Hatrack River Forum: What not to say to DoJ Antitrust Investigatior

This is topic What not to say to DoJ Antitrust Investigatior in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=034101

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :

From the Washington Post. First, the general background:

quote:
The Department of Justice has two blunt warnings for the American home real estate establishment:

• Do not block efforts to save consumers money through rebates of real estate commissions.

• Do not stand in the way of discount "fee-for-service" firms that will list sellers' properties for a fixed-dollar amount but not perform all the traditional brokerage services, such as holding open houses or advising on buyers' offers.

Part of this was a suit filed to overturn a ban on commission rebates:

quote:
A week earlier, the department sued the Kentucky Real Estate Commission, a regulatory body dominated by state realty association board members, for prohibiting brokers from giving customers rebates on sales commissions.

What I found really amusing were some of the comments made to DoJ personnel:

quote:
Hewitt quoted comments made to Justice Department investigators by Kentucky Realtors who oppose competitors' offering commission rebates: "I think this would just take money right out of our pocket," one said. "We work too hard to give it away," said another. "I am for the [rebate ban] as it stands now. If inducements were allowed, they could lead to competitive behavior."

Were they trying to make the case for the government?

Dagonee

Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :

Wow, some people are self-centered to a stupid degree.

Posted by urbanX (Member # 1450) on :

[ROFL]

Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :

Part of the reason I find this amusing is that lawyers have faced two major antitrust challenges over the last 35 years or so. One was for fee-fixing, because the ethical rules prohibited charging too little money, and one was for laws that required the presence of an attorney at certain real estate transactions where one wasn't really required. The non-legal portion of the real estate industry benefited greatly from both.

There were two actions described in the article. The one I didn't quote involves a "minimum service" standard for a real estate broker, which would essentially ban Zip Realty and the like.

These actions are almost exactly parallel to the ones pursued against bar associations way back when. Precedents from that time would likely be used against the real estate agents.

Dagonee