Colorado § 12-10-401 - Legislative declaration.

§ 12-10-401. Legislative declaration.

(1) The general assembly finds, determines, and declares that the public will best be served through a better understanding of the public's legal and working relationships with real estate brokers and by being able to engage any such real estate broker on terms and under conditions that the public and the real estate broker find acceptable. This includes engaging a broker as a single agent or transaction-broker. Individual members of the public should not be exposed to liability for acts or omissions of real estate brokers that have not been approved, directed, or ratified by the individuals. Further, the public should be advised of the general duties, obligations, and responsibilities of the real estate broker they engage.

(2) This part 4 is enacted to govern the relationships between real estate brokers and sellers, landlords, buyers, and tenants in real estate transactions.

Source: L. 2019: Entire title R&RE with relocations, (HB 19-1172), ch. 136, p. 643, § 1, effective October 1.

Editor's note: This section is similar to former § 12-61-801 as it existed prior to 2019.

ANNOTATION

Law reviews. For article, "Disclosure of Adverse Material Facts and Latent Defects in Real Estate Transactions", see 53 Colo. Law. 40 (July-Aug. 2024).

Annotator's note. The following annotations include cases decided under former provisions similar to this section.

With this statute, Colorado was the first state to create a non-agent real estate broker. Sussman v. Stoner, 143 F. Supp. 2d 1232 (D. Colo. 2001).

By its terms, the statute does not impose upon a transaction-broker a duty to keep track of land or water values once land is under contract, or a duty to inform a seller that his land or water is worth more than the asking price. Sussman v. Stoner, 143 F. Supp. 2d 1232 (D. Colo. 2001).

Nor does it require that a transaction-broker advise a party that it is not in his or her best interest to accept a given offer. Such requirements are in conflict with the plain terms of the statute. Sussman v. Stoner, 143 F. Supp. 2d 1232 (D. Colo. 2001).

Section 12-61-807(1) clearly states that the transaction-broker is not an agent for either party, nor, according § 12-61-802(6), an advocate for the interests of any party to the transaction. Sussman v. Stoner, 143 F. Supp. 2d 1232 (D. Colo. 2001); Hoff & Leigh, Inc. v. Byler, 62 P.3d 1077 (Colo. App. 2002).

The statute also specifically forbids the broker from disclosing certain information that would give either side a negotiation advantage. Consequently, the broker may not disclose that a buyer is willing to accept less than stated, that a seller is willing to pay more than offered, motivating factors for the purchase or sale, or financing terms which a party might accept. Sussman v. Stoner, 143 F. Supp. 2d 1232 (D. Colo. 2001).

A broker who is allegedly fired for complying with disclosure rules can bring a claim against an employer for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Mullin v. Hyatt Residential Group, Inc., 82 F. Supp. 3d 1248 (D. Colo. 2015).