Court Rules in Landmark Case on Timeshare Advanced Listing Fees and Unlicensed Real Estate Activity
....Leon County Circuit Court Judge P. Kevin Davey ruled that a Florida real estate license is required for all transactions involving timeshare real estate property located in Florida and where the seller of the timeshare real estate interest resides in Florida.....
I'm guessing the second part of this will give Stroman the perfect opportunity to appeal again. Attorneys can weigh in on this, but all legal precedence I've seen places the transaction under the jurisdiction of the state where the property is located. Will his insertion of the word timeshare somehow create a separate set of real estate law dealing just with timeshare properties? That's seems a bit too much power for a single judge to have at his discretion.
For a judge to say that a seller's state of residence gives Florida the right to extend their real estate laws and requirements onto property located in another state seems foolish to me, and I would expect makes this decision likely to be overturned.
Take for example an individual who owns a home in Florida and another in New York. Would this ruling not create the impression that his New York home would have to be sold according to Florida law? The application of such a decision doesn't even seem feasible....
The other issue raised in this case regards a real estate broker charging an upfront listing fee (similar to fees required in many commercial transactions).. This also will be a non-issue, as Stroman already has a non-licensed advertising company- and will simply push sellers to that entity in a classified format rather than working via a listing agreement.
I'm interested in hearing other's opinions on this.. I'm guessing it will get some publicity, but won't actually change anything in the industry..
....Leon County Circuit Court Judge P. Kevin Davey ruled that a Florida real estate license is required for all transactions involving timeshare real estate property located in Florida and where the seller of the timeshare real estate interest resides in Florida.....
I'm guessing the second part of this will give Stroman the perfect opportunity to appeal again. Attorneys can weigh in on this, but all legal precedence I've seen places the transaction under the jurisdiction of the state where the property is located. Will his insertion of the word timeshare somehow create a separate set of real estate law dealing just with timeshare properties? That's seems a bit too much power for a single judge to have at his discretion.
For a judge to say that a seller's state of residence gives Florida the right to extend their real estate laws and requirements onto property located in another state seems foolish to me, and I would expect makes this decision likely to be overturned.
Take for example an individual who owns a home in Florida and another in New York. Would this ruling not create the impression that his New York home would have to be sold according to Florida law? The application of such a decision doesn't even seem feasible....
The other issue raised in this case regards a real estate broker charging an upfront listing fee (similar to fees required in many commercial transactions).. This also will be a non-issue, as Stroman already has a non-licensed advertising company- and will simply push sellers to that entity in a classified format rather than working via a listing agreement.
I'm interested in hearing other's opinions on this.. I'm guessing it will get some publicity, but won't actually change anything in the industry..
Comment