To deceive someone, usually by making that person do or believe something that they did not intend 

TO:
Diano Hall,
Teresa King Kinney (Major PAC Investor ),
Rep. Toby Overdorf
Rep. Jason Shoaf – Member, Tallahassee Board of Realtors®
Rep. Robert Brackett – Member, Realtors® Association of Indian River County
Rep. Rachel Plakon – Member, Orlando Regional Realtor® Association
Rep. Susan Plasencia – Employee, Orlando Regional Realtor® Association
Rep. Jose Alvarez – Member, Osceola County Association of Realtors®
Rep. James Buchanan – Member, Realtor® Association of Sarasota and Manatee
Rep. Danny Nix – Member, Realtors® of Punta Gorda–Port Charlotte–North Port–DeSoto
Rep. Yvette Benarroch – Member, Marco Island Area Association of Realtors®
Rep. Lauren Melo – Member, Naples Area Board of Realtors®
Rep. Jim Mooney – Member, Florida Keys Board of Realtors®
Rep. Jason Shoaf – Member, Tallahassee Board of Realtors®
Rep. Robert Brackett – Member, Realtors® Association of Indian River County
Rep. Rachel Plakon – Member, Orlando Regional Realtor® Association
Rep. Susan Plasencia – Employee, Orlando Regional Realtor® Association
Rep. Jose Alvarez – Member, Osceola County Association of Realtors®
Rep. James Buchanan – Member, Realtor® Association of Sarasota and Manatee
Rep. Danny Nix – Member, Realtors® of Punta Gorda–Port Charlotte–North Port–DeSoto
Rep. Yvette Benarroch – Member, Marco Island Area Association of Realtors®
Rep. Lauren Melo – Member, Naples Area Board of Realtors®
Rep. Jim Mooney – Member, Florida Keys Board of Realtors®

DISCLOSURE

I am a Florida-licensed real estate broker.

CC’ed & BCC’ed on this correspondence are representatives and/or members of:

  • U.S. Department of Justice
  • Consumer Federation of America
  • Florida and national news organizations
  • Florida Realtors® PAC
  • Florida Realtor® associations and their members
  • Real estate industry colleagues
  • Other interested parties and organizations

This correspondence may also be shared publicly at BeenDuped.com as part of my ongoing effort to obtain direct answers regarding consumer representation, compensation transparency, and Florida’s Transaction Brokerage system.

As a member of Miami Realtors® + RWorld, Florida Realtors®, the National Association of Realtors®, and as a Florida real estate broker, I am formally requesting direct answers to several questions concerning Florida’s Transaction Broker system.

MY CENTRAL QUESTION

What specific benefit does Florida’s presumption of Transaction Brokerage (FL Statute 475.278) provide to a home buyer or seller?

Florida presumes Transaction Brokerage, which provides limited, nonfiduciary representation, rather than Single Agency, which includes duties such as loyalty, obedience, confidentiality, and full disclosure.

I have spent considerable time trying to identify why limited representation should be Florida’s default.

I just cannot identify the consumer benefit.

I can, however, identify potential benefits to brokerages and agents, including limited liability, limited representation, the ability to work with both sides of a transaction, and circumstances in which a brokerage may receive compensation associated with both sides and, depending on the situation, triple the compensation.

So what is the corresponding benefit to the consumer?

REPRESENTATION AND IN-HOUSE TRANSACTIONS

Consider an in-house transaction where one agent from a brokerage works with the seller and another works with the buyer.

  • The buyer wants the best possible deal.
  • The seller wants the best possible deal.
  • The brokerage and agents have a financial interest in seeing the transaction close.

Those interests do not necessarily align.

Under Transaction Brokerage, neither consumer necessarily has a fiduciary representative within that brokerage who is obligated to place that consumer’s interests ahead of the brokerage’s interests.

Who, then, is obligated to put the individual buyer’s or seller’s interests first?

I am not suggesting that every brokerage or agent acts improperly. I am asking why Florida makes limited, nonfiduciary representation the presumed relationship when a higher level of representation is available.

WHY ISN’T THERE A CLEAR DISCLOSURE OF REPRESENTATION?

Why shouldn’t every buyer and seller receive a separate written Disclosure of Representation at the beginning of the relationship clearly explaining:

Single Agent — Transaction Broker — No Brokerage Relationship

The disclosure should explain in plain language what duties the consumer receives and what duties the consumer gives up.

For example, Transaction Brokerage’s limited-confidentiality requirements restrict disclosure of certain information, including that a buyer would pay more than the amount submitted in a written offer.

Does the average Florida seller understand that?

If not, why shouldn’t that limitation be clearly disclosed before the consumer chooses the relationship?

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE COMPENSATION?

I also have serious concerns regarding provisions in Florida’s newer and updated real estate forms that I consider compensation loopholes.

Consider a buyer who proceeds without a buyer’s agent believing:

“If I don’t use an agent, I will save the buyer-agent commission.”

What actually happens to that compensation?

  • Does the seller save it?
  • Does the buyer receive the financial benefit?
  • Or, depending upon the listing agreement, can the listing brokerage receive or retain additional compensation because there is no separate buyer’s broker?

If the listing brokerage can receive compensation that the consumer reasonably believed would otherwise have gone to a buyer’s brokerage, why isn’t that disclosed prominently and unmistakably to both buyer and seller?

A consumer should not give up professional representation believing that doing so will create a financial savings if the anticipated savings can instead become additional compensation to the listing brokerage.

Likewise, the seller should be able to look at the agreement and immediately understand:

“If the buyer has an agent, this is what my listing brokerage receives. If the buyer does not have an agent, this is what my listing brokerage receives.”

There should be no ambiguity.

I refer to provisions that permit a brokerage to receive compensation under these circumstances as “loopholes.” If the Association believes that characterization is incorrect, I welcome the explanation.

Please explain exactly how these compensation provisions operate in practice and who financially benefits when there is no separate buyer’s broker.

WHO LOOKED OUT FOR FLORIDA HOME BUYERS AND SELLERS?

I also sent an email to Florida Realtors® asking a very simple but important question:

Who represented or looked out for the interests of Florida home buyers and sellers when new real estate forms were created or existing forms, such as listing agreements, were revised?

I specifically asked who participated in the process from a consumer-protection perspective and requested the names of those individuals.

As of today, I have not received an answer. View my written request here.

MY EXPERIENCE TRYING TO GET ANSWERS

I also raised these questions with House Representative Toby Overdorf.

During our first telephone conversation, he explained that he did not have the professional real estate experience to be familiar with the issues I was raising.

I subsequently provided my concerns in writing and referred to the 15 Florida lawmakers with professional experience or familiarity with the real estate industry who could independently verify the issues. I also offered a meeting or three-way telephone conversation with a knowledgeable lawmaker.

That opportunity was not accepted by Representative Overdorf, and my central questions remain unanswered. View email dated 12/17/2025 and/or 01/05/2026.

This leads directly back to the consumer:

Florida home buyers and sellers aren’t real estate professionals either.

If a lawmaker can have difficulty understanding the distinction between Transaction Brokerage and Single Agency, how can the average consumer reasonably be expected to understand it without a clear, mandatory Disclosure of Representation?

FLORIDA REALTORS® PAC ENDORSEMENTS

Representative Overdorf has also received endorsement from the Florida Realtors® PAC in previous election cycles, and Florida Realtors® PAC has supported and endorsed a substantial number of Florida lawmakers.

Florida Realtors® PAC endorsed 100+ of Florida’s 120 House members — approximately 86% of the entire chamber.

That raises an important question:

When one industry organization has endorsed such an overwhelming majority of lawmakers, how much influence can that industry have when consumers ask those same lawmakers to change laws governing that industry?

And it raises an even bigger question:

Could this influence help explain why so many lawmakers remain silent—even lawmakers who are familiar with the real estate industry and should understand these issues?

When concerns involving consumer representation, transparency, and potentially millions of dollars paid by Florida home buyers and sellers are brought directly to lawmakers, silence deserves an explanation.

Is there a connection between that level of political support and the lack of action?

Looking at this strictly from the perspective of an ordinary Florida home buyer, seller, or citizen:

At what point does the percentage of lawmakers endorsed by a PAC representing an industry they are responsible for regulating become so substantial that it creates, at a minimum, a public perception of undue influence or a potential conflict of interest?

If 80% does not raise that concern, what percentage would?

I am not alleging that an endorsement establishes corruption or that any lawmaker has acted improperly. Political endorsements and participation are lawful. But there is an important difference between proving corruption and asking whether the level of industry political involvement creates an appearance of influence that deserves public scrutiny.

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE QUESTIONS INVOLVE THE LAWMAKERS THEMSELVES?

Politicians frequently say they support people who speak up, expose problems, and raise legitimate concerns.

But does that support remain when the concerns being raised involve the lawmakers themselves, the laws they oversee, or an industry that has provided them substantial political support?

I am raising specific questions about consumer representation, compensation, disclosure, and the influence of the real estate industry. Those questions can be answered based on facts.

Will Florida lawmakers examine these concerns with the same seriousness they expect when concerns are raised about someone else?

And when 100+ of 120 House members, approximately 86%, have received an endorsement from the Florida Realtors® PAC, shouldn’t Florida citizens be entitled to ask whether that relationship has any influence on lawmakers’ willingness to examine laws affecting the real estate industry?

That question does not presume wrongdoing.

It asks for transparency, accountability, and an explanation.

Otherwise, it is understandable why members of the public may question whether the current system primarily benefits consumers or the industry.

PLEASE ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS DIRECTLY

As a member of these Realtor® organizations, I respectfully request answers to the following:

  1. What specific benefit does Transaction Brokerage provide to a Florida buyer?
  2. What specific benefit does Transaction Brokerage provide to a Florida seller?
  3. Why should limited, nonfiduciary representation be Florida’s legal presumption instead of Single Agency?
  4. Why shouldn’t every buyer and seller receive a clear written Disclosure of Representation at the beginning of the relationship explaining Single Agent, Transaction Broker, and No Brokerage Relationship?
  5. In an in-house transaction involving both buyer and seller, who is obligated to place each individual consumer’s interests ahead of the brokerage’s financial interest in closing the transaction?
  6. If a buyer proceeds without a buyer’s agent believing this will save the buyer-broker compensation, what happens to that compensation under the current listing forms? Can the listing brokerage receive or retain additional compensation, and if so, why isn’t that prominently disclosed?

TWO QUESTIONS FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBER

I would particularly appreciate an individual response from each Board member to the following two questions:

QUESTION 7 — PRESUMPTION OF SINGLE AGENCY

Will you, as an individual Board member, support changing Florida Statute §475.278 from the presumption of Transaction Brokerage to the presumption of Single Agency?

Transaction Brokerage would not be eliminated. It would remain available when a buyer or seller knowingly and affirmatively chooses limited representation after receiving a clear written Disclosure of Representation.

Please answer YES or NO.

If your answer is NO, please explain why you believe Transaction Brokerage should remain Florida’s presumed relationship and identify the specific benefit that maintaining that presumption provides to Florida home buyers and sellers.

QUESTION 8 — COMPENSATION TRANSPARENCY

Will you, as an individual Board member, support changing the applicable Florida real estate forms to remove what I consider compensation “loopholes” and make brokerage compensation completely transparent to buyers and sellers?

Specifically, will you support revising the forms so consumers can clearly understand:

  • Exactly how much the listing brokerage is being paid;
  • How much, if any, may be paid to a buyer’s brokerage;
  • What happens to that amount if there is no buyer’s broker;
  • Whether the listing brokerage can receive additional compensation when the buyer is unrepresented;
  • Whether compensation changes when both sides of the transaction are handled within the same brokerage; and
  • Whether compensation that is not paid to a buyer’s brokerage is retained by the listing brokerage or remains with the seller.

Again, please answer YES or NO.

If your answer is NO, please explain why you believe the current compensation provisions should remain unchanged.

I am not asking the Board to accept my characterization of these provisions as “loopholes.”

If the Association or an individual Board member believes that characterization is incorrect, please explain why and explain exactly how the provisions operate in practice.

MY LARGER QUESTION

Will you support changing Florida’s system so consumers receive the highest level of representation by default and can clearly see, before signing an agreement, exactly whom their agent represents and exactly where their money goes?

REQUEST TO FORWARD THIS EMAIL

Diano Hall & Teresa King Kinney,
Please forward this email in its entirety to all appropriate Miami Realtors® + RWorld leadership and Martin County REALTORS® of the Treasure Coast, including:

  • Corporate Board of Directors
  • Division Board Leaders — RWorld and Miami
  • Miami + RWorld Corporate Board
  • YPN-MIAMI Board of Governors
  • Regional Board Leadership — Broward, Treasure Coast, and Palm Beach County
  • Martin County Leadership (MCRTC Board of Directors)

Please confirm receipt of this message and confirm that it has been forwarded as requested.

I would also appreciate it if each individual Board member receiving this correspondence would respond YES or NO to Questions 7 and 8, rather than only receiving a single general response on behalf of the Association.

A copy of this correspondence will be provided to news organizations and published on BeenDuped.com, together with related correspondence with lawmakers, Realtor® associations, the U.S. Department of Justice, and other organizations.

I am not looking for a general statement about consumer choice or the real estate industry.

I am respectfully requesting direct answers to the questions above.

IN MY NEXT CORRESPONDENCE

My next emails will address several related issues:

  • What actually changed for consumers following the class-action lawsuit and settlement?
  • Are real estate commissions now truly and fully negotiable for buyers and sellers?
  • The talking points points with link to videos you will find on the BeenDuped.com homepage

My current answer: Absolutely not. I will explain the basis for that conclusion.

59-MINUTE PODCAST — NOVEMBER 14, 2023

Busting Real Estate Collusion and Price Fixing With Attorney Mike Ketchmark

Can agents still use what I consider “scare tactics” to persuade sellers to offer buyer-broker compensation?

My current answer: Absolutely. Again, I will provide the basis for that position.

ASSOCIATION LEADERSHIP COMPENSATION

I will also address another question that I believe Association members have a right to understand:

Are individuals serving in so-called “volunteer” Association leadership positions receiving compensation?

According to the tax filing I reviewed, David Serle and Jonathan Lickstein were each reported as receiving $24,000 in compensation. https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/591237171

I will also examine compensation reported for National Association of Realtors® leadership. According to the tax filing I reviewed, Kevin Sears was reported at $357,216 and Kevin C. Brown at $228,810, with approximately 30 hours per week reported for those positions.

If these are considered volunteer leadership positions, I will be asking what these payments represent, who approves them, how they are funded, and whether members are clearly informed about them.

NAR LEADERSHIP AND THE “CULTURE OF EXCESS”

Questions about leadership compensation and the use of members’ dues deserve transparency and accountability.

According to reporting by NOWBAM, when Bob Goldberg became CEO of the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR), his compensation package included benefits such as:

  • Private club memberships in Chicago and Washington, plus a country club of his choice, including an initiation fee of up to $75,000.
  • First-class airline tickets for him and his wife.
  • A monthly car allowance of $1,500.
  • $2,250 per month for utilities and insurance at his Chicago pied-à-terre.
  • Paid pet-sitting services when he traveled for business.

The article also reports that Goldberg’s salary increased from $1.2 million to $2.6 million over five years.

These reported benefits raise important questions about NAR leadership compensation, spending priorities, and accountability to its members.

Who approves these compensation packages? How are they justified? And are members given enough information to understand how their dues are being used?

Read the full article: NAR’s Spending Exposed: Six-Figure Volunteer Perks

Members deserve transparency about how their money is spent, particularly when leadership compensation and benefits are involved.

FOR NOW, MY REQUEST IS STRAIGHTFORWARD

  • If Transaction Brokerage provides a meaningful benefit to Florida home buyers and sellers, please identify that benefit.
  • If Single Agency should not be Florida’s presumed relationship, please explain why.

And to each Board member:

Will you support changing the presumption from Transaction Brokerage to Single Agency?

YES or NO?

Will you support changing the real estate forms to eliminate what I consider compensation loopholes and provide complete compensation transparency?

YES or NO?

Transparency and direct answers are what I am asking for.

Thank you for your time.

Please confirm receipt, confirm that this email has been forwarded as requested, and provide direct responses to the questions above.