Adkins Florida Group
Search Blog:
Phone: 941-713-0635
 
Latest Listings
17202 Waterline Road, Bradenton Fl 34212
17202 Waterline Road, Bradenton Fl 34212
Auction! List price is estimated opening bid. Breathtaking 11.69 acres with pond, gated and fenced n...
>> More

728 Palm Avenue, Ellenton Fl 34222
728 Palm Avenue, Ellenton Fl 34222
Turnkey furnished perfect starter home or retirement getaway with enclosed lanai/living room, shaded...
>> More

4103 11th Street Court West, Palmetto Fl 34221
4103 11th Street Court West, Palmetto Fl 34221
Boatmen & Fisherman Paradise! Magnificent waterfront view end unit condo surrounded by water on ...
>> More

1518 48th Avenue West, Palmetto Fl 34221
1518 48th Avenue West, Palmetto Fl 34221
You'll feel like you've stepped back in time, that's what some folks say about Snead Island. And I'd...
>> More

Anna Maria Island Bar and Grill
Anna Maria Island Bar and Grill
Well known profitable local bar/pub/restaurant in great island location! Highly visible location on ...
>> More



Clarity Provided by Supreme Court on Brokerages’ Administrative Fees

Last week the Supreme Court provided real estate brokers good clarity about administrative fees charged by brokerages by ruling in favor of Quicken Loans in a lawsuit over unearned fees in the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA).

The fees the lender charge, known as loan processing or a loan discount fee, had violated federal settlement laws. The plaintiffs in the lawsuits argued that the fees were unearned because they weren’t tied to a specific service. Quicken argued that the prohibition, in RESPA, only applies to fees which are split with another settlement service provider. Since it wasn’t split with anyone else, Quicken’s loan processing fee couldn’t constitute a RESPA unearned-fee violation. NAR, siding with Quicken, filed an amicus brief with the Court supporting the lender’s argument.

The Supreme Court agreed with Quicken and NAR, saying the RESPA provision very clearly applies only to fees that are split with another provider, therefore it affirmed the appeals court decision in favor of the lender.

“In order to establish a violation of [of the unearned-fee provision], a plaintiff must demonstrate that a charge for settlement services was divided between two or more persons,” the court said in its ruling. “Because petitioners do not contend that respondent split the challenged charges with anyone else, summary judgment was properly granted in favor of respondent. We therefore affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals.”

The case is important for real estate brokerages, because although the defendant was a lender, many brokers charge their own version of an administrative fee, on top of the sales commissions, and in some previous cases, courts have ruled that the fees violated RESPA. With this case, therefore, the Supreme Court has made it clear that the fees are okay, so long as the fees are not split with a third party who provides no services in exchange for the fee.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

0 Responses to “Clarity Provided by Supreme Court on Brokerages’ Administrative Fees”


  1. No Comments

Leave a Reply

You must login to post a comment.



       FL Broker #CQ1003173.        Phone: 941-713-0635        Fax: 941-729-7441
       An Equal Housing Opportunity Realtor®
       © 2008 by Adkins Florida Group All Rights Reserved.