Am I assisting a seller in violating his fiduciary duty to the bank(s) to pay the loan(s)?
Some realtors are under the impression that either the seller or the broker owes a “fiduciary duty” to the bank to create the highest return to the bank. In short, any statement of such a duty is ludicrous. To the contrary, when a seller is in default, the relationship with the bank is an adversarial debtor-creditor relationship. Some realtors are under the impression that the agent must be responsive to the bank because the bank ultimately approves the commission. While this may be an economic reality to a degree, it is not a legal duty. To the contrary, the agent’s duty is to the homeowner and that duty cannot be confused with the adversarial nature of the bank to the seller. To act in favor of the bank at the expense of the seller is a breach of an Agent’s fiduciary duty to the seller. If anyone ever proposes to you that a seller or the seller’s Agent has a fiduciary duty to the bank, demand them to provide a California statute or case law that says so (and then please send it to th
Related Questions
- How does an agent/broker avoid a breach of fiduciary duty to the seller if the broker already has an exclusive listing agreement with the seller?
- Is it mandatory to pay stamp duty on interest to be accrued on the loan irrespective of documents executed as security for such loan?
- What is stamp duty? Does the buyer or the seller pay it?
