What the heck does "Procuring Cause" mean to anyone anymore in real estate Sales?

Procurring cause is so much more than just showing a buyer a house.  Our worksheet here in Northern Virginia to prove procurring cause is complicated and shows how gray an area it can be.  Sometimes it is best to just let it go if not be sure to show not only that you have shown them the property but also done all of the other decision making pieces of the process including, loan approval, comps, etc. 

Great post!  This is a good reminder to get the Buyer's representation agreement signed upfront.

nothing...................

for what it is worth I just took the NAR code of Ethics Class and it stated:

Black's Law

Dictionary, Fifth Edition, defines procuring case as:

The proximate cause; the cause originating a series of events which,

without break in their continuity, result in the accomplishment of the prime

object. The inducing cause; the direct or proximate cause. Substantially

synonymous with "efficient cause."

Kirk...I use to live in Long Beach.  We bought our first home in 1970 and I think it was listed by Mulhearn Realty.  Did you sell back then? (you don't look old enough!) Was this your company? Or maybe your dads?  I also used to sell in Long Beach....in the late 80's.

It may not be the other realtors faults. I know that some people will say they aren't working with an agent, when they have. I think they like to cause cat fights amongst us. It's not always the agents fault. Even we are first to blame our own. Buyers can be very fickle and not honest!

This is one of the things we never get used to.  You let your guard down for a minute and it turns out to be someone like this. I guess the buyer had a new agent every day?  Best of luck with this.

The first agent is the procuring cause, hands down!

Sorry guys, but just because an agent shows a house, does not mean you are procuring cause. Procuring cause has to establish cause and effect. Did the first agent cause the buyer to right an offer? If you didn't guide the buyer and help with their decision to make an offer, then you cannot claim procuring cause. The agent that brings the offer to the table (effect) is usually the prevailing party.

I understand your frustration because I have been in your shoes, but you will most likely lose your grievance when it goes up to the committee because you didn't bring about the final event of the offer. Now if you would have gone back to your office and written up an offer, then the next day an agent gave you a call saying they had a BA with the buyer, well,then they would be out of luck. Good luck though in your fight.

I honestly don't see why you should be angry at the other agents and call them names. Sometimes buyers don't tell the truth either, and maybe these agents didn't know that you had shown the property already. Anyway, if a buyer wants to be represented by someone other than a listing agent, they have that right.

Obviously we don't have enough facts to determine the procuring cause in your case...You indicated that your agent spent one "whole afternoon" with this particular buyer and the next day another agent showed up with the buyer for the second showing and wrote the offer.  As a NAR trained Professional Standards facilitator, and having chaired numerous hearing panels, I can tell you there is "no contract rule", "no threshold rule" and "no agency rule" to determine procuring cause.  This case would be determined based on several factors including all the events that led up to the accepted agreement.  Typically the agent with the longest uninterrupted chain of events (not broken through estrangement or abandonment) should be the procuring cause.  Since there are no predetermined rules of entitlement, the decision of the hearing panel would be made based on the testimony and evidence presented at the due process hearing.  Perhaps the second agent had been working with that buyer for several weeks or months, or maybe they just met the buyer (and it sounds as though your agent only spent a few hours with the buyer), but as I said before, we don't have all the facts.  As some of the comments indicated, buyers have the right to representation, and that is absolutely correct, but unless their agent is the procuring cause they shouldn't expect to get paid through the transaction.  If I were you I'd do my best to get all the facts, and if you don't have a strong case you may want to consider mediation since you could share the commission based on the outcome of the mediation.  If your case is strong, arbitration may be the way to go since NAR suggests not splitting awards in arbitration and there will be a prevailing and a non-prevailing party with only one party receiving the entire commission in dispute.  Good luck and let us know what happens...

Kirk - I don't envy your position. I've been there and got the t shirt. Look up the meaning of procurring cause and go from there (I believe someone spelled it out already here). If the agent started a series of events if left uninterrupted would have resulted in the sale of the property then he is the procurring cause. Leaving the propety was not the best choice but not necessarily a deal breaker. The listing broker has offered compensation to someone bringing a ready willing and able buyer to the negotiating table. If left uninterrupted would your agent have done that? Did the sale happen before the drama unfolded? Last thing you want to happen in these instances is for your seller to still have the property. I made a phone call to the agent that interrupted and let her know I would be asking for the commission thru our Realtor association once the sale was completed so as not to stand in the way then I sat back and waited. Once the sale was complete we went forward with the procurring cause action. Best of luck with your situation. I hope it works out.

Judy T

Kirk, interesting post. I think if you were commenting back to the comments, it would help us all with additional information. The beauty of Active Rain is that with every comment, the nature of the post evolves and changes. We all learn through the dialog and it just gets better and better. Every time I write a post and get good comments, I am a changed person. I learn so much more from the comment than when I originated the post. Just a thought.

Lenn Harley seems to have done some good analysis for you....however a questions remains which is "were you the listing agent"? If so, then I see her rationale. It is a complex problem and we all need to be alert. I ask tons of questions right up front. Attorneys are certainly people you want to qualify. I don't spend time with people who will not be open with me and make a commitment to me to work openly and honestly to achieve their goal. If we can't get there....I pass. I have no time or energy for negativity and do no want to be working on problems. My personal choice would be to move on. Each thing that happens to me in the arena of this nature is a lesson well learned that helps me the next time around. I am a learning individual on a constant and committed basis. I figure that is reward enough! Good Luck. I know sometimes you just have to see it through!

One of the comments said: Bottom line is to have a policy where you do not deal with Attorneys period

Unfortunately in NYC that would be a violation of Fair Housing. Beleive it or not lawyers are a protected class. "Occupation" is one of our 14 protected classes. "occupation was added because lawyers were discriminated against. Many coops would reject lawyers for fear of being sued over every little thing.

In NY there are a lot of lawyers. I have sold apartments to many of them. In NY state practicing lawyers can act as real estate brokers without having to get a brokers license and can collect a commission.

A lawyer can show up at an open house, make an offer including a co-broker commission in the offer. It is up to the seller to accept it or not. Not the listing broker.

Under the law brokers are not allowed to ask a consumer what is their occupation so we would only know if they volunteer the information or use their attorney status to try to get a commission.

According to our real estate board a consumer can have any agent they want represent them no matter who showed the property first. The buyer needs to write a letter staing the agent they want representing them.

Hi Kirk,

I'm in agreement with those that say there is not enough info here to really determine P/C. Like Dorothy, I also serve as an arbitrator for my local assoc. (probably the same one as yours in LB) and CAR, in addition to being a mediator. P/C is not easy to demonstrate/prove, it does happen yet not often.

BTW, with that last name and in LB, you've got to be related to Bruce.

Hi Kirk,

This happens a lot in our market but the agents the do this are from a market over 200 miles away. I have had it happen more times than I can count. Unfortunately it is very difficult to pursue because the buyers lie at the first meeting. Good luck, I hope you win.

I was just thinking about this yesterday.  In Arizona it is pretty much who brings the contract.  Signs, calls, showings, hard to do anything with procurring cause.  The State sees it as whoever brings the contract.  So sad, too bad.