<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Finders: a nonlicensee referral service</title>
	<atom:link href="http://firsttuesdayjournal.com/finders-a-nonlicensee-referral-service-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://firsttuesdayjournal.com/finders-a-nonlicensee-referral-service-2/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 11:15:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ft Editorial Staff</title>
		<link>http://firsttuesdayjournal.com/finders-a-nonlicensee-referral-service-2/comment-page-1/#comment-43297</link>
		<dc:creator>ft Editorial Staff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.firsttuesdayjournal.com/?p=1168#comment-43297</guid>
		<description>Tony,

This article is a first tuesday periodic reminder to brokers that finders are valid and legal. 

The focus regarding finders has turned, during the past decade, to erroneous information filtered anonymously to brokers that RESPA somehow restricts brokers of single family residential units (SFR) from using finders. A broker contemplating an SFR transaction is free to seek out unlicensed finders as part of a legitimate effort to generate business leads. A broker’s employment of finders is authorized under RESPA guidelines and the finder’s conduct is limited under California client solicitation guidelines. 

This has always been the case in California since the conduct of employing and using a finder became regulated. Calculated attempts to mask state and federal authorization and regulation of finders from view have been made for years by the DRE and CAR. But consider this: these organizations are in no position to support, acknowledge or propagate knowledge about the successful or proper use of unlicensed finders. That is because involvement by unlicensed individuals acting legally as finders in real estate brokerage activities is money slipping through their fingers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background: #ffffcc;">
<p>Tony,</p>
<p>This article is a first tuesday periodic reminder to brokers that finders are valid and legal. </p>
<p>The focus regarding finders has turned, during the past decade, to erroneous information filtered anonymously to brokers that RESPA somehow restricts brokers of single family residential units (SFR) from using finders. A broker contemplating an SFR transaction is free to seek out unlicensed finders as part of a legitimate effort to generate business leads. A broker’s employment of finders is authorized under RESPA guidelines and the finder’s conduct is limited under California client solicitation guidelines. </p>
<p>This has always been the case in California since the conduct of employing and using a finder became regulated. Calculated attempts to mask state and federal authorization and regulation of finders from view have been made for years by the DRE and CAR. But consider this: these organizations are in no position to support, acknowledge or propagate knowledge about the successful or proper use of unlicensed finders. That is because involvement by unlicensed individuals acting legally as finders in real estate brokerage activities is money slipping through their fingers.</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony Bowling</title>
		<link>http://firsttuesdayjournal.com/finders-a-nonlicensee-referral-service-2/comment-page-1/#comment-43054</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony Bowling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:33:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.firsttuesdayjournal.com/?p=1168#comment-43054</guid>
		<description>For almost 2 decades we (my wife and I in real estate) have operated on the &quot;fact&quot; that we cannot ask or advertise for referrals. Now this article has brought to light that all these companies that one can pay for referrals/leads is simply that - someone that is offering referrals for money. I am assuming that if companies can offer me referrals then I have the choice to advertise and ask others for referrals and if this is the case when did this change?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For almost 2 decades we (my wife and I in real estate) have operated on the &#8220;fact&#8221; that we cannot ask or advertise for referrals. Now this article has brought to light that all these companies that one can pay for referrals/leads is simply that &#8211; someone that is offering referrals for money. I am assuming that if companies can offer me referrals then I have the choice to advertise and ask others for referrals and if this is the case when did this change?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stevencbradley</title>
		<link>http://firsttuesdayjournal.com/finders-a-nonlicensee-referral-service-2/comment-page-1/#comment-38328</link>
		<dc:creator>stevencbradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:45:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.firsttuesdayjournal.com/?p=1168#comment-38328</guid>
		<description>The article doesn&#039;t address whether or not a &quot;voluntary payment&quot; offered after the fact as a &quot;thank you,&quot; or a &quot;gift&quot; that is offered to &quot;anyone,&quot;  such as a meal or some other item of limited value for a referral without qualification.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The article doesn&#8217;t address whether or not a &#8220;voluntary payment&#8221; offered after the fact as a &#8220;thank you,&#8221; or a &#8220;gift&#8221; that is offered to &#8220;anyone,&#8221;  such as a meal or some other item of limited value for a referral without qualification.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joseph Chryar</title>
		<link>http://firsttuesdayjournal.com/finders-a-nonlicensee-referral-service-2/comment-page-1/#comment-38275</link>
		<dc:creator>Joseph Chryar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:06:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.firsttuesdayjournal.com/?p=1168#comment-38275</guid>
		<description>That was my understanding to. The same as Jack Perry. what&#039;s your answer?. Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That was my understanding to. The same as Jack Perry. what&#8217;s your answer?. Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jack perry</title>
		<link>http://firsttuesdayjournal.com/finders-a-nonlicensee-referral-service-2/comment-page-1/#comment-37428</link>
		<dc:creator>jack perry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:20:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.firsttuesdayjournal.com/?p=1168#comment-37428</guid>
		<description>I am a first reader of First Tuesday...very informative., Question: Under the section, Finder&#039;s fee bargain , it appears that you can pay a finders fee to friends etc. who introduce you to someone who ends up doing business with you. --Grant v. Marinelli. It was my understanding that you could not. Please clarify.

Thank you</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a first reader of First Tuesday&#8230;very informative., Question: Under the section, Finder&#8217;s fee bargain , it appears that you can pay a finders fee to friends etc. who introduce you to someone who ends up doing business with you. &#8211;Grant v. Marinelli. It was my understanding that you could not. Please clarify.</p>
<p>Thank you</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

