In the positions, Díaz states that politics is “an illegal boycott group” that has no “legitimate justification”. He said that the result of the policy is “the reduced consumer choice, the artificial inflation of commercial costs and market mortgage execution for alternative commercial models in real estate brokerage.”
He Association of Real Estate Agents of California (Car), the LODI ASSOCIATION OF REAL ESTATE AGENTS and the CENTRAL ASSOCIATION OF THE REALIZATION Agent They are also appointed accused in the lawsuit, as well as five strangers “whom Díaz said that he will name when his identities are discovered.
The car declined to comment Housing cable. The other defendants and representatives of Díaz could not be contacted immediately.
The demand establishes that many agents choose not to become real estate agents in remote areas such as Modesto, where the commercial group does not provide benefits. But not Bee, a realmeror can prevent a brokerage bag from hurrying them due to the financial barrier it raises.
The case is presented “per se”, which means that Plintiff states that the behavior is inherently illegal and anti -petite, which acquit them of demonstrating any negative impact of the rule.
The plaintiff accuses the defendants with violations of Sherman Law and the Cartwright Law of California.
The VDF rule is written in the statutes of Nar and requires that the runners pay the additional quotas for each agent that is not of Raltor who works for the broker. Otherwise, it may result in the membership of the corridor being suspended or revoked.
But Díaz said there are “legitimate and legal commercial interests” in the hiring of licensed agents for tasks that do not require membership or membership related to membership.
The examples provided are “agent’s visual inspection disseminations”, which are required by California state law, commercial sales and lease. Díaz believes that the VDF rule punishes runners for hiring personnel to perform thesis tasks.
Díaz’s demand is the last of a long line of Ataint against the policies and rules of Nar, most of the cases of Sitzer-Burnett that Nar was assigned for $ 418 million. The plaintiffs in the case affirmed that the requirement of Nar for the listing agents to provide general sacrifices of compensation to the buying agents in MLSS affiliated with Nar were anti -competitive.
The agreement went to the industry and imposed new rules that prohibit the offers of the compensation of the agents on the local MLS, in addition to the requirements related to the agreements that the poster of the possible housing buyer with its real estate agents.
Sitzer-Burnett was also brought, and the judge of Missouri in the case of Stephen Bough, allowed him to process as such. Industry observers believe they played a very important role in lossing Nar.