"The Villages seeks $425,000 in attorneys’ fees from rogue realtors"

[TNGary]

This will be interested to follow to the conclusion. The story continues,

[graciegirl]

This will be interested to follow to the conclusion. The story continues,

Well no one can say the developers are "Law suit happy". They have ignored many things over the years that could easily be won that to me were libelous or slanderous. They are very quiet people and do not seek attention.

It appears to me that they felt this was important enough to establish a legal "tenet". Probably to protect their rights in some way.

I do not think it was about the money, but about the principal. IMHO

[Joe V.]

This will be interested to follow to the conclusion. The story continues,

They won their case. Vae victis

[Ben Franklin]

The Villages doesn't use Realtors. They have company agents who represent The Villages, not the buyer or seller. I assume this is about the two company agents who signed a no compete (give your soul away) contract, and then left to go out on their own?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Well no one can say the developers are "Law suit happy". They have ignored many things over the years that could easily be won that to me were libelous or slanderous. They are very quiet people and do not seek attention.

It appears to me that they felt this was important enough to establish a legal "tenant". Probably to protect their right to sell new homes in some way.

I do not think it was about the money, but about the principal. IMHO

1. it's a tenet, not a tenant.
2. Their right to sell new homes is already protected. It's THEIR property until it's sold, they can use who ever they want - including their own contractors - to sell on their behalf.
3. It's about the principal, alright. It's about proving to EVERYONE that you should never upset them, or they will come after you and your bank account. Even after they win a suit, they'll keep coming for more.

[manaboutown]

Well no one can say the developers are "Law suit happy". They have ignored many things over the years that could easily be won that to me were libelous or slanderous. They are very quiet people and do not seek attention.

It appears to me that they felt this was important enough to establish a legal "tenant". Probably to protect their right to sell new homes in some way.

I do not think it was about the money, but about the principal. IMHO

GG, may I respectfully suggest you intended "legal precedent"... and also "principle"? Precedent | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/precedent)

IMHO theft of intellectual property was a significant issue of the lawsuit, especially that of trade secrets, primarily the customers list. Trade Secret Protection for Customer Lists: A Checklist | Fish & Richardson - JDSupra (https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/trade-secret-protection-for-customer-29052/)

[graciegirl]

1. it's a tenet, not a tenant.
2. Their right to sell new homes is already protected. It's THEIR property until it's sold, they can use who ever they want - including their own contractors - to sell on their behalf.
3. It's about the principal, alright. It's about proving to EVERYONE that you should never upset them, or they will come after you and your bank account. Even after they win a suit, they'll keep coming for more.

Thank you for correcting my spelling. I have never used that word before.

However I fiercely disagree with you on "they will come after you and your bank account." You know to me that just sounds like someone who thinks all financially successful people are greedy and without principle. The developers can hire the best lawyers. They won this case and I am not surprised. AND I am pleased. I believe that if you work hard and long hours and invest your own money, risk your own money and keep bettering your idea and plans and become enormously successful that is NO crime.

I think sometimes, a lot of times, the good guys are RICH. Rich is not a bad word.

[manaboutown]

Thank you for correcting my spelling. I have never used that word before.

However I fiercely disagree with you on "they will come after you and your bank account." You know to me that just sounds like someone who thinks all financially successful people are greedy and without principal. The developers can hire the best lawyers. They won this case and I am not surprised. AND I am pleased. I believe that if you work hard and long hours and invest your own money, risk your own money and keep bettering your idea and plans and become enormously successful that is NO crime.

I think sometimes, a lot of times, the good guys are RICH. Rich is not a bad word.

Principal vs. Principle | Grammarly Blog (https://www.grammarly.com/blog/principle-principal/)

Also: TENET | Definition of TENET by Oxford Dictionary on Lexico.com also meaning of TENET (https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/tenet)

[tophcfa]

Well no one can say the developers are "Law suit happy". They have ignored many things over the years that could easily be won that to me were libelous or slanderous. They are very quiet people and do not seek attention.

It appears to me that they felt this was important enough to establish a legal "tenant". Probably to protect their right to sell new homes in some way.

I do not think it was about the money, but about the principal. IMHO

Of course it is about the $$. Not the $$ from the lawsuit, but about protecting the cash making real estate machine that is the Villages. Does anyone think that the results of the litigation will NOT give pause to other Villages Home Sales People from going rouge? (notice I did not refer to them as Licensed Real Estate Agents).

[John41]

This will be interested to follow to the conclusion. The story continues,

Any realtor who thinks of working for The Villages better think twice.

[TNGary]

Still confusing to me as to why the two main agents left TV real estate team, as it looked like a real cash cow for them, literally on the money train. OK so they had to ride a trolley every now and then. What am I missing? what was the business case for bailing out? or was it just poor judgement? any thoughts?

[graciegirl]

Any realtor who thinks of working for The Villages better think twice.

John 41, What do you mean?

P.S. AND Thank you for correcting my spelling and grammar, Orange Bottle Baby and Manabout.

And....Mr. Town, I am still annoyed that you were very critical of my use of Hellmann's Mayonnaise and Velveeta. The next time my cousin Vinney comes to visit, I will introduce you. ;)

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Of course it is about the $$. Not the $$ from the lawsuit, but about protecting the cash making real estate machine that is the Villages. Does anyone think that the results of the litigation will NOT give pause to other Villages Home Sales People from going rouge? (notice I did not refer to them as Licensed Real Estate Agents).

I think anyone who sincerely wants to be a real estate agent, will think twice about being an agent/sales person for The Villages from now on. They're forewarned now. If you choose to leave, and try to succeed on your own, they'll make sure neither you, nor anyone associated with you, is permitted to even try. And you'll have to pay for the privilege.

The Morse Family essentially just blackballed an entire real estate company, including employees who never worked for the Villages in the first place.

You can all applaud it but I'm disgusted.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Still confusing to me as to why the two main agents left TV real estate team, as it looked like a real cash cow for them, literally on the money train. OK so they had to ride a trolley every now and then. What am I missing? what was the business case for bailing out? or was it just poor judgement? any thoughts?

According to the testimony, the agents were treated like salaried employees, even though they were officially sub-contractors. They were expected to work overtime, on their own dime. They were expected to attend mandatory meetings every week outside normal work hours. They were expected to pick up potential clients - sometimes from the airport - using their own personal vehicle. They were expected to be on call 24/7. But they weren't paid for all of that. These were things they were actually ordered to do. It wasn't merely an expectation that they "would" do it, they were "required" to do it.

Eventually they burned out.

[dewilson58]

Eventually they burned out.

:1rotfl::1rotfl:

They did not burn out..............starting a company would take more time
They stole assets in an effort to make more money.

[bonrich]

I can understand that the agents in question decided to leave the Company and go off on their own, since the real estate market was expanding and it was time for them to start a new business venture, and not work for someone else. Their mistake, as I understand it was they took files with them. They should have walked away with clean hands and nothing other than their pencils. Period!

[Nick B]

Greed

[Nick B]

They made 500,000 a year to show homes I would have driven the bus no problem.

[dewilson58]

They should have walked away with clean hands and nothing other than their pencils. Period!
& not worked in the market for 18 months........that's the "non-compete" in the non-compete.

[ithos]

Is there a link to find out what the final ruling was?

[Jayhawk]

[QUOTE=It's about the principal, alright. It's about proving to EVERYONE that you should never upset them, or they will come after you and your bank account. Even after they win a suit, they'll keep coming for more.[/QUOTE]

Why shouldn't they? The business was harmed and continued to harm until the law forced the violators to stop. If they hadn't broken their promise, The Villages wouldn't have been out $400,000+ in legal costs. Lawsuit losers should pay.

[Pedrocarrasco01@yahoo.com]

Still confusing to me as to why the two main agents left TV real estate team, as it looked like a real cash cow for them, literally on the money train. OK so they had to ride a trolley every now and then. What am I missing? what was the business case for bailing out? or was it just poor judgement? any thoughts?

Where they screwed up is when they took the client list and when originally signed a NON COMPETE. Anytime you remove information from a database to use it later, you have lost the case. They could have settled out of court, but they chose to fight it. They lost big time!!!!!

[ithos]

I had heard that they had promised not to develop past Brownwood.

As The Villages grew and grew, the pressure on the sales force intensified, particularly after the decision was made to cross State Road 44, something Morse publicly had vowed would not happen.

https://www.**************.com/2021/04/02/former-sales-representative-testifies-atmosphere-changed-after-death-of-gary-morse/

[ithos]

It is interesting that it ended up in Federal and not the state court systems. Non competes are often overturned at the state level.

The theft from their database was pretty stupid though. I wonder if they consulted a lawyer before they quit. The agents who settled for $5000 made a great choice.

[Marathon Man]

Any realtor who thinks of working for The Villages better think twice.

Yea. Think twice about the fact that you might make $500,000.

[PJackpot]

I think anyone who sincerely wants to be a real estate agent, will think twice about being an agent/sales person for The Villages from now on. They're forewarned now. If you choose to leave, and try to succeed on your own, they'll make sure neither you, nor anyone associated with you, is permitted to even try. And you'll have to pay for the privilege.

The Morse Family essentially just blackballed an entire real estate company, including employees who never worked for the Villages in the first place.

You can all applaud it but I'm disgusted.

It’s all about a two year non compete contract. You cannot sign a contract and then violate it for some subsequent crybaby reason. You signed it. It is legally binding. This is a no-brainer for any judge. I can’t imagine what those agents were thinking.

[DaleDivine]

One of our neighbors was an agent for The Villages. He was under so much pressure that he eventually quit and went to work at one of the championship courses.
:ohdear::ohdear:

[kenoc7]

1. it's a tenet, not a tenant.
2. Their right to sell new homes is already protected. It's THEIR property until it's sold, they can use who ever they want - including their own contractors - to sell on their behalf.
3. It's about the principal, alright. It's about proving to EVERYONE that you should never upset them, or they will come after you and your bank account. Even after they win a suit, they'll keep coming for more.
Tenet, not tenant but also principle, not principal.

[JMintzer]

And....Mr. Town, I am still annoyed that you were very critical of my use of Hellmann's Mayonnaise and Velveeta. The next time my cousin Vinney comes to visit, I will introduce you. ;)

Hellman's???

You heathen! It's Dukes or nothing! ;)

[MandoMan]

Well no one can say the developers are "Law suit happy". They have ignored many things over the years that could easily be won that to me were libelous or slanderous. They are very quiet people and do not seek attention.

It appears to me that they felt this was important enough to establish a legal "tenet". Probably to protect their rights in some way.

I do not think it was about the money, but about the principal. IMHO

You are right. Other “rogue” real estate agents will now be leery of trying this scheme to increase their yearly income above $500,000. The thing is, while lawyers do pad their billable hours at times, some senior lawyers are charging $1,000 an hour, and this was a long and hard-fought case with lots of interviews and research. That claim for fees may be accurate. I don’t think the “rogue” agents realized what they were facing when they decided they could make even more money by partnering with a nation-wide firm that wanted access to the Villages sales.

[Challenger]

1. it's a tenet, not a tenant.
2. Their right to sell new homes is already protected. It's THEIR property until it's sold, they can use who ever they want - including their own contractors - to sell on their behalf.
3. It's about the principal, alright. It's about proving to EVERYONE that you should never upset them, or they will come after you and your bank account. Even after they win a suit, they'll keep coming for more.

This case would probably be decided the same way in any legal jurisdiction in the country. No Compete clauses have been deemed legal by many courts as long as they are reasonable to protect the business and are not overly restrictive as to duration or covered area. The losers are very lucky that they have not been charged with a larceny charge stealing company property (names, addresses, and other customer info)

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

This case would probably be decided the same way in any legal jurisdiction in the country. No Compete clauses have been deemed legal by many courts as long as they are reasonable to protect the business and are not overly restrictive as to duration or covered area. The losers are very lucky that they have not been charged with a larceny charge stealing company property (names, addresses, and other customer info)

I agree they shouldn't have taken the files out.

However, those files exist because those agents put them there. They were customer files that THEY had acquired. It was THEIR customer lists. They were taking their own information. The developer didn't give them their leads. They worked to create those leads themselves.

That's one of the problems with non-compete rules. You are required to do all the work, but if you quit, you're not allowed to take the results of all that work with you. What they -should- have done, is call any hot and warm leads, and inform them that they were going to be leaving the company and forming their own. And give the potential client the option of being assigned to a different sales agent at the Villages, or follow the agent who's leaving, to their new agency.

THAT would be the right thing to do. It would also be the right thing for the Villages to do, instead of a flat out non-compete clause for 18 months. The Villages have the monopoly on all NEW construction. No one else is ALLOWED to sell those homes. The only thing in question is resales, which are fair game for ANY real estate agency, or independent agent. ANY agent except those few who left the Villages Sales. Many of whom live in the Villages, and know the Villages better than any other outside agent. Many of whom clients would WANT to sell on their behalf, or help them buy.

And now the judge is telling those clients - sorry, you're not allowed to have this licensed real estate agent represent you in the sale or purchase of your pre-owned villages resale home.

That's where it's a problem.

[Dan9871]

The developer didn't give them their leads. They worked to create those leads themselves.

.

Before we came to The Villages to find a home we called Villages Properties. The developer, i.e. Villages Properties, gave us as a lead to one of the sales people. No work at all on the sales persons part.

My guess is that a lot of the leads come to Villages Properties realtors this way.

[Villages Kahuna]

I feel sorry for the realtors being sued. I don’t know the strength of the contract they violated. But I do know that one of the two key partners is awfully good. He sold out house in Mallory in about four hours!

After agreeing verbally to list with him—he was still with Properties of The Villages—he “blasted” an e-mail to his list of potential buyers before we even signed the listing agreement or set the asking price! When he arrived the next day to get the document signed, I set the asking price just a little lower than the most expensive “comp” he provided. He then told us he had set four appointments for the next day! The first couple who visited took only a couple hours to offer our full asking price!

I know you may be thinking that we “left money on the table”. Not so IMHO. I set the price, he didn’t even make a pricing recommendation. And I was familiar with two of comps he provided.

I can see why POTV didn’t want to lose him. He told me that in the preceding year (2018) he sold 128 houses, all pre-owned! All I can say is that he’s good enough to be able to afford however much the lawsuit is going to cost him.

[Stu from NYC]

The developer apparently makes a lot of money by having his salesmen sell resales.

As a result he apparently decided to make a point when these two guys violated the non compete. Bet they wish they consulted a good lawyer before violating it.

[jimjamuser]

Thank you for correcting my spelling. I have never used that word before.

However I fiercely disagree with you on "they will come after you and your bank account." You know to me that just sounds like someone who thinks all financially successful people are greedy and without principle. The developers can hire the best lawyers. They won this case and I am not surprised. AND I am pleased. I believe that if you work hard and long hours and invest your own money, risk your own money and keep bettering your idea and plans and become enormously successful that is NO crime.

I think sometimes, a lot of times, the good guys are RICH. Rich is not a bad word.
Rich IS a bad word when the "rich" make laws to help themselves stay in power. When they stack the deck. Then they become a bad word. In Japan around 1980 (not sure about today) Japanese CEOs refused to take salaries that were more than 10 times their company's average worker's wages. They would be ashamed to have done so. Today in the US, CEOs make 100 to 200 times their average workers - they have no shame!

The US is today in GREAT danger of social instability because the wealth gap is the greatest in US history and the highest in the 1st world (or developed countries) !!!!!! Look that up and see why "RICH" really is a BAD word. Maybe it was NOT in OUR day, but times have changed for the MUCH worse. Sorry! Please be aware!

[manaboutown]

Rich IS a bad word when the "rich" make laws to help themselves stay in power. When they stack the deck. Then they become a bad word. In Japan around 1980 (not sure about today) Japanese CEOs refused to take salaries that were more than 10 times their company's average worker's wages. They would be ashamed to have done so. Today in the US, CEOs make 100 to 200 times their average workers - they have no shame!

The US is today in GREAT danger of social instability because the wealth gap is the greatest in US history and the highest in the 1st world (or developed countries) !!!!!! Look that up and see why "RICH" really is a BAD word. Maybe it was NOT in OUR day, but times have changed for the MUCH worse. Sorry! Please be aware!

This political post is totally off topic.

[dewilson58]

I don’t know the strength of the contract they violated.

Strong enough.

[Ben Franklin]

According to the testimony, the agents were treated like salaried employees, even though they were officially sub-contractors. They were expected to work overtime, on their own dime. They were expected to attend mandatory meetings every week outside normal work hours. They were expected to pick up potential clients - sometimes from the airport - using their own personal vehicle. They were expected to be on call 24/7. But they weren't paid for all of that. These were things they were actually ordered to do. It wasn't merely an expectation that they "would" do it, they were "required" to do it.

Eventually they burned out.

If they were classified as Independent Contractors, then TV wouldn't be able to tell them where to be and when. I certainly hope that's not how they classify their agents.

[dewilson58]

If they were classified as Independent Contractors, then TV wouldn't be able to tell them where to be and when.

WRONG.
Companies can direct IC's.

[Ben Franklin]

& not worked in the market for 18 months........that's the "non-compete" in the non-compete.

Only fools sign no compete clauses, unless they truly want to meld with the company Borg. Obviously, they had other plans. Not for me. I prefer to be independent.

[Ben Franklin]

WRONG.
Companies can direct IC's.

WRONG!
According to the IRS "an individual is an independent contractor if the payer has the right to control or direct only the result of the work, not what will be done and how it will be done. " I was an IC for over 15 years.

[dewilson58]

WRONG!
According to the IRS "an individual is an independent contractor if the payer has the right to control or direct only the result of the work, not what will be done and how it will be done. " I was an IC for over 15 years.

thank you.................you used my word in the definition. Dah

[b0bd0herty]

2. Their right to sell new homes is already protected. It's THEIR property until it's sold, they can use who ever they want - including their own contractors - to sell on their behalf.
3. It's about the principal, alright. It's about proving to EVERYONE that you should never upset them, or they will come after you and your bank account. Even after they win a suit, they'll keep coming for more.

I believe the lawsuit was over the Developer's belief that the realtors who left, took information from the Information system that lists all know facts about anyone who's ever looked at, bought or thought about buying in The Villages. This data is for realtors working for TV not any others.

[graciegirl]

I think anyone who sincerely wants to be a real estate agent, will think twice about being an agent/sales person for The Villages from now on. They're forewarned now. If you choose to leave, and try to succeed on your own, they'll make sure neither you, nor anyone associated with you, is permitted to even try. And you'll have to pay for the privilege.

The Morse Family essentially just blackballed an entire real estate company, including employees who never worked for the Villages in the first place.

You can all applaud it but I'm disgusted.

In my opinion, your summary of why and how is incorrect.

[Ben Franklin]

thank you.................you used my word in the definition. Dah

You can try to make it sound the way you want to, however, you left out the most important part "...direct only the result of the work, not what will be done and how it will be done." I'll let you argue with others. Enjoy your evening.

[dewilson58]

You can try to make it sound the way you want to, however, you left out the most important part "...direct only the result of the work, not what will be done and how it will be done." I'll let you argue with others. Enjoy your evening.

Nope, didn't leave it out...................nice try.

[jimjamuser]

Rich IS a bad word when the "rich" make laws to help themselves stay in power. When they stack the deck. Then they become a bad word. In Japan around 1980 (not sure about today) Japanese CEOs refused to take salaries that were more than 10 times their company's average worker's wages. They would be ashamed to have done so. Today in the US, CEOs make 100 to 200 times their average workers - they have no shame!

The US is today in GREAT danger of social instability because the wealth gap is the greatest in US history and the highest in the 1st world (or developed countries) !!!!!! Look that up and see why "RICH" really is a BAD word. Maybe it was NOT in OUR day, but times have changed for the MUCH worse. Sorry! Please be aware!
Gracy Girl stated that "RICH" is not a bad word. I merely pointed out that it depends on whether it is 1960 or 2017. I added to the thread. That is the purpose of a forum. Maybe my comment got Gracy Girl or someone else thinking about another viewpoint. Your comment on the other hand was productive in ZERO way. It was just personal bullying and vindictiveness.

[ithos]

There are Florida Statutes that cover independent contractors and non compete agreements. Any one know why this ended up in Federal Court?

A little trivia, according to Wikipedia he is the father of our State Attorney General. But he was appointed by Clinton.

[manaboutown]

There are Florida Statutes that cover independent contractors and non compete agreements. Any one know why this ended up in Federal Court?

A little trivia, according to Wikipedia he is the father of our State Attorney General. But he was appointed by Clinton.

Possibly because of the theft of the customers list, a trade secret, was a primary issue and the plaintiff's attorneys thought the federal court offered a better forum for the trade secret theft issue for them. Too, the breach of covenant not to compete might be better treated by the federal court from their perspective. I really do not know, though.

Defend Trade Secrets Act - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defend_Trade_Secrets_Act)

Trade Secrets Law in Florida | Digital Media Law Project (http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/florida/trade-secrets-law-florida)

Federal Standard for Enjoining Breach of Non-Compete Agreement Differs from Florida’s, Eleventh Circuit Rules | Jackson Lewis (https://www.jacksonlewis.com/publication/federal-standard-enjoining-breach-non-compete-agreement-differs-florida-s-eleventh-circuit-rules)

[ithos]

That would make sense.

[flflowers]

I think anyone who sincerely wants to be a real estate agent, will think twice about being an agent/sales person for The Villages from now on. They're forewarned now. If you choose to leave, and try to succeed on your own, they'll make sure neither you, nor anyone associated with you, is permitted to even try. And you'll have to pay for the privilege.

The Morse Family essentially just blackballed an entire real estate company, including employees who never worked for the Villages in the first place.

You can all applaud it but I'm disgusted.

I am sure that anyone that comes for employment know the "rules" ahead of accepting employment...they understand and agree before signing on the dotted line.

[Stu from NYC]

I am sure that anyone that comes for employment know the "rules" ahead of accepting employment...they understand and agree before signing on the dotted line.

They certainly should know what they are signing but many people do not.

[JoMar]

According to the testimony, the agents were treated like salaried employees, even though they were officially sub-contractors. They were expected to work overtime, on their own dime. They were expected to attend mandatory meetings every week outside normal work hours. They were expected to pick up potential clients - sometimes from the airport - using their own personal vehicle. They were expected to be on call 24/7. But they weren't paid for all of that. These were things they were actually ordered to do. It wasn't merely an expectation that they "would" do it, they were "required" to do it.

Eventually they burned out.

And made hundreds of thousands (and in at least one case over a million) doing that. Obvious you have never run a sales or marketing company or had employees under contract. If they burn out they have the option to leave but there are conditions. These were supposedly intelligent people so they knew the risk and they knew what they signed......I applaud the Developer for their actions and am disgusted by those that believe it's ok to do anything illegal as long as it's against the Developer.

[dewilson58]

And made hundreds of thousands (and in at least one case over a million) doing that. Obvious you have never run a sales or marketing company or had employees under contract. If they burn out they have the option to leave but there are conditions. These were supposedly intelligent people so they knew the risk and they knew what they signed......I applaud the Developer for their actions and am disgusted by those that believe it's ok to do anything illegal as long as it's against the Developer.
:bigbow:

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

I am sure that anyone that comes for employment know the "rules" ahead of accepting employment...they understand and agree before signing on the dotted line.

These people weren't employees. They were contractors. That's part of the problem.

[JoMar]

These people weren't employees. They were contractors. That's part of the problem.

Contractors are hired by contract which details the terms and expectations. If they agreed, they agreed, if they didn't they shouldn't have signed the contract.

[Challenger]

The developer apparently makes a lot of money by having his salesmen sell resales.

As a result he apparently decided to make a point when these two guys violated the non compete. Bet they wish they consulted a good lawyer before violating it.

Should have consulted with a real corporate atty before bolting. Should not have violated provisions of a legal contract that they agreed to in advance. Simple stuff .

[manaboutown]

Just read in the online news the rogue agents filed notice they are appealing the verdict. lol.

[JMintzer]

Just read in the online news the rogue agents filed notice they are appealing the verdict. lol.

They are violating the "First Rule of Holes"...

"When in a hole, STOP DIGGING!"

[WEHOWL]

The Villages sales agents are licensed real estate agents. All single-agency representatives (those that work for any developer) MUST have a state real estate license. Please do not disparage those/situations you know nothing about.

[WEHOWL]

The Villages sales agents are licensed real estate agents. All single-agency representatives (those that work for any developer) MUST have a state real estate license. Please do not disparage those/situations you know nothing about.

IF YOU GO TO THE FLORIDA DBPR, LOOK UP ANY NAME ON THE VILLAGES TEAM WEBSITE, YOU WILL FIND A LICENSE NUMBER ASSOCATED TO EVERY MEMBER. IF YOU LOOK UP ANY NAME FROM ANY BROKERAGE HERE IN FLORIDA-YOU WILL SEE THE SAME ARRANGEMENT. EVERY SALES REPRESENTATIVE WITH PROPERTIES OF THE VILLAGES IS A LICENSED REAL ESTATE AGENT. THEY DO THEIR BEST TO REPRESENT THE VILLAGES AND THE FINE FOLKS WHO WANT TO LIVE HERE. THEY ALL HAVE VARIOUS EXPERIENCE LEVELS. THE HIRING PROCESS IS RIGOROUS, AND THEY WANT AND DESIRE THE BEST PEOPLE. PEOPLE ARE PEOPLE, AND IF YOU HAVE HAD A BAD EXPERIENCE, YOU MIGHT HAVE A BAD EXPERIENCE EVERYWHERE YOU GO.

[Jayhawk]

I think anyone who sincerely wants to be a real estate agent, will think twice about being an agent/sales person for The Villages from now on. They're forewarned now. If you choose to leave, and try to succeed on your own, they'll make sure neither you, nor anyone associated with you, is permitted to even try. And you'll have to pay for the privilege.

The Morse Family essentially just blackballed an entire real estate company, including employees who never worked for the Villages in the first place.

You can all applaud it but I'm disgusted.

Interesting take.

So it's admirable that the sales agents who were making a half-million dollars a year to "try to succeed on your own" after earning the millions with support of The Villages, but the developer is an evil, greedy menace?

Seems like disgust might better be referenced as envy.

[dewilson58]

The Villages sales agents are licensed real estate agents. All single-agency representatives (those that work for any developer) MUST have a state real estate license. Please do not disparage those/situations you know nothing about.

Some posters don't like facts. :ho:

[dewilson58]

This will be interested to follow to the conclusion. The story continues,

They are following the advice from the same attorney who told them not to worry about the non-compete. :1rotfl:

[Jayhawk]

They are following the advice from the same attorney who told them not to worry about the non-compete. :1rotfl:

:boom:

[newgirl]

Real estate sales is a career that every agent that has ever sold a home has learned what they were doing by the broker that held their license. The license does not teach you how to sell. Every agent learns from every deal they do more then by anything a broker can teach them. I was surprised that the Villages won since these folks first and foremost we're 1099 independent and as such, owned their careers outside of the brokers umbrella and I have never heard of any broker being able to tell a agent they could not move on, what you sign is a agreement not to use the brokers name if the broker no longer holds your licence.
If you owned a store, this outcome says you can not sell your store and buy another store , different name if you sell the same items or buy product from the same warehouse. Sounds crazy huh..this is exactly from what ( little) I know about this lawsuit. If they took computers given to them to use under the broker then I could see a problem, but experience...this sets a scary picture for all sales people from real estate to furniture sales people.

[Ben Franklin]

The Villages sales agents are licensed real estate agents. All single-agency representatives (those that work for any developer) MUST have a state real estate license. Please do not disparage those/situations you know nothing about.

IF YOU GO TO THE FLORIDA DBPR, LOOK UP ANY NAME ON THE VILLAGES TEAM WEBSITE, YOU WILL FIND A LICENSE NUMBER ASSOCATED TO EVERY MEMBER. IF YOU LOOK UP ANY NAME FROM ANY BROKERAGE HERE IN FLORIDA-YOU WILL SEE THE SAME ARRANGEMENT. EVERY SALES REPRESENTATIVE WITH PROPERTIES OF THE VILLAGES IS A LICENSED REAL ESTATE AGENT. THEY DO THEIR BEST TO REPRESENT THE VILLAGES AND THE FINE FOLKS WHO WANT TO LIVE HERE. THEY ALL HAVE VARIOUS EXPERIENCE LEVELS. THE HIRING PROCESS IS RIGOROUS, AND THEY WANT AND DESIRE THE BEST PEOPLE. PEOPLE ARE PEOPLE, AND IF YOU HAVE HAD A BAD EXPERIENCE, YOU MIGHT HAVE A BAD EXPERIENCE EVERYWHERE YOU GO.

They are real estate agents working for TV. They are not single agencies, and they are not Realtors. Look at your paperwork, there is NO Broker relationship. A single agency works exclusively for the buyer or seller, and MUST be loyal to whomever they represent. There is no loyalty wording in a No Broker Relationship.

There are three types of relationships one can have with a real estate company in Florida. 1. Single Agency (Very few still left in FL) an agent can not work with both buyer and seller - must transfer to a transactional relationship to do so. 2. Transaction relationship (facilitates the transaction). 3. No Broker Relationship (you are not fully represented, IMHO.

With that said, my TV agent was very nice and knowledgeable.

Statutes & Constitution
:View Statutes
:

Online Sunshine (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0400-0499/0475/Sections/0475.278.html)

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

From the Villages website:
In addition to being licensed Florida real estate agents, our team of over 280 agents receives frequent, professional education beyond the state’s continuing education requirements on customer care, product knowledge, and the latest information pertaining to the lifestyle we all enjoy.

Villages sales agents are licensed Florida real estate agents.

[Swoop]

Real estate sales is a career that every agent that has ever sold a home has learned what they were doing by the broker that held their license. The license does not teach you how to sell. Every agent learns from every deal they do more then by anything a broker can teach them. I was surprised that the Villages won since these folks first and foremost we're 1099 independent and as such, owned their careers outside of the brokers umbrella and I have never heard of any broker being able to tell a agent they could not move on, what you sign is a agreement not to use the brokers name if the broker no longer holds your licence.
If you owned a store, this outcome says you can not sell your store and buy another store , different name if you sell the same items or buy product from the same warehouse. Sounds crazy huh..this is exactly from what ( little) I know about this lawsuit. If they took computers given to them to use under the broker then I could see a problem, but experience...this sets a scary picture for all sales people from real estate to furniture sales people.
When I sold my business, the buyer required me to sign a non compete agreement. I certainly understood why. While I owned my business for 32 years, sales people were required to sign my non compete agreement when they were hired.

The people who came to work for me knowingly accepted the non compete clause, as did the realtors hired by The Villages.

Had one of my employees left to work for a competitor or to start their own business, and took my records with them, I would have done exactly what The Villages did.

[Ben Franklin]

From the Villages website:


Villages sales agents are licensed Florida real estate agents.

Who said they weren't real estate agents? They are not Realtors. They are not single agencies either. There is a difference between Realtors and agents. Agents don't belong to the National Association of Realtors, or the Multiple Listing System. All Realtors are independent contractors. Both Realtors and agents are licensed in the state of Florida. Some Realtors I know have their real estate license in several states.

A little sidebar. Only 7% of all Realtors make good money. I don't know if TV agents work on commission or a salary. 93% of all Realtors make, on average, between $30-$40,000 a year.

[BobnBev]

1. it's a tenet, not a tenant.
2. Their right to sell new homes is already protected. It's THEIR property until it's sold, they can use who ever they want - including their own contractors - to sell on their behalf.
3. It's about the principal, alright. It's about proving to EVERYONE that you should never upset them, or they will come after you and your bank account. Even after they win a suit, they'll keep coming for more.
1. It's principle, not principal.

[NavyNJ]

Of course it is about the $$. Not the $$ from the lawsuit, but about protecting the cash making real estate machine that is the Villages. Does anyone think that the results of the litigation will NOT give pause to other Villages Home Sales People from going rouge? (notice I did not refer to them as Licensed Real Estate Agents).

Uhhh......but they ARE "Licensed Real Estate Agents" in the State of Florida......why would any reasonably educated person believe otherwise?? As you can find on countless threads here, however, the Properties of The Villages Sales Agents are not able to use the "marketing" label of Realtor as they do not belong to or pay dues to the National Association of Realtors nor belong to a local Board of Realtors, which most if not all real estate agents who work for local brokers, do. Hope that clears that little point up, one more time.....

[NatureBoy]

It is possible for two things to be true at the same time.

The Developer could have made unreasonable, possibly illegal, demands of the agents. The Developer has the position of power and the contractor refusing any request/order puts their contract at risk. If the agents felt the demands from TV were egregious enough, they could have filed suit.

The agents also violated a contract and stole from TV.

From the bit I've followed the case, it seems one of the agents' primary defenses was that TV did illegal things to them (treating them as employees) so their non-compete clause was null and void. Clearly the court did not agree.

Two wrongs don't cancel each other out.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Uhhh......but they ARE "Licensed Real Estate Agents" in the State of Florida......why would any reasonably educated person believe otherwise?? As you can find on countless threads here, however, the Properties of The Villages Sales Agents are not able to use the "marketing" label of Realtor as they do not belong to or pay dues to the National Association of Realtors nor belong to a local Board of Realtors, which most if not all real estate agents who work for local brokers, do. Hope that clears that little point up, one more time.....

Most licensed real estate agents in this country (and Florida is a state in this country so we're talking about Florida too) are NOT Realtors.

Many of them work for brokerage firms that are run by Realtors, but aren't Realtors themselves. Real estate agents are not required to be Realtors.

[Ben Franklin]

Most licensed real estate agents in this country (and Florida is a state in this country so we're talking about Florida too) are NOT Realtors.

Many of them work for brokerage firms that are run by Realtors, but aren't Realtors themselves. Real estate agents are not required to be Realtors.

According to NAR, there are roughly 2 million active real estate agents in the U.S. Of those 2 million, 1,359,208 of those licensed agents are Realtors.

It has to do with the type of brokerage relationship one has with a real estate agency. A single agency gives you the most legal protections, but there are too few left, most agencies transitioned to a Transaction agency with some legal protections, and the least is No Brokerage Relationship.

Like any profession, there are individuals who are excellent, down to the worst.

[WEHOWL]

Someone who gets it, thank you!

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

It is possible for two things to be true at the same time.

The Developer could have made unreasonable, possibly illegal, demands of the agents. The Developer has the position of power and the contractor refusing any request/order puts their contract at risk. If the agents felt the demands from TV were egregious enough, they could have filed suit.

The agents also violated a contract and stole from TV.

From the bit I've followed the case, it seems one of the agents' primary defenses was that TV did illegal things to them (treating them as employees) so their non-compete clause was null and void. Clearly the court did not agree.

Two wrongs don't cancel each other out.

That was my understanding of the ongoing legal mess. I had heard from someone who worked for the new agency, her perspective of the situation as someone who isn't named in the suit at all (she had never worked for the Villages previously so she has no liability in this). And I'd heard from someone who still works for the Villages, their perspective. And of course all the media coverage from various sources, some more reliable than others.