New objection to NAR settlement targets business practice changes, plaintiffs' attorneys fees
Briefly

Monestier argues the NAR settlement is insufficient for protecting consumers, suggesting it fails to address inflated commissions and lacks broader scrutiny from outside analysts.
She states, 'The goal of the settlement was laudable…but it is an example of something concocted by lawyers without a full appreciation of how this would play out in the real world.'
Monestier believes the settlement is 'the worst of all possible worlds,' critiquing the proposed changes for providing a false sense of accountability in real estate commissions.
In her lengthy objection, Monestier expresses concern over the lack of independent voices evaluating whether the settlement truly benefits aggrieved class members.
Read at www.housingwire.com
[
|
]