We've issued the Course 900 Series informational updates below since the date the course manuals were created. Please incorporate this new information into your presentations.

Course 900 Series Instructors: Are you conducting Course 900 Series classes for a sponsor who licensed the course? If so, would you like to receive our email updates directly? Simply email your request to staff@glrsonline.com. Type "Course 900 Series Updates" in the Subject line. Also, include in your message the name(s) of the sponsor(s) for whom you're instructing.

Update No. 01

Module 3: National Industry Update

January 7, 2008

Word Version

This update pertains to the Short Sales topic on pages 58-59 (Course 900-4, Module 2, pages 36-37) and, specifically to the issue of forgiven debt being treated as income.

Public Law 110-142 (44k), enacted in December 2007 and titled the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007, excludes discharges of up to $2 million of indebtedness from taxation if the debt is secured by a principal residence and if it was incurred in the acquisition, construction or substantial improvement of the structure. This exclusion is temporary and applies retroactively to discharges from January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2009.

In the case of a refinanced mortgage, only the debt used to improve the home qualifies for the exclusion; monies that went for other purchases or to pay off credit card debt don’t qualify. Also, forgiveness of debt on vacation or other second homes must still be treated as income.

Update No. 02

Module 4: The Changing Real Estate Profession

January 7, 2008

Word Version

This update pertains to the MLS Controversy subtopic on pages 68-70 (Course 900-4, Module 3, pages 46-48) and, specifically to the FTC complaint filed against Realcomp II, Ltd. of Michigan.

On December 10, 2007, an administrative law judge dismissed (11.2M) the complaint after finding that Realcomp's policies did not appear to restrain or substantially lessen competition or harm consumers. The FTC has already stated that it plans to appeal the decision to the full commission of the FTC. After considering the appeal, the commission will render a final decision on the matter. If the commission rules in favor of the FTC, Realcomp can appeal to a federal court.

Update No. 03

Module 1: Michigan Laws and Rules Update

January 22, 2008

Word Version

This update pertains to the Advertising topic on pages 5-6 and, specifically to the Truth-in-Lending Act (TLA) subtopic on page 6. The text states that print ads and sign riders stating "$0 Down" trigger the required disclosure of additional financial information.

It's been brought to our attention that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) makes the following statement on its website (as it pertains to the TLA): "Some statements about credit terms are too general to trigger additional disclosures. Examples of terms that do not trigger the required disclosures are: No downpayment…."

When discussing this in class, you should point out that "$0 Down" is fine, but "Only $1,000 Down" will require the additional disclosures.

Update No. 04

Module 3: National Industry Update

January 28, 2008

Word Version

This update pertains to the Meth Lab Registry topic on pages 55-56 (Course 900-4, Module 2, pages 33-34). The text notes that the National Association of REALTORS® has voiced concern that there are currently no specific rules for how properties are to be listed on the Registry, how listings can be appealed, and how properties will be removed from the Registry.

Public Law 110-143 (33k), enacted in late December 2007, requires the Environmental Protection Agency to develop model, voluntary, health-based cleanup guidelines for use by states and localities. When approving this bill, both House and Senate Committees urged the Drug Enforcement Agency to develop a set of transparent procedures for both listing and de-listing properties on the DEA’s Registry.

Update No. 05

Module 2: Real Estate Related Case Law

February 9, 2008

Word Version

This update pertains to the Banking Regulations topic on pages 19-20. The text notes on page 20 that legislation prohibiting banks from entering real estate has been introduced but not enacted.

Public Law 110-161 (25k), titled the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 and enacted December 26, 2007, eliminated a provision that would have permanently banned banks from entering the real estate brokerage, property leasing and management business and replaced it with a temporary ban for 2008 and 2009 only.

Update No. 06

Module 3: National Industry Update

March 8, 2008

Word Version

This update pertains to the HUD Downpayment Assistance Standards topic on pages 54-55 (Course 900-4, Module 2, pages 32-33).

Prior to the effective date of the new HUD rule, the Nehemiah Corporation filed an action in federal court alleging that the HUD rule was illegal, and requested an injunction, which the court granted, preventing HUD from enforcing the rule until the court had an opportunity to rule on its merits.

On February 29, 2008, the federal court ruled that HUD did not adequately explain its reasons for eliminating seller-funded downpayment assistance by charitable organizations rather than providing alternatives for reducing the perceived increased risks. This decision means that the rule is set aside for now, and HUD must reopen the rule-making process. Nehemiah Corp of America v Jackson (100k), U.S. District Ct., E.D. of Calif, No. Civ. S-07-2056 (February 29, 2008).

Update No. 07

Module 2: Real Estate Related Case Law

March 20, 2008

Word Version

This update pertains to the Right of First Refusal topic on pages 31-32 (Course 900-4, Module 1, pages 10-11) and, specifically to the Phillips v Homer case.

Upon appeal, the Michigan Supreme Court affirmed this ruling in a decision (128k) dated March 19, 2008.

Update No. 08

Module 1: Michigan Laws and Rules Update

July 7, 2008

Word Version

This update pertains to the Corporate Brokerages topic on pages 10-11 and, specifically, to the Miller v Allstate Ins. Co. case.

In a decision (137k) dated July 2, 2008, the Michigan Supreme Court essentially set aside the reasoning used by the Michigan Court of Appeals and ruled that the Business Corporation Act (BCA) grants the power to challenge corporate status solely to the Michigan Attorney General. Consequently, Allstate Insurance Company lacked legal standing to challenge Plaintiff's corporate status in the case referenced above.

Without an opinion by the Michigan Attorney General, this decision by itself obviously fails to determine once and for all whether real estate brokerages are "properly incorporated" when formed under the BCA. Regardless, the Department after a one-year hiatus is once again accepting and approving corporate brokerage license applications by corporations formed under the BCA.

COPYRIGHT © 1998-2008 GREAT LAKES REALTY SYSTEMS, INC.  ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.