The Four Walls Group

Stephanie Conklin and her roommate *** were referred to our company by a real estate referral company, Opcity, in March 2019. At that time, one of our agents, Tamika Maisonet, began working with the customer in their home search showing them multiple properties until finally settling on a new construction home in Dallas, GA. Below is a timeline of the events and interactions.

3/1/2019 - Tamika made initial contact, spoke to Stephanie Conklin regarding what type of home she was looking for. She told her about a home she was interested in so Tamika called the community to get details and set up an appointment to view.

3/2/2019 - Tamika met Stephanie and *** at a new home community to show property.

3/5/2019 - Stephanie and *** were ready to get pre-qualified so Tamika referred them to a mortgage lender.

3/25/2019 - Tamika received a group text from Stephanie and *** regarding the Blair floorplan that they really liked and options they wanted in their next home.

3/25/2019 - Tamika spoke with an on-site agent and the builder was no longer building that floorplan in Georgia.

3/26/2019 - Tamika spoke to another agent that gave her other floorplans that were very similar to the Blair floorplan and what communities were building that floorplan.

3/26/2019 - *** informed Tamika that they had selected the Edenwood community.

3/27/2019 - Tamika met with the onsite agent for Edenwood and let him know what they were looking for. He drafted up the pricing and Tamika emailed the pricing to *** and Stephanie.

3/28/2019 - Tamika let them know the incentives the community was offering. They wanted to know the fees of the lender so she inquired about that and let them know. They also wanted to know the dimensions of the backyards but the on-site agent didn't have that information.

3/28/2019 - They had a few other questions that Tamika couldn't answer so she told them she could set up an appointment with the on-site agent at their convenience.

3/31/2019 - Stephanie and *** visited the homesite without inviting Tamika. Tamika received a call that they were at the new home site and signing a contract. They informed her that due to all her leg work they were adding her to the contract as their Buyer's agent.
April 2019-September 2019 - Tamika called, emailed and texted the customer multiple times to coordinate meeting at the homesite and gather details around the progress of the build but received little to no response from either *** or Stephanie.

9/14/2019 - *** and Stephanie reached out Jules Harper, the lead agent for the team The Four Walls Group at Keller Williams Realty, and voiced their concerns that Tamika had not provided adequate service and that they did not want her to receive a commission from the sale which was being paid by the brokerage listing the property to the brokerage that Tamika is affiliated with which is Keller Williams Realty Signature Partners. Jules offered to take over the duties of the agent and provide the needed services through closing.

9/25/2019 - Jules met with Stephanie and *** along with the builder to be brought up to speed on the details of the new build. At that time, he offered to visit the site at any time when requested to take photos and provide feedback on the progress. He also received the builder's contact information to establish regular communication. Jules committed to communicating and updating the customer on the progress at least once per week and even more frequently as needed.

9/30/2019 - *** asked several questions via text regarding lending, the progress of the brick being set on the house, a request for an inspector, a request for the real estate group to compensate them for their dissatisfaction with the Tamika's service, advise on title insurance, and guidance on when rates drop. Jules responded the same day to each of the questions posed. Included in the response was as offer as a suitable resolution and to appease their concerns for a home warranty or termite bond or something of equitable value since the builder was providing these services already. The responses and offer were received with gratitude stating "Awesome news!".

10/1/2019 - Jules checked in with the customer to confirm that the lender had made contact with the customer to answer any questions. They responded that she did and mentioned that they had several questions that they would like to discuss regarding the lender and their processes. Jules recommended a conference call between the couple and himself and setup the call to discuss their questions.

10/3/2019 - Jules drove to the neighborhood and took photos of the progress on the brick setting and sent to the customer.

10/7/2019 - After speaking with the lender, the customer asked Jules if they could apply with another lender. Jules replied that they could and that it was not too late. After the customer spoke with the original lender to clear up some misunderstandings they replied that they were comfortable proceeding with that lender.

10/14/2019 - Jules advised the customer that the rough grade and driveway were being done that week. Jules offered to stop by once the driveway was poured and take photos to avoid the customer having to make the long trip if desired.

10/18/2019 - Jules advised that the grading was being done at that moment and the driveway was being poured the following week.

10/24/2019 - Late that night *** sent a message to Jules stating that the price of the appraisal being charged by the lender which was $525.00 was steep in her opinion and asked what it included and asked if Jules could check to see when the lender would be sending final numbers to them.

10/25/2019 - Jules responded early the following morning that the appraisal price was within the typical range and also provided what appraisals generally included. Jules also agreed to have the lender contact them regarding the final numbers. They mentioned that during their research they found some appraisals to be slightly less with some being $400. *** asked if they needed to be present for the appraisal, and Jules explained that they did not so that the appraiser's work could be 100% objective without buyer or seller influence. *** thanked Jules for the information provided.

10/31/2019 - Jules advised the customers that the carpet was being installed.

11/6/2019 - *** sent a text to Jules stating that she thought he would have been at orientation that day. Jules advised that the builder nor the customer had informed him of the date/time of the orientation meeting at any point. Jules then advised that he would be at the final walkthrough and asked what time worked best for the customer. Jules never received a reply from the customer with a specific date except that it would be best if done the night before closing.

11/8/2019 - *** messaged Jules that she looked at the preliminary closing statement and acknowledged the commission paid from the listing brokerage to the selling brokerage and that it would be a good time to discuss possible compensation to the buyer as a form of customer satisfaction for what they believed Tamika did not provide in the way of services. At no point did they make claim to the fact that Jules had not provided the expected level of service after taking over. Jules called *** to offer what was comparable to a home warranty in the amount of $400 which was what was agreed to on 9/30/2019. *** mentioned that she did not feel that was satisfactory and Jules explained that the gross commission earned by the Selling Brokerage which is Keller Williams Realty Signature Partners is divided several ways as most brokerages pay their agents and paid to multiple parties including the brokerage, the agents involved, referral companies (Opcity), and MLS services. He mentioned that the $400.00 offered was 20% of the previous agent's compensation and that was fair to resolve any disputes that they *** have had. *** became upset, refused to receive any compensation, and then proceeded to request that she not have any representation at closing and for the builder and lender to not share any information about the closing with the agents involved. Jules honored her wishes and did not attend the closing and made arrangements for the brokerage to have the payment delivered to the brokerage office.

It became evident to the agent team near the end of the transaction that the customer intentionally scheduled meetings directly with the builder and did not give the agents the opportunity to be onsite. The agents provided ample service and communication throughout the entire process but once the customer became aware of the commission they believed was being paid directly to one agent instead of the brokerage they decided to pursue some form of a kickback by stating they were not properly represented. The customer is pursuing a r