The Referral Fee and the Undisclosed Conflict
A real estate agent, Denis, refers a first-time buyer, Sophie, to broker Amélie. Denis tells Amélie privately that he will pay her $1,500 "marketing support" for every client she closes who uses his preferred notary and inspection firm. Sophie is unaware of this arrangement. Amélie also learns that Denis is the listing agent on the condo Sophie wants to buy, meaning he earns commission on both sides of the transaction. Sophie tells Amélie she trusts Denis "completely" and wants to move fast because another buyer is interested.
1. What conflicts exist and what must Amélie disclose to Sophie?
Read the worked answer
There are two distinct conflicts.
First, Amélie's own conflict: accepting $1,500 per closed client tied to Denis's preferred notary and inspector creates a financial incentive that may not align with Sophie's interest in independent service providers. This is a referral arrangement that must be disclosed to the client in writing, and in many regimes requires the client's informed consent. Sophie must know the amount and the conditions.
Second, Denis's dual agency: he represents the seller as listing agent while acting as Sophie's referring agent. Sophie believes he is "on her side." Amélie should explain that Denis's commission depends on the sale closing and that his role is not neutral advocacy for her. Sophie should be told she can retain her own representation and that the notary and inspector should be independent of Denis's referrals.
Amélie must not let the referral fee influence which notary or inspector she recommends. Disclosure must be specific, not buried in a general form.
2. Sophie says she doesn't care about the disclosures and wants to proceed immediately. What should Amélie do?
Read the worked answer
Sophie's waiver does not eliminate Amélie's obligations. Amélie should:
- Provide the disclosures in writing anyway and obtain a signed acknowledgment, even if Sophie says she doesn't care. The record protects both parties and satisfies the duty to inform.
- Separately confirm that Sophie understands the dual-agency issue with Denis, because "I trust him completely" may reflect a misunderstanding of his role. Amélie should state plainly: Denis is paid by the seller and his commission depends on closing.
- Decline or restructure the $1,500 arrangement if it cannot be disclosed transparently or if it creates pressure to use Denis's providers. At minimum, ensure Sophie is free to choose her own notary and inspector.
- Resist the manufactured urgency. "Another buyer is interested" is a sales tactic, not a legal deadline. Amélie should confirm the offer terms, review the condo documents, and give Sophie time to consider.
The professional standard is informed consent, not bare consent. Amélie's duty runs to Sophie, not to preserving Denis's referral stream.