from contract due to the client’s disappointment and desire to find another brokerage that conducts itself in an honest and trustworthy manner. As stated previously, the point of this complaint is to notify the community that customers should be wary of this business as they will likely force you to continue to work with them when you are unhappy, and claim they are entitled to commissions for underperforming, being unethical, non-responsive and argumentative. Unlike reputable brokerages, this business does not offer easy release from contract and does not work to satisfy clients; instead this business uses the contract, though fraudulently and haphazardly put together, as proof of their entitlement to any commissions. The Seller/client/complainant would like for the complaint to be closed and published on the record.

In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

Sincerely,