WHY IS THERE NO CLEAR DISCLOSURE OF REPRESENTATION?

Why Isn’t Representation Explained Up Front?

Single Agent. Transaction Broker. No Brokerage Relationship.

Talking points:

• Buyers and sellers should know which relationship applies before signing.
• The differences should be explained in plain language.
• Consumers should understand the duties they receive and the duties that do not apply.
• The relationship should be prominent on the first page, not buried in the agreement.

My concern: Why have the forms and disclosures not been designed to make these differences unmistakable?

Could Clear Disclosure Challenge the Current System?

What happens when consumers understand the difference?

Talking points:

• If consumers were clearly told that transaction brokerage provides limited, nonfiduciary representation, some might ask why it is the default.
• They might ask why a brokerage can work with both sides.
• They might ask how the brokerage is compensated when the buyer has no agent.
• They might choose single-agent representation instead.

My concern: Does the current system benefit from consumers not fully understanding the differences?

I believe this deserves an answer. I am not claiming to know the private motives of every association or brokerage. I am asking why clear, prominent disclosure has not become the standard.