Intelligence is a relative concept– Ayn Rand’s younger sister, Nora…. ergo:
The purpose of these (licensing) laws is to artificially limit entry into the real estate business, with the objective being to artificially raise the prices paid by consumers (emphasis added, ignorance in the original)
I’ve been reading this licensing abolition nonsense over and over. First of all, the real estate licensing laws are so lax as to be virtually nonexistent. Consequently, there is an agent oversupply– not a limited supply. Secondly, what a consumer pays has nothing to do with licensing. There are licensed agents who discount, others that work on a flat fee and those that are full service traditional. The same applies to attorneys– some work on a percentage, others work by the hour. Even the licensed hairstylist gets to charge what they want. The license allows one to do business— it does not mandate a business model. Duh.
Faced with the obvious fallacy of the above statement and the chaos that would result from completely unregulated real estate commerce, this fella decided a semantic back flip was in order. Instead of the license, lets go with a “hard to get” UL-modeled certification. Hmm… license or certification— still sounds like someone is creating some laws to govern who gets to be a real estate agent. And won’t a “hard to get” UL tag tend to artificially limit entry — exactly what you voiced opposition to for licensing. And how will granny, whom you said ought be able to sell homes (as well as cut hair and do heart transplants), get that UL thingee. For anarchy’s sake man, make a choice and stick with it— should anyone be able to sell real estate or only the certified folks?
Forget for a moment UL tests “products” and real estate licensing tests “people“. Besides a complete lack of any evidence (beyond repetitious rhetoric) that real estate licensing laws harm consumers more than they help, there was no indication who would be the experts to test these agents for UL tagging– and pray tell how these experts would test client rapport, negotiation skills, valuation, staging, marketing skills, honesty, reliability, knowledge of unzillowables, even return call skills, REAL ESTATE LAW, as well as all the intangibles that go into making a competent and EFFECTIVE real estate professional? And what label would you get if you have every skill, except the ability to sell more than 2 homes a year, or lack virtually all skills, yet sell a 100.
In case anyone is buying this real estate-UL malarky, go check out exactly what Underwriters Laboratories does and does not do (you have to find the web site yourself because UL prohibits hyperlinking— oh screw them, here’s the link).
UL is primarily a “safety” tester—UL does NOT approve anything– it certifies the lightbulb is in compliance with national safety standards. But it does not GUARANTEE the product as safe or EFFECTIVE. In addition, it will NOT tell you if the bulb will be brighter than another, last longer than another or be more energy efficient than another, whether it will burn out sooner than advertised (heck if I ever got 1,000 hours from a bulb), or even if the bulb will work (geez, my UL-listed Christmas lights barely last one season)— in other words, UL will not provide any guidance or guarantee the lightbulb you buy will serve YOUR PURPOSE or not harm you in another way. And everyone knows that qualities desired in a lightbulb (and an agent) extend beyond minimum safety standards. Both must be EFFECTIVE.
In addition, UL certifies product compliance with government laws. That’s right. UL designations tell the consumer– “this thingee complies with government laws or minimum standards.” And who do you suppose passed laws on fire resistant mattresses, for example–Uncle Sam, not UL (who just burns them)– maybe more lives would be saved without these annoying laws too.
This from wikipedia:
UL certification does not guarantee the product will perform acceptably or that it is safe under all conditions …. UL develops its Standards to correlate with the requirements of model installation codes, such as the National Electrical Code®. The UL Mark does not carry any legal weight… (emphasis added)
This common twist type wire connector is UL listed but nontheless inadequate:
Now, let’s shine some light on real estate licensing and consumer protection. The real estate license, properly bestowed (not given away like cracker-jack prizes), will provide minimum assurance to consumers that agents are at least knowledgable of real estate, housing & discrimination laws, as well as fiduciary duties owing to their clients. But lets face it, neither a license or a UL certification will ever protect consumers from agents who are cheats and liars. Human nature will not be changed by a license or lightbulb tag.
I will be willing to change my opinion of the need for real estate licensing, if ONE study can be presented as “proof” that NOT having a license led to less corruption, less law breaking, better service and savings to buyer or sellers (any connection between lack of a license & lower cost is ludicrous, naive and dim witted — skills, whether licensed or not, will always demand compensation. The monkey who sells my home will still want his share of bananas. And there are already plenty of licensed monkeys who will sell their services for less).
So, I don’t care how many posts are written on the abolition of real estate licensing laws as being good for the consumer– it still remains “certified stoopid“. A dim bulb doesn’t get brighter by constant polishing.
Further Reading:
Suing Underwriters Laboratories in a Product Liability case (L. Booth, Esq. via findlaw.com)
Image adapted from Gary Larson cartoon copyrighted by FarWorks.
Technorati Tags: real estate licensing, UL, law, stoopidity, dog do do
[THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE]
That is good stuff! Each and every real estate broker and agent makes a conscience decision every day on whether or not they are going to serve their clients or serve themselves. Lowering or doing away with licensing requirements will only dilute service and make our perception with the public worse than it already is.
Interesting thoughts put forth here. There is validity in doing away with licensing. Licensing only proves one can pass the licensing exam, which in most states has very little to do with real estate knowledge.
I would be an advocate for raising the standards, not making licensing harder, but enhancing the value so licensees would actually have to demonstrate competence in the field. I.E. knowing how to price a property, filling out a contract, accurately detailing what title insurance or describing in detail differences in types of financing, etc.
Instead the NAR folks prefer to promote the association to dilution. Was it Roosevelt who promised a “Chicken in every pot?” NAR’s goal is a Realtor in every household.
The statement “the purpose of (real estate licensing) laws is to artificially limit entry” is patently false. Quite the contrary. They are so lax as to be virtually no license at all– the panacea for the anarchist. But the result is there are a lot of chickens running around and not enough pots to put them in. And how is the consumer better off, or the chicken?
Kieth Richards says the Stones are about the weaving of guitar patterns. Space and layers. It’s allot harder than people think. You guys are the Rolling Stones of the Blog dudes. Funny and real. No sunshine here, simply you just got a good mix. keep on keepin’ on!
Thanks Joe– we just try to play it like we see it:)
Thanks for taking the time to come by to listen.