[quote=pabloesqobar]Another irrelevant diatribe that makes no sense. I know for a fact that this was not a case of dual agency. The court explicitly states it, and the defendant argues they have no liability BECAUSE THEY NEVER REPRESENTED THE BUYERS. All of the cases and arguments by the Defendants are based on the premise that they have no fiduciary duties to the Buyer/Plaintiffs.
Your continued insistence to the contrary is pathological.[/quote]
pablo, have you actually READ anything I posted here? It has become obvious that you are not familiar with various CAR forms, their language and how that language is interpreted by a court. Here’s an except from an article written by the same attorney as above for the Sierra Sun:
TRUCKEE/TAHOE, Calif. — Real estate agents be advised of a new case — Holmes v. Summer. You have yet another disclosure obligation.
House listing
Phil and Jenille Holmes made an offer to buy a home in Huntington Beach through the seller’s listing agent Sieglinde Summer, a RE/MAX office. The Holmeses did not have an agent.
An offer was submitted, a counter made and escrow opened with a sales price of $749,000 with a 30-day escrow…
