John Sweet Realtor with Roy Wheeler Realty Co. - Unethical Realtor (is that redundant?)

Posted on Monday, December 31st, 2007 at 1:33pm CST by cfcb5e4f

Product: Real Estate

Company: John Sweet Realtor with Roy Wheeler Realty Co.

Location: Ednam Hall 1100 Dryden Lane
Charlottesville, VA, 22903, US


Category: Other

I would like to file an official complaint against John Sweet of Roy Wheeler Realty.

My wife and I signed a contract with John Sweet on April 4, 2006 for a three month period of time to list our Charlottesville, Virginia property for sale. Although the request was made several times, Mr. Sweet never furnished us with copies of the Listing Agreement and other documents as he said the documentation was merely a formality and meaningless because of his promise of "No Satisfaction, No Commission" guarantee.

In December 2006, long after our contract with John Sweet expired, a private party arranged a meeting with a prospective buyer and we entered into a sales contract with that entity. John Sweet, through rumor and hearsay, learned of the sale an issued a demand for a commission.

Due to what we felt was a spurious claim we were required to engage an attorney to contact John Sweet and Roy Wheeler's broker Michael Guthrie to inform them that they had no relationship with the eventual buyer. John Sweet's demand for commission brought the first violation to light: he never provided my wife and me with copies of the original contract nor of purported amendments and we understand this is a violation of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice of the National Association of Realtors (Article 9).

The second violation is that of false advertising. Our attorney wrote in a second letter to Mr. Guthrie after they continued to demand a commission, "Mr. Sweet's "Satisfaction Guaranteed or No Commission Policy" requires that no commission be awarded. The Sellers are at this point very unhappy with Mr. Sweet's services in this matter. As just one instance, Mr. Sweet never furnished them copies of either the initial Listing Agreement nor the Amended Listing Agreement, telling them repeatedly that the contract was just a formality and was meaningless due to his Promise of Satisfaction or No Commission. I am sure you are aware that he also placed the guarantee in writing on both his web-site and in his print advertising and, in fact, this guarantee can still be found posted online."

This is a violation of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice of the National Association of Realtors (Article 12).

The third complaint is that John Sweet claims we signed and extension to the original contract through October 4, 2006 (John Sweet's justification in claiming a commission is a 90-day clause after this disputed expiration date). We dispute the October 4, 2006 expiration date on the contract. Neither of us remember signing off on this date and John Sweet was pressuring us to sign an extension in September 2006 to the contract. Why would he do this if the contract had not already expired? We realize that suggesting that John Sweet altered the contract or forged our initials is a serious charge, but it must be noted that this would not be an issue if he had provided us with copies of the contract upon signing or amending as he is required to do by law.

Our attorney wrote in his second letter to Mr. Guthrie, "John Sweet was not the procuring cause of the eventual sale. The ultimate issue in any Real Estate commission is whether the Realtor was the procuring cause of the sale. Mr. Sweet's parting conclusion was that any deal between those parties represented by [another Realtor] was "dead in the water" and there was no way a deal would ever be reached. The Sellers and the eventual Purchaser were brought together not by the efforts of any Realtor, but by the impetus of a private third party who knew them both personally."

Additionally, the eventual knew of our property being up for sale long before John Sweet became our agent, so Mr. Sweet did not introduce him to our property.

To facilitate the sale of our property and to settle the matter, our attorney negotiated a payment of $5,000 to Roy Wheeler Realty rather than take the issue to litigation. We paid this under protest as the interested buyers would not move forward unless the claim was settled.

A few months ago (late 2007) the final payment on our Charlottesville property came through and I have considered dropping this matter altogether but the injustice and outright extortion of John Sweet's claim and Mr. Guthrie's collusion in the matter should not go unreported.

It's no wonder, given the actions of supposed "professionals" in this situation, that Realtors are held in such consistently low esteem by the public.


Post a Comment