The NAR Is A Sex Offender’s Best Friend

“Hello Mr. Agent, I like this house. I could see my family living here. Just one question, are there any sex offenders nearby”? A simple question that based on information from the National Association of Realtors does not have to be answered by the agent.

The answer the NAR wants agents to proffer is, “Well Mr. homebuyer you’re just going to go look that up yourself”.

Ralph Holman, associate general counsel for the NAR says “What agents should do is tell buyers about their states’ registries.”

Go look it up yourself! That’s the answer that the NAR wants agents to give. An individual who is held out in NAR advertising and lobbying as a professional on par with doctors and lawyers wants their rank and file members to dodge this question as much as possible.

This certainly bestows credibility and trust with the American consumer doesn’t it? This surely will make the public more sympathetic to the plight of Realtors shouldn’t it? You would not expect a “professional” who is being paid upwards of 6-8% to facilitate the sale of a housing purchase to actually tell the truth would you?

If not for information and said coordination of the sale what exactly is the agent being paid such a hefty commission for? Why would any agent or the NAR encourage a culture of deceit? If not deceit, then call it ignorance and unprofessional. In any event, if you are selling a product as important as where someone wants to house their wife and children, then is it not too much to expect that the consumer is relying on the agent to inform and disclose all defects, not the ones they choose to disclose?

Has the NAR declined in credibility so far as to instruct their agents to actually feign ignorance or have there agents slid so far as to actually buy into degrading their “profession” by bamboozling the consumer?

A professional should not have to question whether such information is pertinent. A professional should deliver the information willingly and should openly and freely desire to offer full disclosure.

USA Today recently ran a story wherein a spokesman for the National Association of Realtors was quoted as stating that they have no disclosure policy regarding sex offenders.

I have a question. Do you think a real estate agent buying a home for their family would care if a sex offender lived across the street?

What’s behind this “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Policy all about?”  What else, can it be about other than money!

A 2002 study by Wright State University professors James Larsen and Joseph Coleman found that homes situated within one-tenth of a mile of a sex offender sold for an average 17.4 percent less than similar houses elsewhere. Homes between one-and two-tenths of a mile away sold for 10.2 percent less, while those between two- and three-tenths of a mile sold for 9.3 percent less.

That means lower sales price which translates to lower commissions. It also means more liability for the real estate agent. Which incidentally was the reason the NAR gives for NOT disclosing information about sex offenders.

In the pending Florida case discussed in the aforementioned USA Today article, Christopher and Pamela McCoy bought a home and found out subsequent to the purchase that a convicted sex offender is living NEXT DOOR!

The Sellers, Shawn and Stacey Sima openly acknowledged that a Sheriff’s deputy knocked on their door and handed them a flier informing them of the predator next door but feel that neither they, nor their agents who are named in the suit, had any duty to disclose this fact.

Duty? How about ethics? How about decency? Co-defendants in the case are a local ReMax Real Estate brokerage and the agent involved in the transaction, Peter Lamaster.

In court documents we have reviewed, ReMax and Lamaster claim that it’s the Seller’s fault and the Buyer’s fault and that the disclosure rules do not apply to them. They actually said that.

This statement is eerily reminiscent to the Marti Ummel case in California, it is becoming readily apparent that some agents are intentionally hiding information they know to be in existence and detrimental to the collection of their commission. The new rally cry seems to be that agents must at all cost protect the commission and in defense thereafter do not claim ignorance but rather cowardly state that it is not your responsibility.

The pedophile living next door was arrested for having illegal sexual contact with his own teenage stepdaughter, and was convicted of two counts of sexual battery on a child and sent to prison for a year and a half, followed by three years of counseling and 10 years of probation.

Whether or not this man has served his time or not, the fact remains that should a prospective Buyer not deserve to know that a criminal…not a Jewish person or a Black person, or a Spanish person or a Muslim,..but a convicted criminal who committed a vicious act upon a child, is living next door? I mention Jews, Blacks, Hispanics and Muslims because the National Association of Realtors relies upon the Fair-housing laws that prevent agents from talking about neighborhood demographics.

“The conservative approach is often taken in order to avoid a lawsuit popping up in response to frank neighborhood talk, said Holman, agents are forbidden from giving information that could be considered “steering,” directing a client toward or away from a particular property in a discriminatory manner”.

Making statements about an individual’s race or religion is one thing, but a convicted criminal who is a incurable sex offender is hardly a discriminatory statement. It’s the truth and as such would be a complete defense to any complaint brought for libel, slander or discrimination. Never mind the fact that discount brokers across the Country and upstart companies like Redfin could speak to the proven reality of agents steering clients away from certain listings…give me a break!

Many purchase contracts now include disclosure information about how to look up information on registered sex offenders, but should it be at the time of signing a Contract that this direction be given? Is not the consumer trusting the professional in the transaction to be looking after their best interests?

Does the agent meet the consumer and initially state, don’t believe anything I say and verify yourself before buying this house? Of course not, their “sales pitch” is to make the client feel as if they have their best interest at heart when in true reality, they don’t.

Requirements as to sex offender disclosure varies from state-to-state, but in most states all an agent has to do to comply is tell a prospective homeowner where to go to find out the information if they want to know.

This was not the intent of Megan’s Law and the NAR should be ashamed of skirting the law in an effort to increase pecuniary gain for its members.

While the law says that by informing prospective purchasers how to access the database, that one may be in compliance, would’nt a true professional WANT to exceed this cursory compliance and make sure that they are acting in the best interests of the consumer?

Richard and Maureen Kanka were the Megan’s parents and the catalysts for Megan’s Law. Megan Kanka who was seven years old when Jesse Timmendequas, a repeated violent sexual offender who lived across the street from her, kidnapped, raped, and murdered her.

Megan’s mother has publicly maintained if she had known a convicted sex offender lived in the neighborhood, her daughter would be alive today.

“Every parent should have the right to know if a dangerous sexual predator moves into their neighborhood.”

The Kankas, stricken with grief, became advocates for change in how the sex offender is treated. In an effort to get the laws changed they circulated a petition demanding immediate legislative action. That petition was signed by over 400,000 residents and the law was changed in just 89 days from draft to passage.

This being known, the NAR chooses to act and advise on the side of the sex offender.

This undoubtedly has become a difficult issue for agents sellers, and their attorneys because Megan’s Law does not address the duty of a property owner or their agent to disclose to a tenant or buyer that a known sex offender lives in the neighborhood. But does it have to be that difficult? Human decency should outweigh duty.

The National Association of Realtors’ position is that local law enforcement agencies, not real estate agents, should be the go-to sources for sex-offender information, stating that Realtors, “should not bear the responsibility of notifying home buyers when such offenders live in a neighborhood.”

Cogent evidence and veracious compassion for humanity should be enough to supersede the limitations of responsibility and duty.