As discussed here on Wednesday (On Buyers Suing Agents), San Diego home buyer Marty Ummel is suing her real estate agent Mike Little, saying they were deceived, defrauded actually, and their home wasn’t worth what they paid for it.
The Ummel’s appeared on the Today Show this morning, along with a legal analyst. This is a very interesting video and worth watching. For the life of me, I can’t get this thing to embed on the blog, so please click here to view the video
Phoenix NBC Channel 12 ran a story today on this as well. They have a little video snippet on that page that quotes your’s truly and a commenter here. (And IMHO, they swiped Athol’s comment — “This may be the tip of the iceberg” — to open the video!)
The case is set to go to trial in March.
Technorati Tags: Marty Ummel, real estate lawsuit
If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to this blog via email or RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Thanks for reading! We value your thoughts and opinions, so please feel free to leave a comment. Please contact us if you have any questions or need help. You can also get automatic updates for this blog free via:
{ 12 comments… read them below or add one }
Late Night Austin Real Estate Blog 01.26.08 at 4:01 am
I am a little worried about this. On one hand I dont think they have a case. But if you get a bunch of jurors that lost money on there homes and are looking for someone to blame who knows what the result could be. This is just another piece of extra liability we dont need.
Lani Anglin-Rosales 01.26.08 at 7:29 pm
It seems to me that if we give this potential case airtime, we are just perpetuating the possibility of our industry being drug through the mud, no matter what the legal outcome ends up being. What do you think?
Jay - The Phoenix Real Estate Guy 01.26.08 at 8:37 pm
Maybe Lani. But on the other hand, I don’t think we (we as in the real estate industry) can just ignore it and hope it goes away.
Personally, it makes me ill when I hear about people (allegedly in this case) that were fed a line of BS by their agent and/or lender.
Don’t get me wrong, people need to be responsible for their own actions. But we as agents do have a duty and obligation to help our clients.
I think it will be interesting to watch this case develop. I don’t think the Ummel’s will prevail. But then again, I didn’t think OJ would prevail either. ANYTHING can happen in front of a jury.
But even if the Ummel’s don’t win the suit, there is little chance that that Realtors will “win”. I suspect that we as a group will come out looking like a bunch of sleazy dorks, regardless of what the court says….
Denver Home Refinance 01.26.08 at 9:16 pm
I think the burden of proof would have to be very high, but juries can be unpredictable. If anything comes of this, a new highly specialized form of insurance coverage will be born, umbrella coverage for agents.
Richard Johnston 01.27.08 at 5:12 am
Looking at the video, we don’t really see the facts or the response from the Realtor. From my experience, buyers these days know more about whats going on than I do. The information is online and some sites even provide historical information for free.
I mean, how hard could it have been for the buyer to ask what the active, pending, and sold homes were in the area. If the house was overprised by $150K, how would the appraiser appraise the home without nearby comps.
These people definately don’t seem stupid and I’m sure they know how to use the internet, I think they are upset at their agent because they think they overpaid.
Was this the only home that the buyer’s looked at in the area? There are so many questions to ask both parties. Nonetheless, I think to protect oneself from future liabilities, maybe it would be best to at least show comps of the nearby area including active, sold, pending within the last year and have the buyer sign-off on it.
Richard Johnston, RE/MAX OTB Estates
http://www.estates.la
Henry S. 01.27.08 at 6:02 pm
Rumor has it Mr. Little showed the Ummels appx. 60 homes, LOL. Also, they dismissed another agent before Little & canceled 2 other deals before they bought the house in question! They may be ‘trailblazers’ . . . but only out for themselves
Norm Fisher 01.27.08 at 6:02 pm
Jay,
As you say, it’s hard to know what might happen, but I’ll hazard a guess.
She loses and it costs her far more than she thinks she lost in the home purchase. She’ll end up eating the defendant’s legal fees, and possibly be sued. This guy’s E&O provider is going to fight it like their future depends on it, and it probably does. The guest lawyer tore her case apart, probably without much preparation.
I guess we’ll know in March.
Does anyone know the agent involved and what kind of a reputation he has in his area?
Henry S. 01.27.08 at 6:03 pm
Norm you are correct, the legal analyst trashed the case. She didn’t even know the whole story. Very sad.
Jim Klinge 01.28.08 at 7:30 am
I’ve met Mike Little before and he’s a pretty good agent, but he was quoted in the local paper of calling the plantiff a “nut job”. That should send the E&O insurance company scrambling for a settlement.
Norm Fisher 01.28.08 at 9:09 am
Jim,
Yes, “nut job” was probably not the way to go.
Jay - The Phoenix Real Estate Guy 01.28.08 at 10:16 am
Jim - agreed. I mentioned in On Buyers Suing Agents that calling Ms. Ummel a “nut job” wasn’t quite prudent. Particularly saying that to a NYT reporter….
franky 10.28.08 at 12:26 am
thanks for this information. you can find more information at : http://home-refinance-mortgage.....gspot.com/