Manipulation of days on Market (D.O.M)

[NotCranky]

Knowing the product ,comps and market situation overall and negotiating well is more important than DOM. But how do you tell that to someone who has ample evidence that our industry is deceptive after a BS move like taking away days on market? It only increases the mistrust. Yes I hear you SD R. It is easy to get all info on a houses history. I feel that is not the point.

I think stuff like this reinforces the image that the REIC is monopolizing the business by making Realtors indispensible to the parties in a transaction, which of course is how it has always has worked, except for a few maverick FSBO’S.Yes the NAR lobbies for an uneven playing field. So does every other organization of national proportions. The situation may be breaking down we will see.

[NotCranky]

Knowing the product ,comps and market situation overall and negotiating well is more important than DOM. But how do you tell that to someone who has ample evidence that our industry is deceptive after a BS move like taking away days on market? It only increases the mistrust. Yes I hear you SD R. It is easy to get all info on a houses history. I feel that is not the point.

I think stuff like this reinforces the image that the REIC is monopolizing the business by making Realtors indispensible to the parties in a transaction, which of course is how it has always has worked, except for a few maverick FSBO’S.Yes the NAR lobbies for an uneven playing field. So does every other organization of national proportions. The situation may be breaking down we will see.

[lniles]

Realturds doctor photos to make properties look bigger. They falsify comps using cash-back schemes so nobody knows what the real sale price is on nearby homes. They advertise properties with asking prices they will never accept just so their house will show up in a lower-price-range search. They pressure appraisors by threatening not to use them again if they don’t appraise at the price they want. They make a lot of money by doing these things. Why the issue with DOM? Why should they be ethical about that and nothing else?

[lniles]

Realturds doctor photos to make properties look bigger. They falsify comps using cash-back schemes so nobody knows what the real sale price is on nearby homes. They advertise properties with asking prices they will never accept just so their house will show up in a lower-price-range search. They pressure appraisors by threatening not to use them again if they don’t appraise at the price they want. They make a lot of money by doing these things. Why the issue with DOM? Why should they be ethical about that and nothing else?

[cyphire]

Thanks for the welcome back Rustico and all! I’ve been a bit busy in my life lately, and have neglected the forum’s for a while. I also plan on being more relaxed and “kinder and gentler”!

I appreciate all the arguments so far, for and against the days on market info as well as the many other factors which comprise getting reliable information.

I just want to focus on this one thing though:

– I received a flyer.
– The Days on Market data was a complete lie.
– The Realtor knows this (that the two houses I knew of were on the market for 200 days each but say 44 and 40 days respectively).
– The Realtor crowed about the great reduction in days on market to show the market’s strength, even though knowing that the data is a complete fabrication.

Can you really explain that away SD Realtor?

This is fraud. This is specifically a broker lying and misleading – sending out advertising material which they know to be wrong. Just because this profession does it all the time doesn’t make it right, and it doesn’t say much for it’s trust.

Have we lost all grip with reality? This is sanctioned fraud. Stating (as did the Realtor when I called her up) – that they would run a complete history on any house which a buyer is interested in doesn’t fix it – it’s still fraud.

Example: A used car lot has cars with all sorts of problems. They use a mechanical service to state that the cars are 98 percent defect free. They know that the average car is 75% defect free. They claim that the advertising of the 98% number is ok, because any specific car can be reexamined to find out the truth about it…. But they use the 98% number to mislead the public about the quality of their cars… This is FRAUD!

These folks at Prudential (and probably many others) are specifically making claims which are untrue – because there is no recourse to their falsehoods – other than people making dangerous financial decisions based on Realtors painting a fake, rosy picture.

When will there be recourse to this type of behavior?

p.s. I looked at the listing brokers web site (a different agency) which shows my house as sold at 10% higher (our listing price) then we actually sold at. More deception. and it goes on and on and on!!!

[cyphire]

Thanks for the welcome back Rustico and all! I’ve been a bit busy in my life lately, and have neglected the forum’s for a while. I also plan on being more relaxed and “kinder and gentler”!

I appreciate all the arguments so far, for and against the days on market info as well as the many other factors which comprise getting reliable information.

I just want to focus on this one thing though:

– I received a flyer.
– The Days on Market data was a complete lie.
– The Realtor knows this (that the two houses I knew of were on the market for 200 days each but say 44 and 40 days respectively).
– The Realtor crowed about the great reduction in days on market to show the market’s strength, even though knowing that the data is a complete fabrication.

Can you really explain that away SD Realtor?

This is fraud. This is specifically a broker lying and misleading – sending out advertising material which they know to be wrong. Just because this profession does it all the time doesn’t make it right, and it doesn’t say much for it’s trust.

Have we lost all grip with reality? This is sanctioned fraud. Stating (as did the Realtor when I called her up) – that they would run a complete history on any house which a buyer is interested in doesn’t fix it – it’s still fraud.

Example: A used car lot has cars with all sorts of problems. They use a mechanical service to state that the cars are 98 percent defect free. They know that the average car is 75% defect free. They claim that the advertising of the 98% number is ok, because any specific car can be reexamined to find out the truth about it…. But they use the 98% number to mislead the public about the quality of their cars… This is FRAUD!

These folks at Prudential (and probably many others) are specifically making claims which are untrue – because there is no recourse to their falsehoods – other than people making dangerous financial decisions based on Realtors painting a fake, rosy picture.

When will there be recourse to this type of behavior?

p.s. I looked at the listing brokers web site (a different agency) which shows my house as sold at 10% higher (our listing price) then we actually sold at. More deception. and it goes on and on and on!!!

[NotCranky]

I just talked with my wife about this topic, Phoney DOM, and she pointed out how deceptive it is to sellers as well as buyers.(The topic has been up on other threads since you were here last Cy and we have mostly looked at it from the buyers perspective.)
Now if you were a FSBO you look at what Cyphire has recieved and you say “hey I have had my house on the market for 90 days and I can’t sell it and this Realtor person is doing it in around 40 days at 97% of asking price, maybe I should pay that commission after all?

[NotCranky]

I just talked with my wife about this topic, Phoney DOM, and she pointed out how deceptive it is to sellers as well as buyers.(The topic has been up on other threads since you were here last Cy and we have mostly looked at it from the buyers perspective.)
Now if you were a FSBO you look at what Cyphire has recieved and you say “hey I have had my house on the market for 90 days and I can’t sell it and this Realtor person is doing it in around 40 days at 97% of asking price, maybe I should pay that commission after all?

[SD Realtor]

Cyphire –

I am not trying to explain it away nor am I trying to rationalize it.

If indeed that the listing you spoke of, was listed with this broker and had not been expired, cancelled, or withdrawn then yes it is clear fraud. However, do you know for a fact that it had not been in withdrawn status during the listing period? Do you know if it had been cancelled or had it expired once, maybe twice, maybe three times?

If you would like to give me the MLS number I can give you the exact history of the home with regard to listing status. If you don’t have the MLS number you can give me the address.

Now you said this was a Prudential listing. Cyphire, I am sure you have read my posts and if anyone bangs pretty hard on Prudential I think I am in the front of that line. First off, we all live with fraud every day for most of our consumer products, as well as a host of other goods and services.

To say there is no recourse is not true. You and every single person on this site can go and file a complaint with the DRE. There is NOTHING STOPPING you. In fact it would be far more effective for people to complain to the DRE about the irregularities with MLS rules, mortgage brokering frauds and things like that rather then posting them on Piggingtons. Many a posting has been made on this site about suspected fraudulent transactions and cash back to buyers. Many of the times I have looked into them and debunked them or spoken my opinion that they looked clean. Yet there have been a few instances where they looked shaky.

However NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE have I ever heard of ANYONE actually filing a complaint to the DRE.

Why is that? Most likely because it is easier to complain about something then to actually put time and energy into following the system in place to remedy it.

Now well taken point about the car. Yet when I bought a car I never knew how long it sat on the lot. When I look at a boat I don’t know if it had previous offers on it. Again, not to bang the drum over again, but NOBODY ever complains about Realtor.com or Zillow, or Zip not producing the information as well. Nobody complains about FSBOs being monitored or standardized in any way. Why is that?

Now regarding your listing selling 10% above list price. Yes to me that would be fraud. Was your home in a price range? Was the sold price 10% above the low end? I am not trying to rationalize the fraud here but I am just trying to form a clean angle on the who thing.

*********

In general Cyphire, I absolutely agree with your points. I am not trying to play devils advocate and man do I ever hate trying to defend the establishment or the way things are. I don’t like it, and I don’t do it. I can conduct the way I do business but I cannot police others. It would be suicidal for me to do so.

It does not make it right (what they do). I think there “may” be recourse when enough people take action.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Cyphire –

I am not trying to explain it away nor am I trying to rationalize it.

If indeed that the listing you spoke of, was listed with this broker and had not been expired, cancelled, or withdrawn then yes it is clear fraud. However, do you know for a fact that it had not been in withdrawn status during the listing period? Do you know if it had been cancelled or had it expired once, maybe twice, maybe three times?

If you would like to give me the MLS number I can give you the exact history of the home with regard to listing status. If you don’t have the MLS number you can give me the address.

Now you said this was a Prudential listing. Cyphire, I am sure you have read my posts and if anyone bangs pretty hard on Prudential I think I am in the front of that line. First off, we all live with fraud every day for most of our consumer products, as well as a host of other goods and services.

To say there is no recourse is not true. You and every single person on this site can go and file a complaint with the DRE. There is NOTHING STOPPING you. In fact it would be far more effective for people to complain to the DRE about the irregularities with MLS rules, mortgage brokering frauds and things like that rather then posting them on Piggingtons. Many a posting has been made on this site about suspected fraudulent transactions and cash back to buyers. Many of the times I have looked into them and debunked them or spoken my opinion that they looked clean. Yet there have been a few instances where they looked shaky.

However NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE have I ever heard of ANYONE actually filing a complaint to the DRE.

Why is that? Most likely because it is easier to complain about something then to actually put time and energy into following the system in place to remedy it.

Now well taken point about the car. Yet when I bought a car I never knew how long it sat on the lot. When I look at a boat I don’t know if it had previous offers on it. Again, not to bang the drum over again, but NOBODY ever complains about Realtor.com or Zillow, or Zip not producing the information as well. Nobody complains about FSBOs being monitored or standardized in any way. Why is that?

Now regarding your listing selling 10% above list price. Yes to me that would be fraud. Was your home in a price range? Was the sold price 10% above the low end? I am not trying to rationalize the fraud here but I am just trying to form a clean angle on the who thing.

*********

In general Cyphire, I absolutely agree with your points. I am not trying to play devils advocate and man do I ever hate trying to defend the establishment or the way things are. I don’t like it, and I don’t do it. I can conduct the way I do business but I cannot police others. It would be suicidal for me to do so.

It does not make it right (what they do). I think there “may” be recourse when enough people take action.

SD Realtor

[NotCranky]

“However NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE have I ever heard of ANYONE actually filing a complaint to the DRE.

Why is that? Most likely because it is easier to complain about something then to actually put time and energy into following the system in place to remedy it. ”

SD R The DRE won’t do anything about this stuff. Maybe the fraud but not these practices like value range stuff, fake DOM, manipulated sales price data, the associations putting one face on the market for the public and then filling our trade magazines and web sites with tons of materials on short sells,foreclosures and surviving a down trending market, all the puffing going on until it was obvious the market was a disaster..
You know I am the squeaky wheel type and I have dealt with these basically dead beat agencies several times. I specifically complained about Prudentials value range. You have to get a lawyer and make a big case out of it. That is for the big guys(and it has already been done). I think you need to give us credit for realizing that if the baloney is so prevalent it is because nobody in authority cares?

We all know that you didn’t and wouldn’t make things the way they are btw.

Best Regards

[NotCranky]

“However NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE have I ever heard of ANYONE actually filing a complaint to the DRE.

Why is that? Most likely because it is easier to complain about something then to actually put time and energy into following the system in place to remedy it. ”

SD R The DRE won’t do anything about this stuff. Maybe the fraud but not these practices like value range stuff, fake DOM, manipulated sales price data, the associations putting one face on the market for the public and then filling our trade magazines and web sites with tons of materials on short sells,foreclosures and surviving a down trending market, all the puffing going on until it was obvious the market was a disaster..
You know I am the squeaky wheel type and I have dealt with these basically dead beat agencies several times. I specifically complained about Prudentials value range. You have to get a lawyer and make a big case out of it. That is for the big guys(and it has already been done). I think you need to give us credit for realizing that if the baloney is so prevalent it is because nobody in authority cares?

We all know that you didn’t and wouldn’t make things the way they are btw.

Best Regards

[cyphire]

Hey SD…

A little confused. I’m not saying that there is a specific fraud being committed by the owner of the house in question, or even prudential. I’m also not saying that it was Prudential’s listing (It was on their sheet and I spoke to the broker about the specific listing). They probably did take it off the market for a day, then relist it. They did switch brokers, etc. This is probably within the rules – that is my point. They are manipulating the rules to change the days on market. No one wants to have admitted that they house was on the market for 200 days, so they gamed the system.

But what is worse in my opinion, is that the broker who made the advertisement knows that the data is wrong. They specifically called out how the days on market is dropping when they know that the house has actively been for sale for 200 days or longer.

The DRE would just say that as it came back on the next day they are allowed to show days on market at 0. These rules are perpetrating the fraud. Why would anyone trust the real estate establishment anymore?

If you ask me, it’s the Realtors who should take a stand. And by taking a stand I don’t mean contributing to any pro-real estate politician, I mean try to fix corrupt and misleading industry practices to make their own profession not look like whores.

As stated ad nauseum on this board before – most of the public doesn’t realize how much of the data is wrong, misleading, or downright fraudulent. The ones that do include the Realtors themselves – but try talking to most of them! They will defend the most egregious of practices – and people wonder why they have no credibility!

I also understand that brokers have access to cumulative days on market. Why isn’t this data presented to the public?

[cyphire]

Hey SD…

A little confused. I’m not saying that there is a specific fraud being committed by the owner of the house in question, or even prudential. I’m also not saying that it was Prudential’s listing (It was on their sheet and I spoke to the broker about the specific listing). They probably did take it off the market for a day, then relist it. They did switch brokers, etc. This is probably within the rules – that is my point. They are manipulating the rules to change the days on market. No one wants to have admitted that they house was on the market for 200 days, so they gamed the system.

But what is worse in my opinion, is that the broker who made the advertisement knows that the data is wrong. They specifically called out how the days on market is dropping when they know that the house has actively been for sale for 200 days or longer.

The DRE would just say that as it came back on the next day they are allowed to show days on market at 0. These rules are perpetrating the fraud. Why would anyone trust the real estate establishment anymore?

If you ask me, it’s the Realtors who should take a stand. And by taking a stand I don’t mean contributing to any pro-real estate politician, I mean try to fix corrupt and misleading industry practices to make their own profession not look like whores.

As stated ad nauseum on this board before – most of the public doesn’t realize how much of the data is wrong, misleading, or downright fraudulent. The ones that do include the Realtors themselves – but try talking to most of them! They will defend the most egregious of practices – and people wonder why they have no credibility!

I also understand that brokers have access to cumulative days on market. Why isn’t this data presented to the public?

[SD Realtor]

Rustico if you have made complaints to the DRE then that is great. I would also say that is the first time I have heard that you or anyone else on Piggington has ever done so. Good to see you back.

The fact that there is little or no action that the DRE takes is indeed a sad commentary. I agree with you guys. I also feel that this applies to the real estate industry, our own city council, our government, and many other staples of which our society relies on. That does not justify it nor does it make it right. Since this is a website dedicated to real estate issues, this is a correct forum to discuss these items. I guess I feel like we run across this every 2-3 months.

Cyphire, I am sorry I mistook the listing for a Prudential listing. My mistake. Again, when you take an MLS listing you cannot expedite the expiration date. Also let me ask you this question. One of the most common complaints I get when I go to listing appointments is that people do not want to get into long listing agreements. So then as a listing agent I lose both ways right? Did I make the listing intentionally short to get a quick expiration to reset the time on market? No I did it because I let my clients choose the length of the contract. As we all know there are a ton of things wrong with the way data is presented in the RE industry. My pet peeve is the way sold price data is presented. Personally I think this is much more damaging to the appraisal and industry as a whole then things like days on market.

I cannot or will not go on a crusade to clean up the industry. I work to much as it is and with two careers and a family it is simply not a priority for me. I can do more for my clients by saving them money and doing diligent work.

SD Realtor

[Author]

Posts