Just because I’m currently not an “active agent” doesn’t mean I’ve fallen off the face of the planet or have been suddenly afflicted with senility.
Up until about nine months ago, I received the “Westlaw Real Estate Practitioner” service in my home, due to a subscription a law firm-client of mine had. When it became too expensive ($569 mo) for them, they cut it down to the bare essentials and no longer have a valid online password. This gave me access to public records far beyond what REALIST offers (avail. to MLS subscribers), but NOT some of the statistical models and lists of currently active, contingent, pending and bomk properties that REALIST subscribers are privvy to. I COULD avail myself of REALIST if I wished to pay the fee. I still get relevant case law and subscribe to several online RE publications and am still an active licensee.
Aside from that, I’ve worked on many different RE cases over the years involving RE Agency, contracts, land use issues, CQUA issues, fraud, embezzlement, breach of fiduciary duty, quiet title, construction defect (HOA), RESPA violations, administrative law and appeals, etc.
I HAVE participated in short-sales (before anyone ever heard of them)
and DO HAVE many years RE sales experience BUT THIS WAS ALL BEFORE ANY OF THE PROPRIETARY AGENT INFORMATION WAS RELEASED TO THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.
Several fundamental things about CA real estate HAVE NOT CHANGED over the years. The LAW has evolved somewhat but the basic principles of RE, including agency; non-judicial foreclosure; title insurance; the subdivision map act; property management; covenants, conditions and restrictions; forms of ownership; escrows; easements; landlord-tenant issues, general plan and taxation, etc. have NOT CHANGED.
[quote=sdrealtor]Also please dont confuse me with BG who is an entirely different viewpoint. She is not an active REa gent and is in the legal profession so she is overly sensitive to the intracies of the contract law. While I cant argue with her interpreations of the legalities the reality of what actually happens in the open market tendss to be quite different.[/quote]
drboom, I understand what sdr is saying here but I view events as a court would, after a party to a transaction has already alleged they were damaged in a real estate transaction or land-use issue and sued (or were sued). I HAVE been on the “street” or in the “open market” but the way I view transactions may be more defensive or with an eye out to problematic issues than the way sdr views them. Neither positive or negative . . . just different. In other words, it would be *difficult* to successfully blow smoke up my a$$ at this late date but you could always try. That’s why we have a “free country.” ;=)
