Jnuary 20, 2010. Bethesda, Md. Irate Seller.

The first call was at nine o'clock a.m.today. I had an appointment with an agent at eight, but even though the caller knew I was in a meeting, they demanded to interrupt my meeting and speak to them. Unfortunately for them, I was out of the office and I never interrupt a meeting for a phone call, so my cell phone was unanswered. I spoke to this irate seller when I returned and listened to her tale of woe. She called our agent lots and lots of bad words which included dishonest, unethical, sleazy, along others that my mother would not like hearing. My response is always the same. I listen and empathise and take notes and I say "I am sorry this has happened", which would be true, because if this incident had not occurred, I would not be subject to this tirade. Then I promise to call them back after I have gathered information.

The case was interesting and unusual. Our agent was the selling agent and the listing agent was a single agent company. The property was sold with the seller crediting the buyer $9000 for closing costs. The property did not appraise at the sales price so both seller and buyer agreed to reduce the price to the appraised value and keep all therms the same of the original contract. The lender required the $9000. credit adjusted to $8700. Both buyer and seller signed both pieces of paper making changes to the original contract. So far there seems to be no problem.

The seller told me that our agent stole $9000. from them. Now the real difficulty was that the listing agent led them to believe that when the appraisal was low, the credit to the buyer would no longer be valid, even the seller on two occasions signed agreeing to the terms. Finally, Ned had the happy task of pointing out to the seller the parts of the paperwork where they agreed to both reduce the price and give the $8700. to the purchaser. I was once again involved with a meeting and the seller kept calling and calling and calling. The final comment to Ned by the seller was to say that our agent did not explain the paperwork properly to their agent, therefore the whole thing was our agent's fault. Amazing. We represent the buyer. The listing agent represents the seller and is supposed to be competent. The paperwork is as plain as the nose on your face.

If we make mistakes, we try to make sure the parties are happy, but in this instance, the problem was the other agent which makes life difficult. The seller wants $9000. from us. Ned suggested that as the agent did not explain the papers to them properly, perhaps they should seek regress from the listing agent. But they continued to think it was our problem. These discount brokers drive us batty, but I must say, it is nice to do everything right with the case. Our defensible case is on secure ground.