[quote=bearishgurl][quote=SD Realtor]I agree with UR. I have no idea why this is so landmark. This is a simple case of dumb and dumber. Dumb seller and dumber agent.[/quote]
Don’t forget, SDR, that this “dumber” agent was acting as a “dual agent” in this case; that is, she had a fiduciary duty to Buyer(s) Holmes, as well, who SOLD their house and closed escrow on it during this transaction based solely upon the representations to them made my Seller’s agent and also THEIR agent (Summer).[/quote]
pablo, I see now why you asked me where I got the impression that Summer was a “dual agent.” When I wrote this, it was 3 mos AFTER the thread was started and I had forgotten the exact facts of the case. Hence, my searching for new commentary online.
I understood from the beginning that Summer was working in a “dual-agency capacity” but NOT legally a “dual agent.” She WAS the agent for the Holmeses but did not legally owe them a fiduciary duty. The Holmeses prevailed on the lower std of care, as they should have, because of the egregiousness of the non-disclosure.
