‘Going by the Book’

As a real estate agent, I was offended by much of Karen Steinberg’s “Speaking Out” commentary (“Can’t Always Go by the Book,” Aug. 4). Granted, the broker she engaged should have apprised her that he was going on his honeymoon during a substantial amount of the listing period. (I would have partnered with a capable colleague acceptable to the seller.) But since when is it a broker’s fiduciary duty to suggest a market price which is patently above what in the broker’s best judgment is more than the market will bear?

When an overpriced property sits on the market unsold no one wins--except the seller down the street who prices his property “at or below market” vis-a-vis the overpriced listing--and thereby is aided in effecting a sale.

Steinberg laments that after “closing costs and improvements” her profit was just $340 and that she received only one acceptable offer $9,000 below her “very reasonable” asking price. The acceptable offer was just 3% below the asking price (and 8% below the most optimistic suggested asking price). Such a difference between asking and sales prices in the last year’s market is enviable to most sellers. Much deeper price cutting is the norm today.

She fails to enlighten us as to how long she owned the condo, how much she owed on it and what improvements were made to the property. She fails to acknowledge the tax benefits of home ownership, not to mention the personal satisfaction of owning the roof over one’s head, nor does she acknowledge that real estate investment is not without risk.

Perhaps instead of blaming the realtor for bringing her a bona fide buyer quickly and in a difficult market, she should examine how she could have administered her investment better and should ask herself whether she over-improved the property or whether she should have timed her sale at a better point in the real estate cycle.

RICHARD STANLEY

Los Angeles