Let’s see if you can solve this puzzle. Billy and Elizabeth still work for the same brokerage. Billy is in a meeting with a buyer client in one room, while Elizabeth is in a meeting with the seller client in the next room. Elizabeth’s client is selling the property that Billy’s client is buying. For this to be legal, which of these statements must be true? Select all that apply.
Billy’s client has assets of $1 million or more
Elizabeth’s client has assets of $1 million or more
Billy and Elizabeth are acting as transaction brokers
Billy and Elizabeth are acting as designated sales associates
The property for sale is non-residential
Please help me out I am really stuck on this
http://www.redfin.com/definition/transaction-broker
http://www.tampaschoolofrealestate.com/dictionary/d/designated-sales-associate/
it is still not helping me
They helped me. I think 4 of the answers are right. And one of the answers only applies in Colorado.
i do not know which four are right i have not clue at all
Billy and Elizabeth are acting as transaction brokers is the wrong answer, the rest all is correct.
To solve this puzzle, we need to analyze the given information and determine which statements must be true for the situation to be legal. Let's break it down:
1. Billy and Elizabeth still work for the same brokerage.
This statement is simply stating the initial context and does not directly contribute to the legality of the situation.
2. Billy is in a meeting with a buyer client in one room, while Elizabeth is in a meeting with the seller client in the next room.
This information describes the roles of both Billy and Elizabeth in the meetings.
3. Elizabeth's client is selling the property that Billy's client is buying.
This information implies that there is a real estate transaction occurring between the two clients.
Now, let's consider each statement and assess if it must be true for the situation to be legal:
- Billy’s client has assets of $1 million or more.
This statement is not directly related to the legality of the situation. The financial assets of Billy's client do not determine the legality of the transaction.
- Elizabeth’s client has assets of $1 million or more.
Similar to the previous statement, the financial assets of Elizabeth's client do not determine the legality of the transaction. Therefore, this statement is not necessary to determine legality.
- Billy and Elizabeth are acting as transaction brokers.
A transaction broker is someone who represents both the buyer and the seller in a real estate transaction. Based on the given information, the roles of Billy and Elizabeth are not specified, so we cannot conclude that they are acting as transaction brokers. Therefore, this statement does not necessarily have to be true for the situation to be legal.
- Billy and Elizabeth are acting as designated sales associates.
Designated sales associates are real estate agents who are authorized to represent either the buyer or the seller in a transaction. The given information does not provide any details about their roles, so we cannot determine if they are acting as designated sales associates. Therefore, this statement does not necessarily have to be true for the situation to be legal.
- The property for sale is non-residential.
This statement has a direct impact on the legality of the situation. In most jurisdictions, it is illegal for agents from the same brokerage to represent both the buyer and seller in a residential real estate transaction. However, in a non-residential real estate transaction, it can be legal for agents from the same brokerage to represent both parties. Therefore, this statement must be true for the situation to be legal.
Based on the analysis above, the statement that must be true for the situation to be legal is:
- The property for sale is non-residential.
Please note that without further context or information, it is challenging to provide a definitive answer. The specific regulations and laws governing real estate transactions can vary depending on the jurisdiction and may have additional requirements.