Connect with us

California

Realtors settlement brings confusion, relief to Southern California’s real estate industry

Published

on

Realtors settlement brings confusion, relief to Southern California’s real estate industry


One thing is known for sure about a proposed settlement of a massive antitrust case against Realtors: the home selling process is about to change, and with it, how buyers and sellers compensate their agents.

Otherwise, say members of Southern California’s real estate industry, it’s too soon to decipher the impact of the $418 million deal unveiled on Friday, March 15.

Also see: Brokerage stocks tumble after Realtors agree to commission-cutting deal

Will buyers now start paying their agents directly?

Advertisement

Will buyers now have to sign a contract before their agent will show them any homes?

Will lenders allow buyers to roll the cost of paying agent commissions into a slightly larger mortgage?

And ultimately, will the settlement lead to to smaller commissions and lower home prices?

Also see: Homebuying’s 6% commission is gone after Realtors settle lawsuit

“There’s just a lot of moving pieces that have to be settled,” said Art Carter, chief executive of the Chino Hills-based California Regional Multiple Listing Service, which covers much of Southern California. “And I’m not going to say I have my arms around every one of those moving pieces.”

Advertisement

In a statement announcing the settlement, the National Association of Realtors said it agreed to a new rule banning sellers from offering compensation to buyers’ agents through a Realtor-affiliated MLS, or home-listing database.

But it was unclear if that will end the decades-old practice of requiring sellers to pay buyers’ agents.

While “offers of broker compensation could not be communicated via the MLS,” the NAR statement said, “they could continue to be an option,” so long as they’re communicated outside the MLS.

“The only certainty I can give you is the process will change,” Carter said.

The Realtor announcement followed an Oct. 31 jury verdict in Kansas City awarding nearly $1.8 billion to Missouri home sellers, finding the current agent compensation system perpetuates the 5-6% commission rate.

Advertisement

More than 20 similar lawsuits proliferated across the nation in the wake of the verdict, including at least three in California, naming more than 200 other industry groups in 11 states as defendants.

 California Realtor groups hit with copycat commission rates lawsuit

Under the settlement announced Friday, NAR would pay $418 million over four years, instead of $1.8 billion. The settlement would cover more than a million NAR member agents, all state and local Realtor associations, Realtor-owned multiple listing services and NAR-affiliated brokerages generating less than $2 billion in sales. But large national real estate chains that were NAR’s co-defendants won’t be covered.

A law firm that took part in the settlement hailed the agreement as “groundbreaking,” saying it could save consumers billions of dollars in broker fees.

“This settlement changes (NAR) rules so that competition will occur at the commission level,” Steve Berman, a lead attorney in the case, said in a statement.

Advertisement

In Southern California, the announcement led to a combination of confusion, anxiety and relief.

Carter, the regional MLS CEO, tried to explain the settlement Friday to a meeting of brokers in Arcadia.

“I think there’s just a lot of confusion,” he said of the brokers’ reaction to the news. “They’re just curious to see what the new normal is going to look like.”

There was an element of relief at the Glendale Association of Realtors, one of 19 local Realtor associations named in a class-action lawsuit filed in January.

The settlement appears to be “a good start, a step in the right direction,” said David Kissinger, Glendale Realtors association chief executive.

Advertisement

“We are in defendant in one of the cases,” Kissinger said. “And as a defendant in a case, … that’s concerning. There is substantial risk to us. We were certain in the belief that the case did not have merit. But, you know, the court and the jury are going to do what they’re going to do.”

Carter echoed that sentiment.

“We support NAR for taking the steps” toward settling the cases. “If it would have been litigated further, it could have been quite detrimental to the the industry.”

The proposed effective date will be July 1 if the settlement gets court approval, although that — like everything else — is subject to change, Carter said.

If approved, the settlement could lead to the widespread use of buyer-broker agreements, he said. Currently only about a fifth of buyers sign representation agreements with their agents.

Advertisement

It’s possible sellers could list an amount for concessions in their MLS listings, instead of compensation offers, and buyers could use those concessions as they choose — perhaps paying for repairs, for closing costs or to compensate their agents, Carter said.

“The (agent’s) job is going to change significantly,” said Newport Beach broker Bill Cote, owner of Cote Realty Group. “I think you’re going to see a whole element of people come out and say that they are buyers brokers, and they’re only representing buyers. But the difficulty with that is getting the buyers to step to the plate to say that they’re going to pay the compensation to the buyer’s broker.”

Cote noted that in high-priced communities, from Newport and Laguna Beach to Silicon Valley, the buyer’s share of commissions “has always been very large.”

Ed Coulson, director of the Center for Real Estate at UC Irvine, predicted the settlement could have a major impact on agent earnings and commission rates.

People accepted 5-6% commission rates as if it were a rule, which it’s not, he said.

Advertisement

“One of the things that’s going to happen is people will recognize it’s not a rule, and that’s going to bring commission rates down,” he said. “I think the thing that is most important is we don’t know the impact on prices. There’s been a lot of speculation it would lower house prices, but that depends on the seller folding the commission into the house price. And I’m very uncertain that we know the extent to which that happens.”



Source link

California

California just handed oil companies billions in free pollution permits

Published

on

California just handed oil companies billions in free pollution permits


By Alejandro Lazo, CalMatters

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

California air regulators on Friday approved a contentious overhaul of the state’s carbon market, creating a program that could steer billions of dollars in free pollution permits to oil refineries and other major polluters over the objections of environmental groups, key lawmakers and three of the board’s own members.

Advertisement

Ten members of the California Air Resources Board voted to adopt the changes to its cap-and-invest program after two days of lengthy hearings, including a full day dedicated to hundreds of public comments.

The overhaul followed intensive lobbying by the oil industry as well as pressure from Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration to help keep refineries operating in the state amid rising gas prices.

The approval sets up a potential budget fight in Sacramento. The Legislative Analyst’s Office projects that quarterly auction revenue for state climate programs will drop from roughly $4 billion a year to about $2 billion under the new overhaul.

Such a shortfall would effectively zero out programs lawmakers spent last year fighting to fund: affordable housing, public transit, drinking water in low-income communities and pollution monitoring in California’s most polluted neighborhoods.

The governor’s office praised the measure as a compromise that balanced economic uncertainty with the state’s climate goals. Refinery closures and the Iran-Israel war have driven average California gas prices above $6 a gallon. 

Advertisement

Newsom, in a statement, used the moment to draw a contrast with President Donald Trump.

“While Trump sows ongoing chaos and uncertainty, California is staying focused by protecting our economy, safeguarding public health, and doubling down on the clean energy future all Californians deserve,” he said. 

Environmentalists warned the changes to the program amount to a giveaway to the fossil fuel industry that weakens California’s only program setting a firm cap on greenhouse gas emissions.

Katelyn Roedner Sutter, California senior director for the Environmental Defense Fund, called the decision “deeply misguided” for prioritizing polluters over communities.

“Newsom’s air regulators are handing billions to oil executives at the expense of our climate, health, and affordability for working families in a rushed process that has shortchanged meaningful public participation,” said Bahram Fazeli, policy director at Communities for a Better Environment. 

Advertisement

How the program works — and what changes

California’s 13-year-old carbon market forces major polluters to buy permits while the state lowers the overall cap each year. Friday’s vote will reduce those permits – and creates a new subsidy program carved out of the market.

The program, which may still see changes, could make available a new pool of free pollution permits available to industry valued at as much as $4 billion. Companies that pledge to invest in clean energy and efficiency may qualify for the permits in exchange for investments in clean energy. 

The pool will be capped at 118.3 million permits — the same number the air board has said must come off the market for California to hit its 2030 climate target. Environmentalists say the proposal risks wiping out those reductions. 

Half are reserved for the fossil fuel sector. A recent Berkeley analysis, by the chair of an independent committee that oversees the carbon market, found refineries could end up with more free permits than they need to cover their emissions.

The air board has defended the design. Officials say the credits will go only to companies undertaking decarbonization projects, will be limited and temporary and can be clawed back if companies misuse them. The plan, they say, is meant to keep California refineries operating at a time of mounting closures and global market pressure. According to air regulators, the amended program will spur clean-energy investment as Trump cuts federal support.

Advertisement

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Man charged with murder, kidnapping their 5-year-old child before fleeing to Mexico

Published

on

Man charged with murder, kidnapping their 5-year-old child before fleeing to Mexico


A 40-year-old Los Angeles man was charged with murder after allegedly killing his girlfriend and kidnapping their young child before fleeing to Mexico, according to authorities.

Ruben Fregosojuarez has been charged one count of murder and one misdemeanor count of child abuse under circumstance or conditions other than great bodily injury or death, according to a Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office news release. Authorities first identified him as Ruben Fregoso but Los Angeles County prosecutors listed him as Ruben Fregosojuarez.

On Monday around 12:39 p.m., the Los Angeles Police Department conducted a welfare check in the 2600 block of South Alsace Avenue in West Adams, police said in a news release.

Officers found a woman dead inside the home “as a result of violence” and the woman’s daughter missing, police said. On Monday night, the California Highway Patrol issued an Amber Alert for the child, Daleza.

Advertisement

Photos obtained by NBC4 appear to show Fregosojuarez in a parking garage in San Ysidro with the girl on Sunday. The California Highway Patrol has listed her age as 4 years old but Los Angeles police say the girl is 5. She is also described as the suspect’s daughter.

The alert said that the girl was last seen with Fregosojuarez, who allegedly abducted her in a 2019 Land Rover Discovery, on Sunday at about 4 a.m.

The CHP posted in an update that the vehicle was found but that the child and man were still missing. The girl is described as 3 feet tall, 45 pounds, and having black hair and brown eyes.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

California

23andMe Sued by California Over Massive 2023 Data Breach

Published

on

23andMe Sued by California Over Massive 2023 Data Breach


California’s attorney general is suing the consumer genetics testing company formerly known as 23andMe, alleging the company failed to protect customers’ sensitive personal information in a massive 2023 data breach that exposed the ancestry and genetic data of nearly 7 million people.

Attorney General Rob Bonta filed the lawsuit on Thursday in San Francisco Superior Court against Chrome Holding Co., formerly known as 23andMe, accusing the company of failing to properly investigate or respond to numerous warnings that its systems had been compromised. The company’s mail-in self-testing kits became synonymous with DNA testing before it filed for bankruptcy in 2025.

In 2023, cybercriminals breached 23andMe’s systems by using a “credential-stuffing attack,” which involves bombarding online accounts with huge sets of user names and passwords stolen in previous unrelated attacks. Over a period of months, the intruders were able to make off with the personal data of more than 6.9 million people.

Advertisement

“23andMe’s security measures were so lax that the threat actor was able to operate undetected within 23andMe’s systems for over five months, and remarkably, 23andMe only began investigating after the threat actor offered the stolen user data for sale on the dark web and reached out to 23andMe to demand a ransom,” Bonta’s office said in the complaint. 

The San Francisco-based company, which allowed people to submit genetic materials and get a snapshot of their ancestry, revealed in October 2023 that hackers had accessed customer information in the prolonged data breach that targeted customers with Chinese or Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry. The stolen data of more than 1 million Asian-Pacific Islander and Ashkenazi Jewish users was later posted for sale on the dark web. 

“The sale of this data on the dark web took place amidst a period of mounting anti-Asian American and Pacific Islander and antisemitic hate and violence,” Bonta said in a press release. “This is disturbing and incredibly dangerous.”

 A January 2024 lawsuit accused the company of not doing enough to protect its customers and not notifying certain customers that their data had been targeted specifically. It later settled the lawsuit for $30 million.

23andMe representatives didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Advertisement

At its peak, 23andMe became the best-known name in the emerging area of DNA self-testing, with users paying upwards of $99 for kits that gave them insights into their genetic makeup, potential relatives and ancestry. But the company’s momentum slowed down in recent years after its $3.5 billion public offering in 2021.

Last July, TTAM Research Institute, a nonprofit led by Anne Wojcicki, 23andMe’s cofounder and former CEO, acquired 23andMe’s assets for $305 million.    





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending