The article catalogs illegal and unethical activities by real estate brokers as if they were common practices, including failure to disclose representation, defects in the home, and offers on the home.

NAR's president for 2002, Martin Edwards, Jr. says, "This article has misrepresented the work of hundreds of thousands of real estate professionals who everyday do their best for their clients and customers."

While the article avoids naming REALTORS(tm) among its wrongdoers, neither did it exempt them. That's why the NAR has formed the following response:

1. Open Houses

   The real estate professional knows, as the article points out, that only 2% of buyers first learned through an open house about the house they bought. The real estate pro also knows-but what that article failed to point out--is that only 28% of all buyers attend open houses, that 49% first learn from a real estate agent about the house they bought, and that 80% used a real estate agent in their home search.

   An open house is not just a place for real estate professionals to meet potential clients, as the article states; it takes two people to meet. Open houses are sometimes valuable for home seekers to meet real estate agents active in the neighborhood they're interested in.

2. Fees are negotiable

   The article states, "Brokers like to make it sound as if their fees are engraved in stone, but that's rarely the case…"

   This statement is absolutely false and unfair. There is no set fee or commission. Fees are always negotiated. It is only reasonable that brokers offer different levels of fees for different levels of services.

3. Think you've had no offers?…there've been several

   This intimation of illegality is outrageous. The article gives lip service to the fact that brokers are obligated to legally tell about all offers, then says "but in reality, some don't."

   Any brokers who behave in such a manner put their license and their status as REALTORS® at risk. NAR's Code of Ethics requires our members to report all offers to sellers. In many states, it's the law.

4. I talk behind your back

   The article states, "Legally, brokers are obligated to provide their sellers with any information that can help them get the best prices for their homes."

   That's true.

   Likewise, it is the duty of buyer's agents to report information to buyers that can help them get the best price.

   So, where's the beef? It's in the failure of the writer to understand and explain agency law and the fiduciary duties required under law by agents to perform on behalf of clients.

   Buyer's agents have a strict level of confidentiality to the buyer. Fiduciary responsibility of an agent is to the client, whether seller or buyer. The obligation is to communicate all information to the client. It is the buyer's agent's obligation to protect buyer's information.

   The example cited assumes that the buyer is working with the seller's agent. Today, buyers don't have to do that. NAR research shows that 46% of all buyers work with a buyer's agent. The proposition of buyer agency-based on who actually conveys money at closing-redefined the law of agency in most states. That information is readily available by visiting the Real Estate Buyers Agency Council web site at http://www.rebac.org.

5. Sometimes I forget whose side I'm on

   In most states, instances in which both the seller's agent and the buyer's agent work for the same company, the relationship of agent to client changes to disclosed dual agency. That means they represent neither buyer nor seller, but are facilitators to the transaction and obligated to be fair to all parties. In most buyers' agency agreements, these nuances are classified in writing.

   NAR strongly recommends that buyers seeking a buyer's agent look for a real estate professional with the A.B.R designation (Accredited Buyer's Representative). These professional are members of the Real Estate Buyers Agency Council and been professionally trained and certified. There are more than 30,000 of them. Buyer's agency is one of the fast growing specialties in real estate.

6. I know zilch about zoning

   The article states, "Real estate agents love to suggest big ideas to prospective buyers…"

   That's a false characterization. To prove this claim, the writer cites a single incident and attempts to make it into a generality without any other support.

   The section concludes with the admonition, "Check with your local zoning commission."

   Your conclusion is actually where trained real estate professionals begin. Of course, a buyer should take the time to find a real estate agent who is active and knowledgeable about the neighborhood the buyer is interested in. That kind of professional will direct the consumer to the proper county authority to get the information needed about zoning.

7. Termite and other inspections

   The articles states that a home inspector is a good idea-then says so long as he's "not in cahoots with the broker." That's an outrageous statement.

   Prospective buyers have every right to select the inspector they want to inspect a property, and they would be wise to select one with no conflict of interest. Of course, a written report is absolutely necessary. Buyers are under no obligation to accept any of the inspectors the broker recommends. In many cases, a home inspector will allow the buyer -with permission from the seller-to accompany him in the inspection. In most states, property disclosure is obligatory, and termite inspections are an integral part of mortgage finance approval.

8. I'm not a lawyer, but I play one in your house

   As every person is different and every house is different, so is every contract. Discretion to amend boilerplate agreements is essential in the world of business. Some states require that a lawyer review the contract and/or be present at closing. To have the contract reviewed by a lawyer before you sign is sound advice; to link this with the preposterous example that a real estate broker masquerades as a lawyer shows a lack of good judgment.

9. My Web site is a dead end

   A common flaw, the article says, is a "bait and switch" ploy used by agents who leave a property on their site that's already been sold. That ignores the fact that this is simply bad business. If a buyer gets upset with that tactic, he'll go somewhere else. A broker who doesn't post the latest listings won't be in business long. Most reputable professionals update their Web sites frequently, sometimes daily.

   Keep in mind: What's available at the commonly used Web sites is only a sketch of what's available on the local MLS.

10. You may not need me at all

    This is absolutely false and totally irresponsible. At first blush, the writer encourages FSBOs to try to save a buck by cutting corners; and at worst, the advice given could put a seller's life in danger, and yet that is not addressed.

    If the writer had checked the latest research, he wouldn't have fallen into the FSBO trap.

    The point is that the FSBO ("For Sale By Owners") trend has reversed itself in the past few years. NAR survey data beginning in the late 1980s showed that FSBOs ranged from 10% to 20% of the market, with higher percentages in hot markets.

    But during the record-breaking homesale years from 1996-99, while sales were skyrocketing, a downward trend in FSBO was detected. In 1997, FSBO stood at 18% of the market but slipped to 16% in 1999, as sales continued to rise. (The results from 2001 in this biannual survey are not in yet.) That trend reversal, expected by real estate experts, was due to two conditions: length of sales time and the complexity of the sale process.

    Bottom line: FSBOs need help. But your article ignores this. Further, the FSBO could even be endangered because of a lack of professional security screening. FSBOs have no idea which buyers are bona fide and which have other interests: the idle curiosity shoppers, those who are comparing your asking price to what they paid for their home, and the outright thieves who want to cadge your possessions while you are looking the other way. Or worse.

    Many FSBOs have said that the tension alone of having to deal with people in their homes was very stressful. Others were not ready to handle the negative comments from visitors; homeselling is an emotional experience, and third-party objectivity in dealing with complaints is extremely helpful. And still others point out that a significant problem was not having a middle person to negotiate.

Variations of the same themes have been around since 1996, according to Google.com, proving that old notions about real estate professionals die hard.