Canada’s real estate community has reacted swiftly to CREA’s proposed policy restricting the use of “exclusive listings.” Whether it’s enacted is now up to the association’s membership.
Following a tsunami of comments and strong reactions from the industry, a spokesperson for CREA says the board has decided to put the proposed Realtor Cooperation Policy to a vote.
The policy, which was slated to come into effect next year, would have required realtors to place their listings on their local MLS within three days of public marketing. CREA says the new policy seeks to reinforce cooperation among realtors.
Over the past weeks, there have been few issues more contentious among industry insiders. Realtors Justin Havre and Barry Lebow have been vocal in their stances, penning opinion columns for Real Estate Magazine.
“Many buyers have missed out on properties that sold off-market, and that frustrating message has been clearly received from the public over the last couple of years,” Havre wrote. “One can also argue that sellers have left a lot of money on the table – with limited visibility when selling off-market with a coming soon or pocket listing program.”
Lebow shared responses he received from the community, “This is for the sellers to decide, and they can opt-in to an exclusive over MLS for a myriad of reasons which is their prerogative. No one should restrict a seller’s right to be less open and more in control of their situation.”
In an October interview with Real Estate Magazine, Cliff Stevenson, immediate past chair of CREA, said, “When somebody says ‘coming soon,’ they mean it’s coming soon to the MLS system, it’s coming soon to Realtor.ca.” Stevenson added, “The challenge in these last two years of this heated market was the number of properties that never came to the MLS system or never came to Realtor.ca because they were sold out.
“We saw this as a problem, and we saw a need for us to recommit to cooperation in our industry which is one of the pillars of our industry.”
The proposed policy has generated strong opinions among Canadian realtors. More than 150 comments have been left on related articles on REM’s website.
“Another foolish rule that is unenforceable,” writes Jason Bamlett. “CREA should rethink treading into the lawful instructions of the client. ‘The Code’ already addresses this situation.”
Rick Kedozior disagrees, “The marketing concept of coming soon should be abolished. It serves no purpose other than allowing the outliers an opportunity to hoard the details or attempt to work both ends of the transaction.”
Realtors may have the opportunity to vote on the policy through their local boards and associations; delegates will then cast a ballot on behalf of members at the next Annual General Meeting (AGM) scheduled for April 2023.
Editor’s note: The original article stated that CREA’s more than 150,000 would have the opportunity to vote on this policy. While members should have the opportunity to vote through their local boards and associations, a delegate for each board/association will cast a ballot on behalf of its membership at the AGM next year.
Jordana is the editor of Real Estate Magazine. You can reach her by email.
NB it’s the BOARD reps at the CREA Annual General Meeting that will vote not precisely as quoted above as
“a spokesperson for CREA says the association’s board of directors has decided to put the proposed Realtor Cooperation Policy to a vote for its more than 150,000 members.”
This is absolute BBBB SSSS
ON LINE VOTING FOR ALL…
Voting AT A MEETING THAT WE CANNOT GO TO…
DID JUSTIN MAKE THE RULES FOR THIS
Typical of our government agencies.
Correct John.
It’s us voting..electronically it should be very simple for ALL AGENTS to openly vote on this matter with “REAL TIME RESULTS
I agree. We individually should have a vote.
Agreed
Is CREA really working for us… I don’t think so. To twist and imply it is going to be put to a vote of its 150,000 members when it is only going to a vote of our boards, whom have a very different agenda then its members is a clear sign of misrepresentation and self serving. Shame on you CREA! This doesn’t require a vote; it needs to be shipped off to the competition bureau and put to rest. Then we need to take a close look at our associations and determine just who are they really serving. Our associations failure to license, educate and enforce reasonable duty of care is what is creating this problem if a problem even exists in this regard. I really don’t know why a seller’s decision to sell using a concierge service is any business of the buyer or CREA. And a seller shouldn’t have to “opt out” with signing something that disrespect the very agents that have honed their skills over years to provide an excellent alternative to the MLS system for those that want it. Is this about customer care or forcing reliance on a system that perhaps out of date and no longer needed with the exception to generate membership dues, to maintain their existence.
This policy contradicts the Competition Act and restricts the public’s rights. There is no need for it!
CREA listen to the members. Just a reminder the members are the ones dealing directly with the public, we, Realtors take our orders from them and CREA “takes” orders from US(the members)!
Is there a reason that CREA’s membership, as a whole, cannot vote on this proposed policy through an Online referendum?
Only reason being bit would get voted down. How can delegates relay the wishes of their provincial bodies? If the delegate wishes to vote in favour and the majority of his members indicates not in favour, he can do that. No one will ever know
CREA made their own decision about this without consulting its members. Why would we Realtors trust them about running a vote on this? The CREA Board is compromised and should be investigated.
I’ve been questioning CREA’s motives for a long time. I agree, I don’t trust them as well.
Yes, there is a reason, the vote won’t go the way CREA wants, that is the reason.
CREA’s bylaws provide that association members vote on matters. This should be no surprise to REALTORS® across Canada. However, it would be beneficial to specify this in a clarification. It might be interesting for REM to survey all ORE members of CREA for their intended position on the subject when it does come to a vote.
Association members or delegates?
To my understanding, John, grass roots and provincial associations have delegate status at meetings of CREA. The precise form and ratio of delegates for each individual association would be described in the CREA bylaws which are easily downloaded.
Bring the vote directly to us, the realtors working in the trenches! CREA has our email addresses and should consult us directly not the board reps (who may be influenced by lobbying by CREA).
It is good idea Agents shouldn’t be allowed dual Representation.
Why can we not all vote on this proposal???????????
Exclusive listings have always existed for a reason. The sellers request is the usual reason. The dishonest realtor will stay dishonest realtor. This is an overwhelming minority! Trying to legislate morality has never worked. A terrible idea but well intended. Look at the failure of Fintrac!!
I agree with this comment. The very small minority of realtors who abuse this “exclusive” period are outliers.
For my clients, the exclusive period allows us all time to “properly” market the property and not completely rely only on MLS. We get to do previews, consult with other agents about price and let the neighbourhood at large to pay attention.
They’re such a thing in the world of marketing as “decision making process”. When you drop a listing for 12 hours on mls, how is that really giving best exposure of a property to the market? And, if you sell on day one with market not having the time to process the listing and make the choice to head out to look at it… how is MLS an advantage?
Buyers and their agents need time to consider a listing that may be coming months from now. Instead of making a terrible decision and buying a different property… they could get advance notice on an exclusive listing and have “the choice”. In some cases an exclusive could last A year or more. Renovation projects, new construction.
Our client is served best if we explore non-mls means of spreading the word that a desirable property will be available “ soon”. It’s called marketing. Every other industry segment knows this and we don’t see Apple or Lexus being forced to keep the fact that they have a new product coming a complete secret!
How will the next Marvel movie do on the opening weekend if they don’t promote it a year in advance?
“NOT AS WELL” !
Maybe CREA forgot that we aren’t automatons dropping listings on MLS and moving on. What a way to reduce even further our value to the consumer! CREA forgot we aren’t just salespeople. We are supposed to market a property. Not stop at marketing ourselves. And MLS isn’t the only game in town.
The last decade allowed many agents to bypass this concept. Perhaps a tougher or balanced market will see real value in Exclusives ahead of MLS again?.
With more than 50 years of experience in real estate, licensed in ’73 and broker since ’75, I have seen the industry become more and more complicated and confused, by good intensions taken far outside the original theme, too many times imposed by outside sources too far removed from the actual day to day business or having their own agendas . This issue is not new and has already been dealt with previously and in most real cases is a non-issue at the public level , being a personal decision made by the Seller and their licensed representative. ( remember them, they pay the freight ) CREA seems to be trying to make a case when one is not justified for their own purposes.. Absolutely, put it to a vote
I don’t agree, it doesn’t deserve a vote. This is about controlling something that is supposed to be outside the reaches of MLS. Clearly new business models are evolving that result is an excellent result for the seller. That could likely render CREA obsolete. Let’s not forget the seller is actually the one paying the freight for everyone.
Sellers not wishing to use MLS listings would avoid realtors if this policy/regulation were enacted.
I would like to see CREA host a live debate, select a “Realtor” to represent each side of this proposed new rule. There are many reasons a client (who is our boss) may choose exclusive over MLS, its not for CREA to mandate this. IF this moves forward the unintentional consequences could end up diminishing the MLS brand, CREA & organized real estate as we know it. Simply put this is a very bad idea!
I believe that the system works. MLS is the most effective tool available upon which to transact real estate. When I provide my clients with their options when taking a listing, I tell them the last person they want selling their property is me. By that I mean; while I may in fact have a buyer for their home; there may be hundreds of other realtors that have qualified buyers. It is in their best interest to expose their home on MLS and explore those possibilities/probabilities. I have a dream. I would like to see the Residential rules, codes and conduct rules apply to the practice of Commercial real estate. I would like to see all commercial properties on MLS. That said, I do not think that the rule will be enforceable… client’s lawful instructions… You can lead a horse to water… We will see.
Placing a for sale sign on a property with a “coming soon…….” rider is not the same as a sign which reads “exclusive”. I think that “coming soon” should not be allowed. It is an open ended statement with no date as to “when”. Currently, we have two TRREB days to place the listing on mls from the time the sign is placed on the property. That should be sufficient. Why CREA is placing the 2 different statements into one category is very concerning.
I agree totally with Albert Fialkows post above. Seeing a sign that says coming soon smacks of the Realtor trying to double end the listing. No seller would agree to that had they been told the repercussions to their pocketbook of not letting all agents and more importantly their buyers get access to decide on actual value. Hard to get multiple offers and best price when only one buyer has access.
Individual votes please. Each member should have a say if you want a fair, unbiased decision.
Yes, the industry is becoming more and more complicated. Will not this be categorized under the human rights? If the Sellers (the client) ask their agent to have their listing removed over the holidays, and yet remain active with advertising/for sale sign, and will still be allowing showing at a condition we provide the Seller with notice like days to a week depending of the number of family visiting.. and insuring that us, their agent, qualify the prospective buyer as if they are willing to move late spring to summer. I dont’ see why they cannot be listed exclusively. 1) This is the Seller wishes 2) Those sellers will be relisting by end of January/February if it is not sold. Don’t they have the right? 3) This way, the listing will still be under the real estate agency and secured. This has to be an exclusive listing if not on MLS. I agree “coming soon” is not appropriate on the for sale sign and yes it’s not right if it doesn’t make the MLS (I have done that many times & ensured that even if showings were allowed earlier, they would have to wait until the presentation date of the offer..). But to prevent the Seller to choose that route for whatever reason and or have an agency removed the right to advertise listings exclusively is wrong. FYI, I have 7 listings that will be cancelled on or before end of November and with a contract signed to be relisted by end of January. If a Realtor ask for a showing, I will be happy to arrange it for them. Thank you
I agree. The abuse of the concept of “coming soon” is the problem. Not the exclusive listing. Spend the effort to weed out those that abuse the system rather than restricting the seller’s rights.
Can anyone at Crea tell us:
how many listings that were marketed as “coming soon” sold last year AND THEN
how many listings that were marketed as “coming soon” were problematic? Is there a percentage they are working with or is it anecdotal information?
I can see why some agents would be heavily against this- and many of those agents probably double end many of their deals. On the brokerage side we see the problem with coming soons and not getting onto MLS right away. It may not be a good change in the eyes of some agents, but it is in the best interest of most sellers.
You’re jumping to conclusions. Many of us do not believe in using the exclusive listing for self-serving double-ending purposes. In fact many of us refuse to provide multiple representation and actually believe in always putting the client first.
We are supposed to be providng services that is in the best interests of our clients which means, it is whatever our clients lawfully decide is in their best interests. Neither CREA, boards nor individual Realtors have the legal authority to determine what is the client’s best interests, yet essentially CREA is teling the public – we, not Realtors nor you, know what’s good for you.
Realtor.ca and board ads consistently push that Realtors have the expertise, knowledge and professionalism to advance the client’s interests, but all this move does is reinforce to the public that those Realtor abilities mean little and take a backseat to the realtor.ca advertising portal.
The industry ran into trouble defending itself against VOWS and FSBO brokerages precisely because the mantra for our existence was – ‘we have access to the data.’
CREA has learned nothing – shocking considering most of the board were ORE leaders at the time..
we all want fairness and fair representation for all parties included in transactions. How seller wants to sell his or her house should be his or her choice. Exclusive listing gives opportunities for some unethical agents to misuse or compromise the system. Exclusive also creates opportunities for dual agency( which our present govt. is trying to stop) .if we all want no dual agencies then what’s the use to have exclusive listing system at the first place. All registrant should deal with MLS system. If in new act dual agency is banned or not allowed or not permissible. Then let the new act Bann dual agency all together and this will eliminate exclusive concept by itself.
This is NOT just about Coming Soon Listings! While it is the primary use of, it is not the only reason an Exclusive Listing may be used in our industry. If the reason was to restrict this, then make the rule focused on Coming Soon, not Exclusive as a whole. There are sellers that do not want the wide exposure of the MLS system (for a number of reasons), yet want to have representation, and select advertising used. The rule suggested is too broad.
Just curious to know where it was ever written that “Coming Soon” meant it was coming to the MLS and not just the market place in general. I believe CREA is just trying to appease buyers who screamed a blue streak because they thought the rules were unfair to them while disregarding the rights of sellers. If you want to ban the signs because they are misleading go ahead, but don’t trample on the right of the seller. Also, if there is a vote everyone should vote! A group of smaller boards getting together shouldn’t out weigh a larger board.
It’s appalling and disgusting that CREA’s board decided on their own to make such a drastic change to the operations of the individual board MLS Systems without input! It is just like the elf-serving decision to create an IT corp with member money that was outside of member control.
This from Stevenson is as idiotic and ill-informed a reason to make such a change imaginable: “When somebody says ‘coming soon,’ they mean it’s coming soon to the MLS system, it’s coming soon to Realtor.ca…The challenge in these last two years of this heated market was the number of properties that never came to the MLS system or never came to Realtor.ca because they were sold out.”
That will not stop the unethical Realtors like the one whose abuse of the system is so egregious she consistently sells her property outside of MLS, posts the listing to MLS and within 3 minutes changes the status to sold firm. It is impossible for such to happen, yet that is how she eventally brings to listings to the MLS as do many others who at least they figure taking a couple hours to update the status, will fool everybody. This still meet Stevenson’s grievance, yet will do nothing to market the property at large.
Nor will it stop the likes of another well known rep from a low listing fee brokerage which offers 2.5% co-operating but less than 1% for their side and who consistently either does not respond to requests to show their properties or, when trying to book an online request you’re met with a property currently unavailable for showings notice. But, when the brokerage is a called directly, they know of no status change, at least not for many days or weeks later when the listing is updated to sold firm and not shockingly double-ended.
For as long as I’ve been in this business, the unethical doube-ender has always found ways to circumvent the system. This won’t deter them. It doesn’t say much about CREA’s braintrust when they all it takes is a list/cancel cycle to get around this cockamamie rule.
PED, agree with the sentiment this policy change is appaling. It required and yet did not have broad, broader even, consultation with the key stakeholders in service to clients/customers: the individual REALTOR® and the client/customer.
Agree, the unethical professional is not stopped by the proposed exclusive listing to MLS® policy. Your cited examples are so common as to make these a greater priority for regulation, if regulation could even be thought to correct them (which, IMO, it will not).
Self regulation and self education are the two elements most able to raise the bar of results in favour of the highest ethical, honest and client/customer focused service.
Does not matter what the out come of the vote is as it is not legal for Crea to put in place restrictive trade practices like this. Someone will and should challenge this in court.
Where do I sign up?
Agreed. CREA is transferring the blame for imposing a restrictive trade practice on the membership (Board Leadership) when the Competition Bureau come calling. As for double-ending that is not unlawful and the right of every brokerage listing a property. Exclusive Listings cannhave safeguards for a seller than are not permitted under MLS rules and regulations. I see Brokerages opening secondary brokerages outside of the CREA/MLS domain if this proposal is endorsed by self-serving voting member/delegates.
100% Terry! Spot on….they will come!
I use Coming Soon for several reasons:
First and Foremost, to notify the neighbourhood and any other potential buyers and their agents that my properties will be listing shortly – so they can be prepared to book a viewing when it hits the market. I find this especially helpful in fast markets where buyers may not have the time availability to see things at the last minute. I always put a coming soon sign and a website url, which leads buyers and their agents to basic property details, as well as the date it’s expected to go on MLS.
Secondly, I order my signs as Coming Soon to ensure that the signage will be installed on time – which is important to me as once the home is on MLS, the property website (which is on the sign) is updated with in-depth property information, photos, virtual tours, etc. Without the sign, my sellers would miss out on that traction.
and is a potential Competiton Bureau case.
This is an unprofessional way to get very important input from the Licensed Real Estate Agents who keep the whole system moving. We need more detailed information to discuss with our local brokerages and local Real Estate boards.
Let’s wait and see how this blows in everyone’s face.
Some new unregulated anything-goes platform will emerge and that will be the end of organized real estate as we know it.
There’s a really simple solution. (1) Allow Exclusive Listings. (2) Allow “Coming Soon” listings with a board requirement that a “Coming Soon” listing must be placed on MLS within x days. (3) Problem has disappeared.
The clarification is also potentially incorrect. There is no inherent obligation on the part of any ORE association which is the defined “member” of CREA to require a vote of the ORE association membership, except and unless its bylaws expressly require such. Most, if not all, do not have the voting of the ORE association membership on matters that will be before a meeting of CREA members.
Our association structure, built to service an industry in the early 1900’s through to the mid 1900’s, no longer serves what is a professional practice, nor the business models which are inherently set out in the law and practice of today’s professionals. The present organizational structure of real estate associations is antiquated, inefficient, and (how ironically in relation to those who see the views of those anti to the CREA policy as self serving) in their structures are self perpetuating what no longer serves the interest of its members, never mind serving those members in providing service to their customers and clients.
The concept of one member, one vote for all levels of ORE does not exist. It should. The concept of one association serving all registrants in Ontario, much less REALTORS® in Canada, is unlikely to become the reality even so as it is a better way.
So much baloney about unethical double-ending when all the flyers in my mail box say ‘We have buyers’. When we list a property the Sellers expectation is that WE will sell it if marketing is to be believed. Placing it on MLS is a safety exercise in case OUR Buyers won’t buy it. The credo is “List with US” and we will sell it. As one Manager told me when I started in the business ‘A signed listing is money in the Bank’. Many Exclusive Listings used to be when a Seller wanted to pay a lower commission and save a few %. It also meant an Agent had to work much harder, spend more on marketing and not have an easy and inexpensive time using MLS! ORE should keep out of our business…they are just self-serving trade associations.
The right of the seller t list exclusive should remain. It should also be mandatory and I’m writing a pros and cons document. That being said, coming soon should be abolished and all MLS listings should be posted to real estate boards and realtor.ca within 24 hours of the start date of the listing and no marketing of any kind should be permitted until the property is available to the
Public.
In my opinion, Cliff Stevenson is wrong. When a sign says Coming Soon, it does not mean it is coming to MLS at all, it simply means this property is coming for sale soon, it may or may not come to MLS. That is a Sellers perogative.
In my opinion if the Seller agrees to a COMING SOON marketing strategy to sell his/her home so be it. The property is not ours, we offer a vehicle to the Seller to sell his/her property.. We are here to protect the Sellers rights to sell.
Unfortunately this policy conflates “Coming Soon” with Exclusive listings. I actually agree with the implementation of guardrails for “Coming Soon” as it can be abused. Exclusive listings involves CREA inserting itself into a complicated world of sellers choice, local regulatory obligations and potentially anticompetitive optics. Separate the two and we can talk.