Issuu on Google+


C.A.R. Business Meeting Report Long Beach, October 2013 The California Association of REALTORS® held its EXPO and final business meeting of the year in Long Beach. Sixteen of our NSDCAR members represented you in the C.A.R. decisionmaking process. Ron Romanowich of Heritage Realty & Financial as the Region 29 Chair heading your NSDCAR contingent, and Ron Brownell of Real Living Lifestyles in Escondido serves as Assistant Chair. These members are contributing their time on your behalf to attend the C.A.R. business meetings. Their reports follow, along with the name of the committee member and his or her email address. Please feel free to contact any of these members for additional information, or CEO Dianne McMillan (Dianne@nsdcar.com) or Government Affairs Director Ernie Cowan (ernie@nsdcar.com), or phone us at the Association’s Administrative Office (760) 734-3971.

BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY FORUM

desktop. She gave a list of things to do in order to go paperless. She suggested:

Marie Jebavy The Real Estate Consultants (760) 405-9050 marie@mariejebavy.com

Justin Martin gave information on RPR (REALTOR® Property Resource). It currently contains 166 million U.S. properties and 1-billion photos for REALTORS® only. Tax information is updated twice a month and MLS twice a day. RPR does two valuation models, the Automated Valuation Model (AVM) and the REALTOR® Valuation Model (RVM). New updates to the program include that you can save an area in the drop down menu and name it Rancho Del Oro, for instance. You can also draw a polygon and save that. Another addition is the Valuation Workbook designed for appraisers. It is an 8-page report. It was very interesting and could be used on listing appointments.

Prepare basic tools such as scanner, staple remover and laptop.

Gather papers to be digitized in one place. Start with closed files and with recent files.

Scanners: Paperport, ScanSnap or Kodak.

Move to the cloud. Organize cloud docs; your naming conventions should be consistent.

Create electronic file in Dropbox.

Setup and organize client information.

Six notebooks to create in Evernote: Prospects, Buyers, Sellers, Pending, Closed, Templates.

Just Do it (set a goal to spend time setting this up).

One program talked about is CARTAVI for storage, share folders, replaces Dropbox, storage and backup. It is a competitor for Transaction Point. She recommended a site www.paperlessagent.com and also AdobePro.

Kelly White talked about going paperless. She quoted Stefan Swanepoel, that business will be online for easy file access and by 2014 mobile usage will overtake the 1


FEDERAL COMMITTEE

to value ratio and reduce FHA insurance from 100% to 50%.

Chris Osteen Cal West Management & Sales (760) 438-5728 chriscalw@aol.com

Tax Reform - Has totally taken a back seat to everything. QRM (Qualified Residential Mortgage) - Would require lenders to increase the loan to value ratio, loan to debt ratio, and require the lender to have "skin in the game."

I have been on the Federal Committee for several years and candidly I was a little surprised to see the effect that the Federal shutdown has had on the government overall. Sure, we all know that the shutdown resulted in federal parks being closed, government agencies closing, and certain federal government buildings being closed. What we did not see is that with this close down all of our elected representatives are focused on the shutdown and nothing is happening to some very important issues, many of them regarding extremely critical real estate issues, including real estate finance, government service enterprises (GSEs), tax issues, tax reform, etc. So, do I have everyone's attention? NOTHING IS GETTING RESOLVED. As a result, all of the real estate issues that the Federal Committee has been addressing during 2013 have not been properly debated and we are in a holding position. We still do not know what congress has planned for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We still do not know what the final plan is for legislation dictating what the appropriate standards are for mortgages. We still don't know what income tax proposals will be made with regards to real estate. For the first time in a long time, I am worried that many very important real estate issues are not going to get the proper discussion an input once the financial crisis logjam breaks.

The California Association of REALTORS速 is working on background papers on FHA Condo approvals and the line between banks and Wall Street.

GLOBAL REAL ESTATE FORUM Kim Murphy Murphy & Murphy (760) 415-9292 kim@murphy-realty.com

We heard from a lender, a title officer and an escrow officer with information to help us navigate the process of working with a foreign buyer. Steven Hung from China Trust Bank has programs in place to help foreign investors get loans on property in the United States. China Trust Bank underwrites and funds their own loans, and was created to help your buyers attain property in the U.S. It can be accomplished with no U.S. credit, no Social Security number, and limited income documentation. Interest rates are lower than 5% and have no points. For selfemployed people, only a CPA's letter is required. Inter Valley Escrow helped us understand that one of the most important aspects they verify is to source where the funds are coming from. Some countries have a ceiling on how much money is allowed to be transferred every year, so planning is very important. All third party deposits need a notarized verification that states the funds are contributed without any intent that the contributor has any ownership rights to

Here is where we are on a broad overview standpoint. Please note that some of this discussion is based on where we were prior to the federal shutdown: PATH Act- would reduce loan limits, mandate risk sharing, lower FHA loan limits, mandate a 20% loan 2


the property. Orange Coast Title reminded us that all foreign entities need to provide proof of who the legal signers are and if that paperwork is received in a foreign language it must be translated by a U.S. Court appointed translator and then the translation reviewed by a U.S. based attorney. If foreign buyers create a CA LLC, it makes the transaction much easier. With over $100 Billion expected in 2013 from foreign investors into the United States, it makes sense to develop this business into your current business plan.

problem. JURY TRIALS FOR TENANT EVICTIONS Tenant rights groups continue to have tenants push for jury trials. It seems to be a ploy to disrupt and extend the eviction process. Not only will the eviction process be longer but also much more expensive for the landlord. This puts the tenants in the position of negotiating a cash pay-off from the landlord in exchange for the tenant withdrawing the jury trial request. A tenant may only need to win a minor “habitability award” and that can cause the landlord to be responsible for all of the tenant attorney fees. A full jury trial may cost a landlord $20K, so a landlord may agree to settle with the tenant for only $10K.

HOUSING COMMITTEE – INVESTMENT Anita Quillman Sea Coast Exclusive Properties (760) 944-1112 anita@AnitaQuillman.com

Some committee members stated that they have heard of rental/lease agreements that limit attorney’s fees in order to decrease the leverage that a tenant may have against a landlord.

The committee mission is to develop C.A.R.'s housing policy in the rental segment of California's housing opportunities. It has original jurisdiction to evaluate housing legislation and regulation in the following issue areas: Fair Housing/Equal Opportunity, Multifamily, and Property Management.

The committee was ready to propose some action by C.A.R. We agreed to wait until 2014 to take action when a new bill is introduced. FIRE PROTECTION SPRINKLERS AB 433 (Gordon) is sponsored by the California Building Industry Association. In addition to licensed fire protection, contractors (C-16 license) this bill proposed to authorize, until January 1, 2017, licensed plumbers (C-36 license) to install residential fire sprinkler systems in one and two family dwellings. C.A.R. position is FAVOR. The bill was signed by the Governor September 27, 2013.

SQUATTERS We continue to see a significant rise in the number of properties occupied by SQUATTERS. The practice is so pervasive that there are now websites providing “how-to” guidelines! Under California laws, it can take a minimum of 30-60 days to evict a sophisticated squatter. Unlawful detainer laws are not specifically designed to provide law enforcement officials the tools they need to assist owners of residential real property in their efforts to remove, or prevent the occupancy by squatters on vacant properties. No viable solutions have been found. However, C.A.R. continues to seek solutions to the

PREPAID RENTAL LISTING SB 269 (Hill) – Prepaid rental listing services charge a fee for providing prospective tenants with lists of

3


HOUSING COMMITTEE – HOME OWNERSHIP

available residential rental units. Under existing law, people are prohibited from engaging in prepaid rental listing services unless they are licensed to do so by the Department of Real Estate (DRE now CalBRE) either as a real estate licensee or as a prepaid rental listing service. This measure requires, before any fees can be imposed, that those individuals offering this service shall provide a notice to perspective tenants explaining their contractual refund rights, the complaint process and describing their options if the listing provider refuses to honor their contract. C.A.R. position is FAVOR. The bill was signed by the Governor September 30, 2013.

Diane Conaway Re/Max United (760) 749-2888 dianeconaway@sbcglobal.net

HOME OWNERSHIP HOUSING COMMITTEE The Home Ownership Housing Committee is a policy committee with the mission to develop housing policy and evaluate legislation and regulation as it pertains to Common Interest Development, Housing Policy and Manufactured Housing.

NO PETS The committee had a brief discussion regarding “NO PET” policies for rental housing. It seems that a landlord may NOT be able to enforce a “NO PETS” policy for “service animals” or “comfort animals.” It is difficult for a landlord to determine what is a qualified “service animal” or “comfort animal.” Additional recommendation is that a rental advertisement that states “NO PETS” has the additional statement “except for qualified service animals” or some other qualifier.

HOUSING POLICY AND LEGISLATION Members of the Housing Committee have been working on possible solutions for homeowners’ associations with a large number of delinquencies to be able to collect past due assessments from the tenant. The committee proposed that C.A.R. sponsor legislation next year to address the issue; however, the motion was defeated by the Board of Directors after much debate. STATE ISSUES AB 968 (Gordon) Directors Election Process for Small CIDs. This bill will simplify the process for Common Interest Developments (CIDs) with less than 15 units to hold their elections. It would allow these CIDs to use secret written ballots in a meeting with a quorum in place, which could then be read out loud, and a winner declared at the meeting. C.A.R. is in favor of this bill, which will be considered by the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee in January.

2014 IRS TAX REGULATIONS The IRS continues to make changes to the treatment of money spent in investment real estate. Seems there are some more specific rules regarding what can be an “expense” and what must be a “capital improvement” and depreciated over time. PLEASE CHECK WITH YOUR TAX ADVISOR!

4


AB 1360 (Torres) Electronic Voting in CID Elections C.A.R. supports this bill, as it will allow electronic voting in elections for those homeowners wishing to do so. Those who prefer a paper ballot would be allowed to vote in writing. Since it did not pass out of the Senate, it will be heard by the Transportation and Housing Committee in January.

its original goals in place. C.A.R. is supportive of these efforts. Manufactured Housing SB 510 (Jackson) Mobile Home Park/Manufactured Housing Communities Conversions to Resident Ownership. This Bill simply clarifies existing law regarding mobile home park conversions. This bill was signed by the Governor on September 26, 2013.

AB 325 (Alejo) Challenges to Local Planning Decisions - In 2008, Urban Habitat v. City of Pleasanton changed the timeframes for challenging land use decisions of local governments to a 90-day period from what was previously 5-8 years. Prior to 2008, low and moderate-income housing were exempt from the timeframe requirements helping to make sure affordable housing could be built. This bill establishes a 280-day window for challenging a general plan. This Bill is enrolled to the Governor.

LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE Sandi Adelson Homeland Properties (760) 591-3090 ext 104 Because we are between sessions, most of what was discussed was in the form of updates only: AB 429, Daly - BRE Staff Preservation – Although Governor Brown had given C.A.R. assurances that even with the reorganization in 2012 that moved real estate oversight from the Department of Real Estate to the Bureau of Real Estate (CalBRE) under the Consumer Services Agency, effective July 1, 2013. Under the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) regulatory, enforcement, and legal staff would be maintained by CalBRE. Both C.A.R. and CalBRE had concerns that should there be a change in the political mood or a change in the Governor’s office the assurances would be forgotten and the Department of Justice (D.O.J.) would take over. After the introduction of AD 429, the D.O.J. issued written confirmation that it had no intent to take over CalBRE’s legal action and that the D.O.J. didn’t have the manpower to do it even if it wanted to do so. The interagency letter to maintain "status quo" until 2015 when the issue will be revisited with CalBRE's participation was delivered to CalBRE. In addition, Assembly member Daly, author of AB 429, placed a letter in the Assembly Daily Journal to memorialize the interagency agreement. With the interagency letter and memorializing in the Assembly records

SB 662 (Galgiani) Licensing Requirements for Structural Pest Control Operators - This bill proposes to increase the surety bond for pest control companies from $4,000 to $12,500, and would raise the upper limit from $8,000 to $25,000 for those companies who have had their license revoked or suspended. C.A.R. supported this bill, as the requirements have not been changed in more than 20 years. This bill was signed by the Governor and becomes effective on January 1, 2014. FEDERAL ISSUES FHA Update - In the House, legislation has been proposed for dramatic changes to the FHA program. Known as PATH (Protecting American Taxpayers and Homeowners Act), the changes would include limiting FHA to first time low and moderate income buyers and lower FHA loan limits among other changes. C.A.R. and NAR are against these changes. In the Senate, the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs committee is working on legislation that would improve FHA’s financial health while keeping 5


existing law regarding stakeholder involvement in rulemaking activities. In June, C.A.R. amended SB 176 to permit agencies to electronically submit these documents to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL), rather than using the current outdated practice of requiring notices and rulemaking documents to be hand delivered in hard copy. SB 176 will pave the way for easier electronic posting by OAL in the future. It is stalled in committee.

C.A.R. did not advance AB 429. C.A.R. views this a victory. (PLEASE NOTE THAT NO LONGER IS THE ABBREVIATION FOR THE BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE “BRE” BUT RATHER “CalBRE.”) SB 30, Calderon/AB 42, Perea - Short Sale Income Tax Treatment - While the federal statute for forgiveness was extended until January 1, 2014 as part of the budget solution to avoid the “fiscal cliff,” California’s forgiveness expired as of December 31, 2012 and has not been extended. SB 30 and AB 42 are sponsored by C.A.R. to have California conform to the federal guidelines. The Senate Appropriations Committee linked SB 30 to SB 391 meaning SB 30 cannot become law unless SB 391 passed. C.A.R. took an “OPPOSED” position to SB 391, a bill that called for all real estate related documents recorded excluding those for a sales transaction, be assessed a $75 fee fund affordable housing, an action strongly opposed by C.A.R. C.A.R. will pick up the fight on SB 30 in the new session. It can be signed as late as April 14, 2014, to protect taxpayers on their 2013 tax returns, which must be filed by April 15, 2014. If signed after that date, amended returns will probably have to be filed. This is for your clients’ tax advisors to interpret and as C.A.R. wants to stress- unless you are that advisor, please do not give tax advice.

The only item brought forward for action came from the Home Ownership Housing Committee: At the meetings in Sacramento, this committee brought forward two (2) motions: “That C.A.R. ‘SPONSOR’ legislation in 2014 that will allow H.O.A.s to impose a lien on an H.O.A. unit for delinquent assessments that will empower the H.O.A. to attach rent payments by a tenant in the unit in order to satisfy the unit owner delinquency.” AND “That C.A.R. ‘SPONSOR’ legislation in 2014 that will empower H.O.A.s to impose a lien on an H.O.A. unit for delinquent assessments that will create a lien for up to one year’s delinquent assessment that is superior to the claim of the foreclosing mortgage.” Both motions WERE OPPOSED BY THE Legislative Committee. Both motions were sent forward to the Executive Committee with Legislative Committee opposition noted. Both motions were sent to the floor for vote by the directors and both were defeated.

Federal Mortgage Debt Forgiveness Update Senators Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) and Dean Heller (R-NV) have introduced S. 1187, “The Mortgage Forgiveness Tax Relief Act” to extend the federal forgiveness for two (2) years to include 2014 and 2015.

The Home Ownership Housing Committee brought forward a new motion at this meeting – “That C.A.R. sponsor legislation in 2014 to authorize associations in Common Interest Developments (CIDs) to require a tenant of a unit in the CID to pay to the association any delinquent assessments owed to the association by the unit owner who is renting the unit to the tenant, in lieu of paying rent to the owner, until such assessments are brought current by the owner or through payments by the tenant?” The Legislative Committee debated this motion and had major concerns that this motion was too broad and

SB 176, (Galgiani) Notice of Regulatory Actions – This as originally written would have required all state agencies (city, county, and state entities) to publish meeting notices and preliminary rulemaking activities in the California Regulatory Notice Register. Register at least 15 days prior to any scheduled meeting. It was amended by the Senate Appropriations Committee to make minor changes to 6


contained no direction. Some of the concerns were how this would impact the assignment of rents clause in trust deeds. Would the H.O.A.s be put in the position of evicting a non-paying tenant when the lease is between the landlord and tenant, so how could an H.O.A. interfere? The Legislative Committee felt that this motion was similar to the one proposed in April only without any details. Legislative Committee voted to have the issue postponed until the next meetings so that the details could be worked out. Executive Committee sent it forward with a notation that the Legislative Committee had recommended postponement. The postpone was voted down by the directors. The motion was defeated by the directors. Additional information and Policy Position Papers for all of the issues can be found at: http://www.car.org/meetings/carmeetings/committeematerials-archive/2013fall/legcvr1013/

Eminent domain has passed the city council in Richmond, CA by a vote of 7-0. This is for underwater mortgages that are still performing. MRP will then refinance them at the home’s current value and sell the new note to a new investor. The city of Richmond, CA. has begun the process of implementing the MRP Program. This could dramatically affect the market value and this process will probably end up in major litigation.

MEMBERSHIP Bette Curtis Realty Executives (760) 631-0606 bette@bettecurtis.com

Majority of income comes from a member’s specialty. Nearly all firms have a website and use social professional networking sites. More than half of REALTOR® members use social media, but less than 15% of REALTORS® are using blogs. Study shows most REALTORS® are confident about the future of Real Estate. Most important factor is inventory problems, financing problems and the expectation that property prices may fall.

LAND USE & ENVIRONMENTAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT FORUM Chuck Smiar Prudential California Realty (760) 533-6653 smiarnsmiar@hotmail.com

The average REALTOR® does eight transactions in a year and works approximately 40 hours a week. In 2013, the average income for a California REALTOR® grew 4.6%, which is double the national average.

Proposition 90 in Riverside County passed by a 5-0 vote. This provides for transfers of real estate for sellers over 55 to transfer their tax basis. It passed with restrictions. In Santa Ynez Valley there is a map called the TCA. This map shows an area around the Indian reservation that is additional land that could be purchased and added to the reservation land. The additional land could affect the value of other land on the specific map, and create multiple new disclosures for the agents and brokers involved in the transaction.

REALTORS® will spend money on the following business expenses:

7

Office Managers with a profit margin of 84%.

REALTORS® spend much of their money on vehicle expense and administration expert.

REALTORS® will have a medium tenure of 7 years per brokerage.


The National Association of REALTORS® (NAR) voted to allow new homes and rentals to be included on Realtor.com. It is believed that the website should be the main source of accurate information for consumers and that by adding these listings, online traffic will increase at the site.

Average size of an office is 23 with 50/50 men and woman.

Demographic per office are: •

3/4 Caucasian

9 Latino

3 black

During the downturn in the market, membership had a 20% decline, but is getting stronger and by next year it is predicted to be in positive territory.

Renewing membership is forecasted to increase 1 to 3 percent.

Presently there are 162,600 Realtor members of C.A.R., with a growth factor of 3% each year. C.A.R. is projected to have 173,000 members over the next 3 years

PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS Kevin Forrester, Attorney at Law (760) 944-1918 kforrester@psmkr.com

The Professional Standards Committee’s meeting focus was, again, on the final Report and Recommendations of the Ethics and Professionalism Task Force chaired by Jim Hamilton.

Some C.A.R. benefits recognized to be the leading reason real estate agents join with the top benefit being: C.A.R. Legal Hotline Legislature from C.A.R. zipForm6 Digital Ink Forms Library Technology

The message from the task force is: not all licensees are REALTORS® or required to be REALTORS®; membership in the Association of REALTORS® is conditioned upon conforming your practice to the REALTORS’ Code of Ethics; and those who are unwilling to practice in conformance with this Code are invited to take their business elsewhere or be subjected to swift punishment if they remain.

MLS

At its May 2, 2013, meeting the Professional Standards Committee sought an amendment to the California Association of REALTORS® Bylaws relating to enforcement of the mandatory provisions arising out of the Ethics and Professionalism actions taken by the Board of Directors in May.

Diane Conaway Re/Max (760) 749-2888 dianeconaway@sbcglobal.net

The committee continued discussion regarding “pocket” or “off market” listings that are prevalent in some areas of the state. Verbiage regarding this practice has been incorporated into the Residential Listing Agreement so that a seller is aware of the ramifications of this practice.

Namely, that local Associations be mandated to use the statewide ethics database for (1) investigating transfer and new applicants to their association in accordance with NAR policy and (2) implementing progressive discipline and (3) use for publication by C.A.R. 8


impose in addition to the Mandatory Sanctions. Such sanctions may include, but are limited to (1) removal of all directors that have membership in the Noncompliant Member Board from all Committees, Task Forces, Charter Committees, N.A.R. directors (if permitted by N.A.R. processes), (2) imposition of fines, (3) removal of some or all C.A.R. membership benefits from the persons at the local Member Board for noncompliance such as the local board of directors and officers.

Any association that fails to comply with the Ethics and Professionalism mandatory provisions (which, as of today, are set forth in the paragraph directly above), or any other provisions that the Board of Directors deems important enough to make mandatory, would be subject to the following sanctions as set forth in the amended C.A.R. Bylaws: “11.10 Any Member Board which fails to comply with C.A.R. Bylaws and mandatory policies promulgated by the Board of Directors of C.A.R shall be deemed a “Noncompliant Member Board” and may be sanctioned after due notice and opportunity for hearing by a panel of Directors appointed by the President. The panel shall recommend whether the Member Board be deemed “Noncompliant” as well as recommend sanctions. These recommendations may be approved, modified or dismissed by a majority vote of the President, President-elect and Treasurer.

(c) If the Bylaws so provide, the panel may also recommend suspension or expulsion of the Noncompliant Member Board until such time as the Member Board becomes compliant. (d) Any sanction imposed shall be reported to the full Board of Directors and made public to the Membership by the usual C.A.R. communication vehicles. (e) Reinstatement as a compliant Member Board shall be determined by the C.A.R. Officers after submission of facts and the determination by the C.A.R. Officers that the violations have been remedied.”

(a) Mandatory Sanctions. The sanctions against any Noncompliant Member Board must include: (1) Removal of the President of the Noncompliant Member Board as a Delegate and Director as set forth in Article IV Sections 2.0 and 6.0.

In short, the C.A.R. Board of Directors wants Member Boards to use the statewide database, including submitting all ethics and arbitration matters, for the purpose of (1) checking new and transfer applicants for membership, (2) implementing progressive discipline and (3) for publication by C.A.R. in accordance with NAR guidelines, and is prepared to punish Member Boards that fail to comply.

(2) Removal of all members of the Noncompliant Member Board from C.A.R. Committee or Forum leadership positions (chairs, vice chairs and liaisons), Regional Chair, as members of the Executive Committee, Strategic Planning and Finance Committee, any Charter Committee, Task Force, as Trustees from all sponsored PACs, and affiliated charities, and from any other position that the Board of Directors has determined is a “leadership” position for purposes of this provision of the bylaws.

The NAR rules currently require two ethics violations to occur in a 3-year period before publication can take place. However, NAR has approved C.A.R’s request to allow associations to impose fines of up to $15,000 per hearing on a par with currently allowable MLS fines. This new policy will go into effect as of

(b) Discretionary Sanctions. The Board of Directors may also approve a list of discretionary sanctions to 9


January 1, 2014, and will apply to behavior taking place on or after January 1, 2014.

PUBLIC POLICY FORUM Marie Jebavy The Real Estate Consultants (760) 405-9050 marie@MarieJebavy.com

We also heard from Paul Leonard, the California Director at the Center for Responsible Lending. Mr. Leonard stated that goals for reform is to be broad and with deep liquidity, affordable homeownership, stability and consumer protection. He believes it is not a good idea for the government to get out of loans but to fix what is broken. He stated the structural incentives led to the risky behavior also insufficient capital/implicit government guarantee and weak regulatory oversight.

Congressman Gary Miller of the 31st Congressional District addressed the body making the following points: •

As the legislative process moves forward, I will work with the Chairman and members of the Committee to ensure that the Committee’s final product is a viable solution to ending Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and replacing their functions with a system that ensures a stable and healthy housing market.

The hybrid, public-private model for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was fundamentally flawed and is irreparably broken, but we still need a viable secondary mortgage market, with sound underwriting principles.

While the major problems with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have made it clear that we must find a new way forward, the fact remains that what we replace them with must capture the important functions they have performed in the market.

The final bill must contain a structure that ensures that taxpayers are protected in the future from costly bailouts. If we stay silent on this critical point, while creating a system that is “too big to fail,” we will leave the taxpayers more vulnerable than they were in the last crisis. And if we create a system that fails, the government will have no choice but to intervene. Therefore, our focus must be on the true functionality of the new system we design, based in fact and not theory.

Mr. Leonard believes we should preserve what works, which is equal treatment for all small lenders, serve all markets at all times, 30 year fixed rate mortgage and support the TBA market. He believes these items are cost effective. He asserted that getting rid of the GSE’s would be harmful to the United States homeownership. David Min, Assistant Professor of Law UC Irvine, stated that if the Fannie & Freddie go away, it would be like a nuclear winter for the real estate community. He felt, and had testified before Congress, that Fannie and Freddie did not cause the market collapse. And that the Private Label Securities (PLS) was instrumental in the failure of the GSE’s. He believes that we cannot proceed without a government backstop and it would be a catastrophe if we reinsured behind private capital. This is a problem that all real estate professionals need to watch and respond to the Call to Action when requested because it could mean our jobs.

We cannot just eliminate Fannie and Freddie with no viable alternative – the alternative must be workable, which includes being an attractive option for investors to purchase mortgage backed securities and consumers seeking to purchase a home. If not done correctly, we will be faced with a massive liquidity crunch and contribute to further housing sector instability at taxpayer expense. 10


REALTOR® RISK MANAGEMENT/ CONSUMER PROTECTION

New forms will be out in November. One item on the TDS will be a question for the seller to disclose any lawsuits pertaining to the property or complex. Other new forms include, the Pet Addendum; Pool, Hot Tub, and Spa Addendum and one of the most important will be the Seller Multiple Counter Offer. With the changes in the market, multiple offers are commonplace. The Seller Multiple Counter Offer form will provide additional lines for the counter offer as well as specific information needed for a multiple counter situation. An agent may not use a multiple counter if they do not have other offers.

Bette Curtis Realty Executives (760) 631-0606 bette@bettecurtis.com

Open Houses are common among REALTORS®, but it is now recommended to be done with more than one agent in the home during the open house. Today, the standard practice should be to have a REALTOR® at each exit door of a house. This is for the safety of the homeowner, as well as the REALTOR®. Also, if the REALTOR® has a listing where there is a tenant in the property and the tenant says no to the open house, the court sees a weekend as normal working hours for a REALTOR®. Therefore, a tenant cannot say that a weekend is unreasonable to have an open house. The REALTOR® must give the tenant reasonable notice before doing an open house.

C.A.R. has put together a task force called Distressed Property Task Force that was created from the REO Advisory Group in 2011. The task force will meet in conjunction with the C.A.R. Board of Directors to put together recommendations for strategies to facilitate and standardize sales of distressed properties by REALTORS® and make suggestions that will reduce costs and avoid inappropriate liability. Some of the top issues in today’s market include:

Gov Hutchison reported on the necessity of retaining all documents, including emails, Facebook postings, texts and all paperwork for at least three years. This also includes advertising materials. Brokers must instruct their agents what is required. If you plan to destroy the file after three years, it is recommended that you contact your client to see if there are any documents they would like to have and to put them on notification you will be shredding the file. The new smoke alarms now have a battery with a 10year life and the battery cannot be removed. As of July 1, 2014, the new type of smoke detectors will no longer have a beeping sound when the battery goes out. It is incumbent upon the property owner to replace the units every 10 years.

11

Everything in marketing materials can be used against you.

Whenever providing square footage information, include a disclaimer that states such information is unverified. In addition, identify the source of the information and round down to the nearest 100 feet.

The disclosure documents that we provide to the buyers are for identification of defects only and are not intended to diagnose. Leave the diagnosis to the appropriate experts. Be careful with respect to which experts are utilized.

Always discuss potential claims with management and the company’s attorney. Many things occur from the inception of the claim, which can create adverse effects on you later in the litigation process.


“As Is” does not relieve the duty to disclose, it must be recognized as expression of goodfaith obligation in the purchase agreement.

Be careful in short sale and REO transactions and understand disclosure risks do not step outside the box.

Seller Multiple Counter Offer (SMCO) A separate stand-alone seller multiple counter offer form (SMCO) was created for use when the seller is making multiple counter offers. This is a new form ready for release in November.

No matter what you do, the risk of being sued cannot be completely avoided. As such, having a good Error and Omissions insurance policy is critical. Remember not all policies and carriers are the same. Best to do your homework before selecting your insurance.

Contingency Removal (CR) This form was modified to make it clearer whether the Buyer or Seller was removing contingencies and only the party removing the contingencies is required to sign it. It is okay to continue to use the old CR form.

STANDARD FORMS

Request for Repairs (RR) This was modified to clarify the seller response. It is okay to use the existing form.

Gretchen Mitchell Coldwell Banker (760) 65-4284 Gretchen@ColdwellBanker.com

Quick reference to other changes of interest: Residential Lease After Sale (RLAS) Modified to clarify that day one of the lease is the day after COE.

Now that you have become familiar with the 24 forms released in April, and the three new forms released in June, there are seven new forms and 23 revised ones coming out in November!

Statewide Buyer & Seller Advisory (SBSA) Added Tsunami warning and language regarding Internet advertising. Seller Property Questionnaire (SPQ) Added question about seller’s awareness of smoking on the property.

You can find a Quick Summary of all of the November 2013 Forms Released on the NSDCAR website or the C.A.R. site. I strongly urge you to review all of them. However, to make things easy for you here are the highlights of the forms that members use most frequently.

The seven new forms are:

Counter Offer (CO) After much discussion and debate within the committee, and consideration of member feedback, it was decided to create a new one page Counter Offer (CO) without the multiple counter offer language. This provides room for more lines on the standard counter offer form, which many members requested. It is okay to continue to use the old CO form.

12

Buyer Vacant Land Additional Disclosure

Seller Multiple Counter Offer

Corporation/Limited Liability Company Signature Addendum

Delivery of or Failure to Deliver Short Sale Lender Written Consent

Notice to Quit (rental form)

Pet Addendum (rental form)

Pool, Hot Tub and Spa Addendum (rental form)


Also, as you have hopefully noticed by now – it is no longer necessary to initial page 2 of the Agency Disclosure (AD). Remember the best way to ensure that you are using the most current updated form is to use zipForms. It is good for business and good for the environment.

taxes and benefits for homeowners and tax collectors alike. He goes on to say that, “split-roll” treatment of commercial properties (which may or may not include residential income) can be achieved in different ways than by changing the rates. What might those ways be? 1. Commercial properties might be reassessed on a periodic basis – every 3 to 5 years. 2. Commercial properties might be reassessed when an ownership change in the titled entity occurs. 3. Redefine “change in ownership” of property.

TAXATION & GOVERNMENT FINANCE Sandi Adelson Homeland Properties for Peggy Yeomans (760) 591-3090 sandi_does-real-estate@hotmail.com PROPERTY TAX ISSUES; Retaining Proposition 13 Protections for Residential Property in a Split-Roll – There is a strong sense that Sacramento is going to be looking hard at the “loopholes” in Proposition 13. A split-roll tax has been discussed and thrown around for several years. Under the conventional definition of split-roll, residential and commercial (which may include residential income) are assessed at different tax rates with the commercial rate being higher than that of residential. Under Proposition 13, properties are reassessed at the time of change of ownership at the rate of 1% of the property value (usually the sales price) plus any voter passed bonds and assessments. What happens to the reassessment of the property if the title is not transferred but rather the entity owning that property is transferred? The answer is: it is not increased. Corporate owned properties are transferred frequently through this method. There are also generation-skipped trusts where owners leave the property not to their children, but to their grandchildren… conceivably not triggering a reassessment for 50-75 years. According to Lenny Goldberg, of the California Tax Reform Association, the property tax burden has shifted to residential property in 55 of 58 counties (Santa Clara was 50/50 now 70/30, L.A. now 70/30, Contra Costa 73/27, and Ventura 75/25). Jon Coupal of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association says Proposition 13 stabilizes

There was a boisterous debate and the committee finally decided that because of the complexities of this issue and other related issues that were on the agenda, a task force should be formed to explore the issues and possible solutions and make recommendation at a future date. A motion was made. “The Taxation and Government Finance Committee recommends that the President of C.A.R. appoint a Task Force to analyze the issue of and C.A.R.’s policy and position on “split-roll” taxation and related issues.” The motion was seconded with no discussion, and it was passed. This is not a motion that goes to the directors because only the President has the power to appoint a Task Force. FLORIDA'S PROPERTY TAX SYSTEM vs. CALIFORNIA’S PROPOSITIONS 13, 60 & 90 The first difference between Florida’s property taxes and California’s is that they are based on annual reassessments of the property, not on the transfer value with annual increases. Florida’s “Save Our Homes” placed caps on assessment increases but it only protects homeowners who are permanent Florida residents. Nonresident homeowners have no cap protection. Florida assessments can be increased by a majority vote of the local government to allow for collecting the same amount of revenue as the year before. To increase revenue through assessment increases, a supermajority vote of the local government or approval of the voters is required, but assessments cannot be increased more than 3% over 13


the previous year under any circumstances. This is as opposed to the 2% annual increase to property values in California. Florida has adopted a policy that has similarities to Props 60 and 90, but also has some glaring differences. Under Prop 60, a homeowner over 55 in California can transfer the property tax assessment on the home to another of equal or lesser value. This can be done only once. Prop 90 allows this to be done for moving into another county, as long as the county has opted-in (only six counties have). In Florida there is no age restriction, no location restriction, no property value restriction, but there is a maximum of $500,000 tax savings (Assessed value is $100,000 – market value is $550,000 – assessment difference $450,000 – new property market value $700,000 – new assessed value $250,000). The other difference is that it can be done as many times as you want or need to move. Florida’s program was adopted for much the same reasons Propositions 60 and 90 were. The difference is such that any resident in Florida has complete portability. Even before the discussion on this issue was put to the floor, committee members had decided that this should be included in the consideration of a Task Force creation

should be taken on this and therefore C.A.R.’s policy of two-thirds would remain. AB 243 (Dickinson) Infrastructure Financing Districts –Would reduce from two-thirds to 55% voter approval. Position: Oppose Status: Assembly Floor Inactive File AB 690 (Campos) Jobs and Infrastructure Financing Districts - Would reduce from two-thirds to 55% voter approval. Position: Oppose Status: Assembly Local Government Committee SB 33 (Wolk) Infrastructure Financing Districts Would reduce from two-thirds to 55% voter approval. Position: Oppose Status: Assembly Floor Inactive File SB 628 (Beall) Infrastructure Financing Districts Would completely eliminate the voter requirement for the creation of infrastructure financing districts and the issuance of bonds that will be used to finance these kinds of transit projects. Position: Oppose Status: Senate Floor Inactive File

REDUCTION OF VOTE THRESHOLDS: Because most of these issues fall into the report only and/or update category, I will group them all together.

AB 1188 (Bradford) Vote Threshold Requirement for Fire Protection Bonds - Would reduce from two-thirds to 55% voter approval. Enactment of this measure is contingent upon the approval of ACA 3. Position: Oppose Status: Senate Governance and Finance Committee

Reducing The Vote Threshold Needed To Approve Housing Bonds – The issue arises out of the need for funds because all of the funds generated by Props 46 and 1C have been used and the state has eliminated redevelopment agencies and those funds have been used for budget balancing. C.A.R. believes that any change in the threshold might be used by larger cities and counties but not the smaller. It has always been C.A.R.s policy to maintain the twothirds vote for bonds, but to consider a case-by-case basis for any proposals. The committee felt no action

ACA 3 (Campos) Bonded Indebtedness Vote Threshold Reduction – Would reduce from twothirds to 55% voter approval. Position: Oppose Status: Assembly Local Government Committee

14


ACA 8 (Blumenfield) Bonded Indebtedness Vote Threshold Reduction – Would reduce from twothirds to 55% voter approval. In a political maneuver, ACA 8 was removed from its policy committee without a hearing and passed by the Assembly. Position: Oppose Status: Senate Governance and Finance

SCA 11 (Hancock) Vote Threshold Reduction for Special Taxes - Would reduce from two-thirds to 55% voter approval. Position: Oppose Status: Senate Appropriations Committee OTHER UPDATES: AB 1103 Regulations have been suspended until January 2014 - California Energy Commission (CEC) was scheduled to begin enforcing the provisions July 1, 2013, for buildings larger than 50,000 square feet. Late last spring, the CEC delayed enforcement of AB 1103 until September 1, 2013, and later again delayed enforcement of the regulations until January 1, 2014, due to technical difficulties with the data transfer interface on the Energy Star Portfolio Manager. Beginning January 1, 2014, the CEC will enforce the benchmarking requirement on buildings 10,000 square feet or more, which will put enforcement of the regulations back on its phased-in implementation schedule.

SCA 3 (Leno) Parcel Tax Vote Threshold Reduction – Originally would have reduced from two-thirds to 55% voter approval. C.A.R. was opposed because of the threshold reduction and because parcel taxes are assessed to property without regard to property value. SCA 3 was amended to instead pertain to an individual's right to access information on the meetings of public bodies and documents produced by public officials and agencies. Position: Watch Status: Passed Legislature and will be on the ballot in 2014 SCA 4 (Liu) and SCA 8 (Corbett) Transportation Project Special Tax Vote Threshold Reduction – Would reduce from two-thirds to 55% voter approval. Position: Oppose Status: SCA 4 and SCA 8 are in the Senate Appropriations Committee

AB 758 Regulation Development Timeline - The California Energy Commission (CEC) released its Draft Action Plan for AB 758 (Skinner, 2009) implementation this summer relating to building energy efficiency. The CEC will use a “glide path” to implementation that will incentivize and exhaust all voluntary measures for adoption of energy efficiency ratings, audits and upgrades in advance of considering mandatory approaches. The CEC will seek to use effective public information, financing, technical assistance, and incentives to encourage voluntary compliance. It is anticipated that the Final Action Plan will be released this winter.

SCA 7 (Wolk) Vote Threshold Reduction for Public Library Funding - Would reduce from twothirds to 55% voter approval. Position: Oppose Status: Senate Appropriations Committee SCA 9 (Corbett) Vote Threshold Reduction for Economic Development - Would reduce from twothirds to 55% voter approval. Position: Oppose Status: Senate Appropriations Committee

SB 30 (Calderon) and AB 42 (Perea) Debt Forgiveness Income Tax – There has been no movement on the bill to extend the debt forgiveness. C.A.R. has opposed the bill because of the attachment of SB 391. Indications are that when the new session begins SB 391 will be removed and the bills will go forward. 15


Following Legislative Day opposition, the AB 905 was made a two-year bill and it will not move forward this year. Position: Oppose Status: Assembly Judiciary Committee

Position: Sponsor Status: SB 30 and AB 42 Assembly Appropriations Committee SB 391 (DeSaulnier) Document Recording Tax – While the bill excluded all sale documents, C.A.R. opposed this bill because while affordable housing is necessary, C.A.R. does not believe that the entire burden should fall on real estate. This fee applied to only the recording of real estate documents. Position: Oppose Status: Assembly Appropriations Committee

AB 23 (Donnelly), AB 124 (Morrell) and SB 17 (Gaines) Repeal of Fire Prevention Fee - Would repeal the Fire Prevention Fee of $150 on structures located in State Responsibility Areas. Position: Support Status: AB 23 and AB 124 were held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, and SB 17 is in the Senate Rules Committee

AB 561 (Ting) Documentary Transfer Tax – This issue is another of those that the committee believes should be part of any Taxation Task Force’s analysis. C.A.R. has a policy to oppose split-roll tax. Position: Oppose Status: Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee

SB 125 (Gaines) Exemption from Fire Prevention Fee – Would exempt property owners from paying $150 fee on habitable structures, which are located within both a State Responsibility Fire Area and a local fire district. Position: Support Status: Failed passage in the Senate Natural Resources and Water Committee

AB 905 (Ting) Private Transfer Tax - This creates private transfer taxes to fund environmental improvements. It exempts residential 1-4. It forces ALL future owners of the property to pay a transfer tax as high as 2% of the purchase price of the property. C.A.R. unsuccessfully sponsored SB 670 (Correa) in 2007 to outlaw private transfer fees. And in March 2012, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) restricted Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's ability to invest in mortgages with such private transfer fees. This measure binds future owners with no oversight, no accountability and no limit on how long the tax can be imposed, even years after the improvement has been paid for or the useful life of the improvement has passed. C.A.R. also believes that this measure does not comply with FHFA's newly imposed regulations so such covenants would restrict financing on the encumbered property. There was an amendment to cap the time to 50 years and to provide for language in any assessment to have a subordination clause for mortgage financing. This was a bill that the REALTORS® who attended Legislative Day in Sacramento lobbied hard against.

AB 468 (Chesbro) Disaster Management, Preparedness and Assistance Surcharge – Would repeal the $150 Fire Prevention Fee and replace it with an insurance surcharge on every commercial and residential fire and multi-peril insurance policy issued after January 1, 2014. C.A.R. is opposed to AB 468 because it is inappropriate to establish a statewide surcharge to fund emergency activities given that not all homeowners face the same potential hazards. In other words, this is a tax not a fee. Position: Oppose Status: Assembly Natural Resources Committee AB 59 (Bonta) Split Roll within School Districts The Borikas v. Alameda Unified School District decision states that parcel taxes imposed by a school district must be applied uniformly to all property (residential or commercial) within the district. This would void the Borikas v. Alameda Unified School 16


District decision. C.A.R. opposes this bill because it could create a split-roll tax and C.A.R. policy is to oppose such action. This is another of the issues that will hopefully be addressed if a Task Force is appointed. Position: Oppose Status: Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee

on a fixed income, such as senior citizens or disabled individuals. Position: Support Status: Held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee FEDERAL TAXATION ISSUES Tax Reform The debate will undoubtedly include whether the reform should be revenue neutral (supported by Republicans) or should raise revenue (supported by Democrats). Indications are that everything is on the table including mortgage interest deduction, capital gains forgiveness and even tax-deferred exchanges. C.A.R. and NAR are actively monitoring the issues and are supplying input whenever and wherever possible.

AB 188 (Ammiano) Split Roll – Again, another split-roll issue. There are more and more of these coming out of Sacramento and it is for this reason that the Taxation Committee wants a Task Force to analyze the options. There is no doubt that the assault will only become greater and C.A.R. must look at all possible solutions. Position: Oppose Status: Held in the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee

Mortgage Debt Forgiveness The current forgiveness runs only to January 1, 2014. The bill introduced on June 19, 2013, by Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) (S. 1187, “The Mortgage Forgiveness Tax Relief Act.”) would extend it for two more years.

AB 1172 (Bocanegra) Intercounty Transfer of Base Year Value – This would replace Prop 90. It would eliminate the opt-in for counties and would mandate the portability of “Base Year Value.” One other notable change is that it would increase the age for qualified homeowners to 65. When looking at this, one may also want to consider Florida’s model. Position: Support Status: Assembly Local Government Committee

U.S. Treasury Decision on Same-Sex Marriage Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in June to overturn part of the Defense of Marriage Act, the U.S. Treasury and IRS recently issued rules to help clarify the tax treatment of married couples of the same sex. Specifically, the IRS will treat same-sex spouses in all U.S. states as a married couple for the purposes of their tax filings. So long as the couple holds a marriage license from a state that allows for same-sex marriage, that couple may reside in any state and still be treated as a married couple in terms of how the IRS applies the tax code. More than 200 provisions in the tax code and federal regulations reference marriage, affecting a range of financial matters such as estate planning and capital gains.

AB 1322 (Patterson) Senior and Disabled Citizens Property Tax Deferment - The previous program expired as of February 20, 2009. This would eliminate a sunset date and allow the Controller to accept and process applications for tax deferment beginning July 1, 2014. This measure would also create the Senior Citizens and Disabled Citizens Property Tax Postponement Fund, which will be funded through the repaid tax postponement payments. Money from this fund will be appropriated to the Controller beginning on January 1, 2014, for the administration of the deferment program. C.A.R. supports this measure as it assists individuals who are 17


Corporate Tax Reform While reform of the full tax code is unlikely, there seems to be more of a chance that Congress and the President can agree to broad changes within the corporate tax code, including carried interest, passthrough entities, interest deductibility, and depreciation.

relates to a homeowner’s ability to access the equity in the property they own. As Congress debates mortgage reform, lawmakers are looking at the impact that debt-to-income ratio and loan-to-value ratio changes after a senior mortgage has been originated on loan performance. Some legislators have proposed limitations on home equity lines. The Corker-Warner bill, SB 1217, has been pointed to as a bipartisan compromise on housing reform on which to start the debate. Within the bill were provisions to limit an owner's ability to access the equity on their property. In response to that, C.A.R. proposed this action: "That C.A.R., in conjunction with NAR, OPPOSE preemptive federal legislation and/or regulations that would limit a homeowner's access to their home equity, thus preserving the authority of the individual states to determine a homeowner's right to borrow against their home." This was APPROVED by the Federal Committee at C.A.R. and will now go to NAR for approval.

Commercial Loans S.289, the Commercial Real Estate and Economic Development (CREED) Act of 2013 would temporarily (for five years) allow commercial real estate projects to be eligible for the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) 504/CDC refinance program. By expanding the types of projects eligible for the SBA 504/CDC refinance program, the CREED Act will alleviate some of the pressure from the nearly $1.3 trillion of commercial real estate loans with balloon mortgages that will mature between 2013 and 2016, by allowing small businesses to refinance certain owner-occupied commercial buildings. NAR strongly supports the CREED Act.

Auctions within Real Estate are becoming a new source of frustration for REALTORS®. Generally occurring during the term of a short sale escrow, agents and principals have been swept into an "Auction Process" that puts the agent and principals at risk. With this in mind, we requested that the Standard Forms Committee draft a clause for insertion to appropriate and relevant documents, advising the Buyer and Seller of the chance that the property could be forced into an auction type sale at any time during the contract period, which would give agents and principals an opportunity to "opt out" for consumer protection reasons. C.A.R. is also exploring the presence and legality of the Auction Process to determine what C.A.R. can do to either educate or protect agents and principals from being forced into a situation that could have unknown hazards down the road.

Lease Accounting The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) is still getting input and comments. Nothing has been finalized yet. Additional information can be found at: http://www.car.org/meetings/carmeetings/committeematerials-archive/2013fall/agda1013/

TRANSACTION & REGULATORY Kim Murphy Murphy & Murphy (760) 415-9292 kim@murphy-realty.com

As a result of the Fire Prevention Fee, CAL Fire is required to maintain official State Responsibility Area maps showing where the state has financial

The Transaction and Regulatory Committee (T & R) covered many topics that relate to the practice of real estate. We took "Action" on one item. The item 18


OTHER INFORMATION OF INTEREST

responsibility for preventing or suppressing fires. These maps are to be reviewed every five years in an effort to catch changes in land, such as development or agricultural growth. Insurance rates are generally based on potential risk to the property. If an owner is denied Fire Insurance then, as a last resort, owners can apply for the FAIR Plan. Transaction and Regulatory requested that C.A.R. Legal create a Q&A regarding fire insurance options availability, and that C.A.R. Communications develop a Consumer Advisory on "How to Shop for Fire Insurance" with emphasis on FAIR plan applications.

Dianne McMillan, CEO (760) 734-3971 ext 209 Dianne@nsdcar.com

Each October C.A.R. also holds an Expo featuring many great courses and an exhibit hall filled with products for your business. Since the meeting was just “up the road” in Long Beach this year, it was a great opportunity for you to join 8,500 others at the Expo. Miss it this year? Well, next year it will be in Anaheim, which is even closer. Watch for details next September. If enough are interested, we can even get a bus to drive you, giving you a no hassle ride and an opportunity to network up and back. Let me know if you’re interested.

There is an ongoing discussion regarding Ethics and Professionalism with licensees. Requiring continuing education on a yearly basis that includes a class in Ethics has been considered. At this time, the proposal has been tabled, but the Transaction and Regulatory Committee have been asked to study the proposal further. We also discussed whether or not to support legislation requiring Home Inspectors to be licensed. We decided not to take any action on this. However, just like REALTORS® need to amp up the professionalism with which we perform, so do the Home Inspectors.

Coming: A new domain extension of “.realtor” early in 2014. More information should be available soon. Legal Cases of Interest: C.A.R. reviewed eight cases since the May meeting and filed amicus briefs for five of them, two of which also received funding assistance.

Final thoughts: It is so important to take action when you receive a RED ALERT. It is simple yet profound when our large body of licensees speaks out in favor or opposition to a proposed bill. Your voice needs to be heard, so please click on that button and send your email to our representatives. Also, as you purchase new business cards, please remember to put CAL BRE and then your license number on your card. The Bureau of Real Estate received a cease and desist from a company whose call letters are BRE, we must use the CAL BRE to conform with that.

19

All Cities Realty .v Brunet: has to do with whether salespersons are individually liable when use the DBA name issued by CalBRE (formerly known as DRE) to the broker, which is alleged to infringe on the trademark of another broker. (Lesson: do a trademark search before getting a DBA.)

Bararsani v. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage: relates to whether salespersons are employees.

Prahm v. Pickford: is a procuring cause case relating to what standards and factors should be applied when a salesperson had discussions with a buyer who subsequently made an offer after the listing expired (but the buyer was noted in the safety clause) which as accepted. The first


salesperson never had obtained a written offer from the buyer. •

CBIA v. City of San Jose: This is an inclusionary zoning case on whether a local government that imposes a burden on a developer to include low or moderate income properties as part of the development, or pay an in-lieu fee, must establish that the requirement is reasonably related to the impact of the housing development on affordable housing. The case has been accepted by the California Supreme Court for hearing.

ADP v. Realty Executives: has to do with whether a broker can be sued by another broker under a “quantum meruit” theory (a claim for value of services) when there is no contract between the brokers.

Industry Leader Insights: If you would like to know the state of the industry and the most pressing issues facing REALTORS® from a private roundtable between C.A.R.’s CEO Joel Singer and five CEOs of top national brokerages, go to http://www.car.org/aboutus/thoughtleadership. I highly recommend it. Finally, please remember to thank your NSDCAR delegates to C.A.R. who have given generously and unselfishly of their time.

20


NSDCARWe Are All About Your Business Success!

Vista Administrative Service Center 906 Sycamore Avenue, Suite 104 Vista, CA 92081 (760) 734-3971 Phone (760) 734-3976 Fax

Carmel Valley Service Center 12250 El Camino Real, Suite 118 San Diego, CA 92130

Carlsbad Service Center 6183 Paseo Del Norte, Suite 150 Carlsbad, CA 92011

Escondido Service Center 1802 S. Escondido Boulevard, Suite E Escondido, CA 92025

Fallbrook Service Center 126 West Beech Fallbrook, CA 92028

(858) 350-1600 Phone (858) 350-0380 Fax

(760) 745-2299 Phone (760) 745-3842 Fax

(760) 929-2100 Phone (760) 929-2115 Fax

(760) 728-5811 Phone (760) 728-0646 Fax


C.A.R. Business Meeting Reports - October 2013