I had not seen it, but I'm not surprised.  Dual agency (or in this case transactional agency) is a minefield, and I'm surprised that lawsuits aren't filed more frequently.

The fact that the 'accepted' offer was the listing agent's clients, and $400,000 LESS than the Cohen's offer... and all the other basic terms (waived inspection, cash deal) were the same... makes for a strong case for the lawsuit.

Wanda,

I don't think that the attack is on double ending.  As I see it, this attack is on agents who do not show their clients all offers.  A

Hmmm. Well. IF the seller did NOT see ALL offers . . . that could be a problem for the broker/agent.

IF however the seller DID see all and simply chose another . . . well the lawyers are happy, anyway!

The plaintiff stated 'his offer was presented as inferior' which is not uncommon IF...(and we do not know the if's) there were preconditions, time issues, Thurderbolt Mortgage is known poor preformer (some offer cash only to change later) or inital offer was way to low indicating this buyer is predatory even though he dangled a carrot.. The plaintif should have offered the +500K at the start. That may make his offer superior.  He schemed and lost.
But now about that Coldwell Banker thing.....We do not know if the agent remitted to the seller the buyer side compenstation. Could have happened..but then there is that Coldwell Banker thing. The agent is not in control of their business. Hopefully the 'employee' model of CB places the broker and franchise in the crosshairs and not the agent.
However, the solution is the radicalizion of real estate sales via a block chain concept where buy and seller are anonymous and ALL offers are presented and shown on line FOR EVERYONE TO SEE including the seller, including all buyers.
This also addresses the Fair Housing issues since everyone is anonymus. 
Rich people who lose always want to make the lives of others miserable.

It's a common concern and complaint that listing agents don't present all offers. We aren't required to prove to buyer agents that their offer was presented, but it's considered a professional courtesy. And even if LA sends a buyer agent proof offer was presented, they don't have to send them proof of what all the other offers came in at. Also, LA can just get a written notice from seller stating seller does not want to receive or review any more offers. And sellers do not have to accept the highest offer. They might have had legitimate reasons for accepting a lower offer.

Clearly sour grapes from the buyer. Only $500,000 over list? That doesn't guarantee anything. Buyer is delusional & is just making trouble. I think because the size of the commission they are also making a big deal out of it. 

Might not be dual agency but certainly 'in house'. 

Is there any way you can insure that when representing a buyer that your offer is presented>  

There are times that I feel my client's offer was not presented or dismissed unfairly by those that end up double ending a transaction.  It is a real disservice to the buyer and the seller. 

In this case, we just do not know enough to make an informed opinion.  Did the seller initial each offer acknowledging that he saw the offer?  Was there a good proof of funds?  What were all of the terms?  Was the buyer's agent that lost out a real pain? There are so many other questions that need to be answered.

I will say, if the agent did bury the best offer for his own benefit, he should be held very accountable.  I hope we here what the outcome of this trial is and some more of the details.

I had not seen this.

To get to the truth we need to see all the offers. The listing agent is very experienced and smart. Did Cohen Trust buyer provide proof he had $4,600,000 sitting in a checking account with the offer?  Best offer straight up rather than adding he would go $500 above asking and whatever clauses verses a simple offer: full price no conditions we close in five days and let you rent back. 

Not enough details to know for sure if the lawsuit is warranted, but if an agent put personal profit ahead of what was best for the customer, they should be sued.  

Dual agency has a time and place but it invites a LOT of very shady behavior

So much is unknown or yet disclosed here. When the facts are lined up, likely Roger and CB will prevail. Sour grapes are not admissible in court

Lots of people file lawsuits, some win, many do not.

A Question with homework! LOL... I can see where the aggrieved buyer may conclude "unfair practices" BUT let that go for right now. Many buyers think that just because they've made the highest offer then they are automatically the successful bidder. But, let that go, too. There is no law, rule or regulation stating the seller is bound to accept the highest offer. Sometimes terms can trump the other offers.

On another note, this is another reason dual agency is under such scrutiny. AND I hate escalation clauses!

1) This is what makes real estate agents look bad.

2) This is why I don't represent both sides. People may accuse or suspect you of doing wrong even if you did everything right.

3) I see a new form in our future - acknowledgment of offers.

I can relate to that since I have represented several buyers this summer. It was the brutal time. I feel the frustration of this buyer who seems had an extremely  strong offer. Honestly I am surprised that with all modern technologies the is no transparency in the negotiation process. 

This will be interesting to follow.  I know there have been times the listing agent did not present my buyer's offer. I always sent the one page of the offer indicting it was presented and the seller rejected it. This page is initialed by me and the seller. 

Keep good written records of every move you make, especially when dual agency is involved.  In this case the seller should have signed a rejection of the Cohen offer, which would then be returned to Cohen's agent...

I am surprised that no one has mentioned how fast the news station people were to convict the agent. The were taken aback that a sale would generated such a large commission and there were aghast that one agent could receive the entire amount. Details about the competing offers were not fully presented. We only heard the disappointed buyer's story.

The buyer was using an escalation clause. That means his offer was not clean and straightforward.