The NAR Is A Sex Offender’s Best Friend
March 26, 2008

“Hello Mr. Agent, I like this house. I could see my family living here. Just one question, are there any sex offenders nearby”? A simple question that based on information from the National Association of Realtors does not have to be answered by the agent.
The answer the NAR wants agents to proffer is, “Well Mr. homebuyer you’re just going to go look that up yourself”.
Ralph Holman, associate general counsel for the NAR says “What agents should do is tell buyers about their states’ registries.”
Go look it up yourself! That’s the answer that the NAR wants agents to give. An individual who is held out in NAR advertising and lobbying as a professional on par with doctors and lawyers wants their rank and file members to dodge this question as much as possible.
This certainly bestows credibility and trust with the American consumer doesn’t it? This surely will make the public more sympathetic to the plight of Realtors shouldn’t it? You would not expect a “professional” who is being paid upwards of 6-8% to facilitate the sale of a housing purchase to actually tell the truth would you?
If not for information and said coordination of the sale what exactly is the agent being paid such a hefty commission for? Why would any agent or the NAR encourage a culture of deceit? If not deceit, then call it ignorance and unprofessional. In any event, if you are selling a product as important as where someone wants to house their wife and children, then is it not too much to expect that the consumer is relying on the agent to inform and disclose all defects, not the ones they choose to disclose?
Has the NAR declined in credibility so far as to instruct their agents to actually feign ignorance or have there agents slid so far as to actually buy into degrading their “profession” by bamboozling the consumer?
A professional should not have to question whether such information is pertinent. A professional should deliver the information willingly and should openly and freely desire to offer full disclosure.
USA Today recently ran a story wherein a spokesman for the National Association of Realtors was quoted as stating that they have no disclosure policy regarding sex offenders.
I have a question. Do you think a real estate agent buying a home for their family would care if a sex offender lived across the street?
What’s behind this “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Policy all about?” What else, can it be about other than money!
A 2002 study by Wright State University professors James Larsen and Joseph Coleman found that homes situated within one-tenth of a mile of a sex offender sold for an average 17.4 percent less than similar houses elsewhere. Homes between one-and two-tenths of a mile away sold for 10.2 percent less, while those between two- and three-tenths of a mile sold for 9.3 percent less.
That means lower sales price which translates to lower commissions. It also means more liability for the real estate agent. Which incidentally was the reason the NAR gives for NOT disclosing information about sex offenders.
In the pending Florida case discussed in the aforementioned USA Today article, Christopher and Pamela McCoy bought a home and found out subsequent to the purchase that a convicted sex offender is living NEXT DOOR!
The Sellers, Shawn and Stacey Sima openly acknowledged that a Sheriff’s deputy knocked on their door and handed them a flier informing them of the predator next door but feel that neither they, nor their agents who are named in the suit, had any duty to disclose this fact.
Duty? How about ethics? How about decency? Co-defendants in the case are a local ReMax Real Estate brokerage and the agent involved in the transaction, Peter Lamaster.
In court documents we have reviewed, ReMax and Lamaster claim that it’s the Seller’s fault and the Buyer’s fault and that the disclosure rules do not apply to them. They actually said that.
This statement is eerily reminiscent to the Marti Ummel case in California, it is becoming readily apparent that some agents are intentionally hiding information they know to be in existence and detrimental to the collection of their commission. The new rally cry seems to be that agents must at all cost protect the commission and in defense thereafter do not claim ignorance but rather cowardly state that it is not your responsibility.
The pedophile living next door was arrested for having illegal sexual contact with his own teenage stepdaughter, and was convicted of two counts of sexual battery on a child and sent to prison for a year and a half, followed by three years of counseling and 10 years of probation.
Whether or not this man has served his time or not, the fact remains that should a prospective Buyer not deserve to know that a criminal…not a Jewish person or a Black person, or a Spanish person or a Muslim,..but a convicted criminal who committed a vicious act upon a child, is living next door? I mention Jews, Blacks, Hispanics and Muslims because the National Association of Realtors relies upon the Fair-housing laws that prevent agents from talking about neighborhood demographics.
“The conservative approach is often taken in order to avoid a lawsuit popping up in response to frank neighborhood talk, said Holman, agents are forbidden from giving information that could be considered “steering,” directing a client toward or away from a particular property in a discriminatory manner”.
Making statements about an individual’s race or religion is one thing, but a convicted criminal who is a incurable sex offender is hardly a discriminatory statement. It’s the truth and as such would be a complete defense to any complaint brought for libel, slander or discrimination. Never mind the fact that discount brokers across the Country and upstart companies like Redfin could speak to the proven reality of agents steering clients away from certain listings…give me a break!
Many purchase contracts now include disclosure information about how to look up information on registered sex offenders, but should it be at the time of signing a Contract that this direction be given? Is not the consumer trusting the professional in the transaction to be looking after their best interests?
Does the agent meet the consumer and initially state, don’t believe anything I say and verify yourself before buying this house? Of course not, their “sales pitch” is to make the client feel as if they have their best interest at heart when in true reality, they don’t.
Requirements as to sex offender disclosure varies from state-to-state, but in most states all an agent has to do to comply is tell a prospective homeowner where to go to find out the information if they want to know.
This was not the intent of Megan’s Law and the NAR should be ashamed of skirting the law in an effort to increase pecuniary gain for its
members.
While the law says that by informing prospective purchasers how to access the database, that one may be in compliance, would’nt a true professional WANT to exceed this cursory compliance and make sure that they are acting in the best interests of the consumer?
Richard and Maureen Kanka were the Megan’s parents and the catalysts for Megan’s Law. Megan Kanka who was seven years old when Jesse Timmendequas, a repeated violent sexual offender who lived across the street from her, kidnapped, raped, and murdered her.
Megan’s mother has publicly maintained if she had known a convicted sex offender lived in the neighborhood, her daughter would be alive today.
“Every parent should have the right to know if a dangerous sexual predator moves into their neighborhood.”
The Kankas, stricken with grief, became advocates for change in how the sex offender is treated. In an effort to get the laws changed they circulated a petition demanding immediate legislative action. That petition was signed by over 400,000 residents and the law was changed in just 89 days from draft to passage.
This being known, the NAR chooses to act and advise on the side of the sex offender.
This undoubtedly has become a difficult issue for agents sellers, and their attorneys because Megan’s Law does not address the duty of a property owner or their agent to disclose to a tenant or buyer that a known sex offender lives in the neighborhood. But does it have to be that difficult? Human decency should outweigh duty.
The National Association of Realtors’ position is that local law enforcement agencies, not real estate agents, should be the go-to sources for sex-offender information, stating that Realtors, “should not bear the responsibility of notifying home buyers when such offenders live in a neighborhood.”
Cogent evidence and veracious compassion for humanity should be enough to supersede the limitations of responsibility and duty.
UPDATE:
Update on this Post:
We have spoken to several lawyers and an expert who is testifying on this particular case.
A lot of people commented on this post and accused us for “shooting from the hip” and not being sensitive to the business because I am not a licensed agent.
1. I am very close to the agents in our office and we are involved with the training and management of many agents. That being said, we are not simply investors out there winging it. We make our living from the real estate industry. I state this because some have been erroneously presumptous in their thinking that we are not aware what an agent is faced with.
Which leads me to something we do which most don’t, and that is to perform additional research when a subject is questioned or comments seem to be contrary to the law.
2. The lead expert on the case spoken about above wrote the following:
“After one of my staff listened to your program yesterday and upon my listening, I would like to address one point. Specifically you inquired about my opinion on real estate brokers fear of being sued for discrimination for revealing the prescence of a sexual offender or predator. HUD enforces the THE FAIR HOUSING ACT you are not allowed to discriminate because of the following:
a. race or color
b. religion
c. sex
d. national origin
e. familial status, or disability
These are the protected classes that this law addresses.
You will notice that age is not included because you can restrict sales to for instance 55 years of age and over.
A felon is not part of a protected class.”
That being said,providing a prospect with information relative to a sexual offender or predator is NOT subject to any portion of the Fair Housing Act and does not place any liability on an agent.
You may view the Fair Housing Act at the following link:
http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/FHLaws/
You may further find additional information on the application of the Fair Housing Laws by going to the following link:
http://www.fairhousinglaw.org
If you have further qustion or concern I would suggest contacting your business lawyer, not just accept high-fiving associates who think they know the law and its applications.









[…] The NAR Is A Sex Offender’s Best Friend, by Barry Cunningham. […]
[…] NAR Is A Sex Offender’s Best Friend Jon wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerpt“Hello Mr. Agent, I like this […]
OK, so a sex offender moves in next door to you. Think you can stop it? Try again.
Now, with the shoe on the other foot and your ranting reasoning applied - good luck on selling your house! And oh, by the way… the price of your home has probably just dropped by 15-20%.
Don’t be narrow in your thinking. It just may cost YOU.
[…] for the most part on a single topic. The topic came from Barry C’s latest blog post, “The NAR is a Sex Offender’s Best Friend“. We discussed the post at length and had experts on the show including Robert Lechtenberg, […]
NAR may not be the only one playing the “liability” card when it comes to sex offender disclosure. Let me relate a real life happening right here in Palm Beach County. A developer sold out a subdivision of 142 single family home in a gated family community. One of the early on buyers was a registered sex offender on probabtion. At this point, families buying into the community have no scource of info on who is going to live there until all the happy Moms Dads & kids actually move into thier new digs. Only now they find out that they bought in a community that they wouldn’t have, had they known better. The builder claims no liability and no reason to check each person moving in and furthermore that the offender could possibly be not on the deed or mortgage so how could they “know for sure who is going to live there” even if they had any responsibility to inform buyers, which they claim that they don’t.
NAR, major developers & builders, even homeowners associations are advised by the attorneys that they consult ,to point people in the direction of information but don’t actually provide it for them. Caveat Emptor all over.
A person with valid information is left with his or her own conscience and self worth. (Assuming they have either or both of these qualities). There is absolutely an ethical obgligation on anyone’s part to inform. Even if you’re the next door neighbor and your unable to sell you may have a compelling reason not to let the cat out of the bag but you also have a moral obligation to not put others in harms way.
Gary if you actually listened to the show, you would have heard an appraisal expert who said the value drop can be by as much as 35-40%!
Not sure what exactly you were stating in your post, but I would hope that you were not advocating the right of a sex offender to live where they want. That would be perverted to say the least.
As for “ranting reasoning”…why is this a rant? Becasue I have a family and would expect a Realtor to do their job instead of ignoring human decency for a measly 6% commission?
I am trying very hard to even understand why ANY real estate agent would have a problem with this article. Seems to me there’s just one reason and only one reason and we all know why. That really makes the general public endear themselves to Realtors doesn’t it?
Right here, right now reading Gary’s comment offers a glaring, under the microscope look at how many of our freinds and neighbors think. Shallow, narrow minded and self serving. I don’t mean to go all philosphical but really…… heres my question, as a society has our moral fabric declined with our tangible assets?
Hey george..sure seems like it doesn’t it? Pretty sad state of affairs!
So sad. It’s no wonder people value thier pets loyalty so much. When you think about this stuff it’s a lot like a person standing at a crosswalk and watching another guy get run over by a truck and than saying why should I have told him the truck was coming, he should have looked before he crossed the road.
While you may have writtent he sex offender article with good intentions, your lack of back ground information on this subject does your readers a disservice. In other words, you missed the point entirely. NAR doesn’t ever encourage its memebers to disguise or conceal information relevant to a buyer’s informed decision on whether to purchase a home. Rather, NAR wants to be sure that complete information is made available.
In today’s world of privacy of information, Realtors don’t know all the facts about what sex offenders are present in a community or nieghborhood. To assume such knowledge protects no one. In fact, to pass along a report (or rumor) of a specific sex offender and potentially overlook others would potentially create the offense you assumed in your article. Instead, we’re encouraged to refer a prospect to the local police department - with whom all sex offenders are required by law to register.
Only through this avenue can the prospect’s best interests be well served.
I encourage you to publish a follow-up article to correct he errors in the first article.
There are no errors. If you want to proceed as you believe please feel free to do so and in doing so..make sure you have a good attorney on retainer.
Did you ever actually speak to NAR? Did you even read the statements the NAR rep said? Did you read the fair housing act?
What you need to do my friend is make sure you understand what you are talking about BEFORE you take finger to keyboard.
A felon, of which a sexual predator is one, has no expectation of privacy under the fair housing act.
Please don’t waste my time with such obvious ignorance to the law. Save that for your clients..you know the ones that are looking to YOU for professional advice.
[…] […]