Massachusetts Real Estate Broker Exam — All Questions

A new environmental ordinance leaves a landowner with no economically viable use of a parcel, although the government takes no title to it. The owner's strongest constitutional claim is:

• a.The ordinance is void because zoning cannot restrict use
• b.A regulatory taking entitling the owner to payment✓
• c.Escheat has occurred and the state now owns the parcel
• d.Spot zoning, since only this parcel lost its value

Regulation that goes so far it denies an owner all economically viable use is treated as a regulatory taking, and just compensation is owed even though the government never took title. Arguing that zoning simply cannot restrict use fails, because regulating land is a valid exercise of the police power and owners have no right to the most profitable use. Escheat moves property to the state only when an owner dies with no will and no heirs, which has nothing to do with an ordinance. Spot zoning describes singling out one parcel for a different classification, not a general environmental rule applied to a class of land.

Reviewing a title report, a broker finds an old recorded covenant, written decades ago, that bars resale of the lot to members of a specified race. Its legal effect today is:

• a.It binds the buyer because it was recorded before purchase
• b.It is void, so a court will never enforce it or enjoin it✓
• c.It stays valid until the homeowners association removes it
• d.It is enforceable by the association but not by an owner

A private restriction that discriminates on a protected basis is void and unenforceable under the federal Fair Housing Act and the Civil Rights Act of 1866, so no court will order compliance or enjoin a violation, and the association has no power the courts would back. Recording rescues nothing, because an illegal restriction gains no force from sitting in the public record. No association vote is required to strip it of effect, although many states let an owner have the language formally struck. Valid CC&Rs, by contrast, are enforced privately by injunction brought by an owner or the association. A broker must never repeat or give effect to such language.

A grantor signs and notarizes a deed naming a nephew as grantee, locks it in a safe deposit box, and tells no one. The grantor later dies. What is the deed's effect?

• a.Title passed when the grantor signed the deed
• b.Title passed because the deed was acknowledged
• c.No title passed, because delivery never occurred✓
• d.Title passes when the estate later records it

A deed operates only when the grantor delivers it with the present intent to pass title and the grantee accepts, and both must happen while the grantor is alive. Signing accomplishes nothing while the instrument stays under the grantor's control in a box no one knows about. Acknowledgment before a notary serves recording, not validity, so notarizing it changes nothing here. An estate representative cannot supply the delivery the grantor failed to make, and recording an undelivered deed does not revive it. The nephew takes only through the will or the intestacy statute, which is why closings hand over the executed deed rather than merely signing it.

A deed is signed by a competent grantor and handed to a grantee who accepts it, but the grantor's signature was never notarized. As between those two parties, the deed is:

• a.Void, since notarizing is a validity requirement
• b.Valid, though it cannot be recorded as it stands✓
• c.Valid only if the grantee later pays a recording fee
• d.Voidable at the option of the grantor's creditors

Acknowledgment is a recording requirement, not an element of a valid deed. Delivered and accepted, the deed transfers title between grantor and grantee even with no notary, but the recorder will reject it, leaving the grantee exposed to later purchasers and lienholders who record first. Calling it void confuses the two ideas: validity turns on a competent grantor, an identifiable grantee, words of conveyance, an adequate legal description, the grantor's signature, and delivery and acceptance. Paying a fee cannot cure a missing acknowledgment, because the recorder cannot accept the instrument at all. Creditors of the grantor gain no power to undo a completed conveyance.

In a deed, which clause opens with the words 'to have and to hold' and defines the extent of the estate the grantee is receiving?

• a.The granting clause containing the words of conveyance
• b.The habendum clause, following the granting clause✓
• c.The acknowledgment taken before a notary public officer
• d.The legal description identifying the land conveyed

The habendum clause follows the granting clause, begins with the traditional phrase 'to have and to hold,' and spells out the estate conveyed, for example a fee simple absolute or a life estate. The granting clause holds the words of conveyance that actually transfer the interest and names the grantee. The acknowledgment is the notary's certificate that the signature is genuine, which the recorder requires but the transfer does not. The legal description identifies the land by metes and bounds, lot and block, or government survey, and it fixes what is conveyed rather than how much of an estate. Reading both clauses tells a broker exactly what the buyer is getting.

A relocation company that has owned a home for three months conveys it, warranting title only against defects that arose during its own ownership. The deed it delivers is a:

• a.Bargain and sale deed implying ownership without covenants
• b.General warranty deed covering the entire chain of title
• c.Quitclaim deed conveying only the interest actually held
• d.Special (limited) warranty deed covering the grantor's period✓

Warranting only against defects created or suffered while the grantor held title describes the special or limited warranty deed, the customary instrument for corporate, relocation, and fiduciary sellers who cannot vouch for what earlier owners did. A general warranty deed reaches back through the whole history of the property and offers the broadest protection, which is more than this seller is giving. A quitclaim carries no warranties at all and passes only whatever interest the signer happens to hold. A bargain and sale deed implies that the grantor owns the property but adds few or no covenants. A buyer taking narrower covenants should lean on an owner's title policy.

A title search shows that a seller's former spouse may still hold a possible interest in the property. What is the usual instrument used to release that interest and clear the record?

• a.A quitclaim deed from the former spouse✓
• b.A general warranty deed from the former spouse
• c.A trustee's deed issued after a foreclosure
• d.A correction deed fixing the legal description

A quitclaim releases whatever interest the signer may hold, with no warranties attached, which makes it the standard tool for removing a cloud such as a possible marital interest, a stale easement claim, or a name discrepancy. Demanding a general warranty deed asks the former spouse to guarantee title he or she may never have owned, and it is normally refused. A trustee's deed is what the trustee under a deed of trust issues to the purchaser at a foreclosure sale. A correction deed reforms a mistake in an earlier deed between the same parties and cannot release an outsider's claim.

A court-appointed personal representative sells a decedent's home during probate, and the buyer's broker asks what instrument will convey title. The answer is:

• a.A trustee's deed given after a nonjudicial foreclosure
• b.A sheriff's deed issued following a judicial sale
• c.A general warranty deed with full title covenants
• d.An executor's or personal representative's deed✓

Estate property is conveyed by an executor's deed when a will names the executor, or by a personal representative's or administrator's deed when the court makes the appointment; these deeds recite the court authority and give only limited covenants. A trustee's deed comes from the trustee under a deed of trust after a nonjudicial foreclosure sale. A sheriff's deed, called a referee's deed in some states, follows a judicial sale ordered by a court. A general warranty deed is not used, because a fiduciary will not personally guarantee title against the acts of the decedent or of owners further back in the chain.

After closing under a general warranty deed, a buyer discovers a recorded utility easement that the deed never disclosed. Which covenant did the grantor breach?

• a.Quiet enjoyment, a promise against eviction by better title
• b.Seisin, a promise that the grantor owns the estate conveyed
• c.Against encumbrances, a promise of no undisclosed burdens✓
• d.Further assurance, a promise to sign curative papers

The covenant against encumbrances promises that no liens, easements, or similar burdens exist beyond those the deed discloses, so a recorded easement left unmentioned breaches it at the moment of delivery. Seisin promises the grantor actually owns the estate being conveyed, which is not the trouble when ownership is sound but burdened. Quiet enjoyment shields the grantee from later eviction by someone holding superior title, and an easement holder's use is not an eviction. Further assurance obliges the grantor to sign additional documents needed to perfect title. A general warranty deed carries all of these along with the right to convey and warranty forever.

A neighbor has openly farmed and fenced a strip of an absentee owner's land, excluding others and never asking permission. To take title by adverse possession the neighbor must prove:

• a.Payment of the owner's property taxes for every year
• b.Open, notorious, continuous, hostile, and exclusive possession✓
• c.A written agreement signed by the record title owner
• d.A recorded deed describing the disputed strip of land

Adverse possession requires possession that is open and notorious, continuous, hostile in the sense of being without permission, and exclusive, held for the statutory period set by state law. Some states add payment of taxes or color of title, but those elements are not universal, so a broker should never assume them from another state's rule. A written agreement from the record owner would destroy the claim outright, since permission defeats hostility. Recording a deed creates no possession and cannot manufacture the required years of use. Adverse possession is one form of involuntary alienation, alongside descent, escheat, foreclosure, eminent domain, and accretion.

An owner dies leaving no will, and after a diligent search no heirs can be located. A broker asked to list the property should understand that title:

• a.Passes by devise to the beneficiaries named in a will
• b.Descends to the decedent's nearest surviving creditors
• c.Vests permanently in the administrator the court appoints
• d.Escheats to the state, an involuntary transfer of title✓

Escheat is the state's claim to property when an owner dies intestate and no heirs can be found, and it is a classic involuntary transfer rather than a voluntary one by deed or will. Devise is a gift of real property by will, so it cannot operate where there is no will and no named beneficiary. Descent carries property to heirs under the intestacy statute, but creditors are paid as claimants out of the estate and never inherit the land itself. An administrator has authority to manage and convey estate property during probate, not to own it permanently. Each state sets its own escheat procedure and waiting period.

A search reveals an old mortgage of record that was paid off but never released, and the lender no longer exists. Which step clears that cloud so title is marketable?

• a.Ordering an abstract of title with an attorney's opinion
• b.Buying an owner's title policy that insures over it
• c.Filing a quiet title action asking a court to clear it✓
• d.Recording a correction deed signed by the current seller

A quiet title action asks a court to determine ownership and extinguish a stale or unreleasable claim, which is the practical cure when the mortgagee has vanished and no release can be obtained. An abstract of title with an attorney's opinion summarizes and evaluates the recorded chain; it reports the cloud rather than removing it, and it offers no indemnity. An owner's policy may insure over a known risk, but insurance pays for loss and leaves the defect on the record for the next buyer to confront. A correction deed fixes a drafting error between the original parties and cannot release a third party's lien.

A seller deeds a parcel to one buyer and later deeds the same parcel to a second buyer, who records first. Which framework decides who owns the land?

• a.A federal recording statute applied in all fifty states
• b.The state's recording act, race, notice, or race-notice✓
• c.The order in which the two deeds were signed and dated
• d.The county recorder's discretion over competing claims

Priority between competing grantees is governed by the recording act of the state where the land lies, and the schemes differ: a pure race state protects whoever records first, a notice state protects a later purchaser who took without notice of the earlier deed, and a race-notice state protects one who took without notice and recorded first. No federal statute governs land recording. Signing dates do not decide the contest, which is precisely why a public recording system exists. Recorders act ministerially and have no power to resolve claims. Because the gap between closing and recording is the danger zone, a broker should press for prompt recording.

A buyer pays for a lender's title policy at closing and asks the broker whether it also protects the buyer's equity in the home. The correct answer is that the policy:

• a.Protects both parties equally up to the full purchase price
• b.Protects the buyer once the mortgage has been fully repaid
• c.Protects the buyer against defects arising after closing
• d.Protects only the lender, declining with the balance✓

A lender's, or mortgagee's, policy insures only the lender's security interest, and its coverage shrinks as the principal is paid down, ending altogether when the loan is satisfied. It never covers the buyer's equity, which is why a separate owner's policy is offered at closing for a one-time premium and lasts as long as the insured holds an interest. Repaying the mortgage does not convert the lender's coverage into the buyer's; it extinguishes it. And no title policy insures defects that first arise after its date. Brokers should explain this plainly before a buyer waives owner's coverage to save money.

Six months after closing, a contractor the buyer hired records a mechanic's lien against the home. The buyer files a claim under the owner's title policy. The insurer will most likely:

• a.Deny, because the defect arose after the policy was issued✓
• b.Pay, because owner's policies cover all future liens
• c.Pay, because the standard exceptions were removed
• d.Deny, because only a lender may file a title claim

Title insurance looks backward: it covers defects that already existed when the policy was issued but were not discovered or excepted, not events that happen later. A lien for work the buyer ordered after closing is a new problem the buyer must resolve directly. Buying extended coverage removes standard exceptions and broadens what is insured as of the policy date, but it does not push coverage forward in time. Owners plainly may claim under their own policies; the lender's policy is the one limited to the lender. Extended coverage typically depends on a current survey, which reveals encroachments and boundary issues a records search alone cannot.

A buyer tours a house and finds an occupant who is not the seller living there under an unrecorded lease. What kind of notice does that occupancy give the buyer?

• a.Actual notice, given by the seller's written disclosure
• b.Constructive notice, given by the public record
• c.No notice at all, since the lease was not recorded
• d.Inquiry notice, requiring the buyer to ask about it✓

Someone in possession who is not the seller puts a buyer on inquiry notice: the buyer is charged with whatever a reasonable investigation of that occupancy would have turned up, including an unrecorded lease or an option to purchase. Actual notice is what a party genuinely knows, typically from a disclosure or a conversation, and no one has told this buyer anything. Constructive notice comes from the public record, which by definition cannot reveal an unrecorded lease. Treating an unrecorded interest as invisible is the classic error, because possession is itself notice. A broker should always ask who occupies a property and on what terms.

A Massachusetts broker under investigation refuses to hand over the books and papers the Board of Registration has summonsed. What can the Board do next?

• a.Enter the broker's office and seize the records without further process
• b.Refer it to the attorney general, the only officer who can compel them
• c.Apply to the superior court, which can order the broker to produce them✓
• d.Treat the refusal as an admission and revoke the license without a hearing

M.G.L. c.112 s.87BBB(A) lets the Board require by summons the attendance of witnesses and the production of books and papers, and provides that on a failure or refusal the superior court for the county where the investigation is carried on, or where the witness resides or has his principal place of business, has jurisdiction to order the witness to appear and produce. Enforcement therefore runs through a judge, not through self-help, so entering and seizing has no statutory basis. The attorney general is not the gatekeeper either; the summons power belongs to the Board itself. And revoking on the spot collides with s.87BBB(B), which forbids suspension or revocation except after a hearing preceded by at least ten days' written notice.

The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination makes a finding, now final, that a licensed broker committed an unlawful housing practice. What must the Board of Registration do?

• a.Wait for a criminal conviction before it may suspend or revoke the license
• b.Hold its own hearing and decide independently whether discipline is warranted
• c.Impose a fine of up to twenty-five hundred dollars and leave the license alone
• d.Suspend the license for sixty days, or ninety on a repeat within two years✓

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA is unusual in leaving the Board no discretion here: on notice that the Commission Against Discrimination has made a final finding that a licensee committed an unlawful practice under c.151B arising out of his occupation, the Board 'shall suspend forthwith' for sixty days, and for ninety days if the Commission finds the violation occurred within two years of a prior final violation. Because the statute says forthwith and fixes the length, a second Board hearing on whether to discipline at all would defeat it. A money penalty is not the prescribed sanction and would leave the licensee practicing. And nothing in the section conditions the suspension on a criminal case; the discrimination finding is the trigger.

A Massachusetts company charges prospective tenants a fee for finding them apartments. It never lists or sells property. Does the license law reach it?

• a.No, the license law reaches only the sale, exchange, or listing of real estate
• b.No, a license is required only where the fee is paid by the property's owner
• c.Yes, but only where the company also negotiates the lease for the landlord
• d.Yes, finding dwelling accommodations for a fee for tenants requires a license✓

M.G.L. c.112 s.87DDD1/2 opens by saying that no person shall engage in the business of finding dwelling accommodations for prospective tenants for a fee unless licensed as a broker or salesperson under s.87PP. That sentence exists precisely because apartment-finding does not look like a sale, so the answer that limits licensure to sales, exchanges, and listings has the statute backwards. Who ultimately bears the fee is a separate question the same section answers elsewhere, and it has no bearing on whether a license is needed in the first place. And nothing conditions the requirement on negotiating lease terms for the landlord, since the triggering activity is the finding itself.

What must a Massachusetts candidate be able to show before sitting the broker examination?

• a.Two years affiliated as a salesperson at twenty hours a week, plus sixty classroom hours
• b.Three years affiliated as a salesperson at twenty-five hours a week, plus forty classroom hours✓
• c.Five years affiliated as a salesperson at thirty-five hours a week, plus twenty classroom hours
• d.One year affiliated as a salesperson at forty hours a week, plus ninety classroom hours

Two sources have to agree here. M.G.L. c.112 s.87SS requires a broker applicant to submit proof of having been actively associated with a real estate broker for three years as a salesperson and of forty classroom hours of Board-approved courses. 254 CMR 2.00(6) supplies the intensity the statute leaves out: twenty-five hours per calendar week, which is stricter than an average of twenty-five hours a week because it is measured week by week. PSI bulletin 4460 repeats both figures and adds that the experience must be no more than two years old at the examination. Every other combination offered moves one or both numbers, and each is wrong on its face: the hours never fall to twenty, the years never rise to five or drop to one or two.

A Massachusetts licensee renews on inactive status. What may that licensee still lawfully do?

• a.Negotiate a lease for a client provided an active broker signs the paperwork
• b.Assist with or direct the procuring of prospects and take referral fees for it✓
• c.Hold listings personally while another licensee handles the showings and offers
• d.Nothing at all, because an inactive license is treated as an expired license

M.G.L. c.112 s.87XX1/2 says a licensee on inactive status may not act as a broker or salesperson as defined in s.87PP, 'except that he may assist with or direct the procuring of prospects and may receive referral fees for such procurement activities.' That carve-out is the whole of what inactive status permits. Negotiating a lease is squarely within the s.87PP definition, and having an active broker countersign does not convert the act into someone else's. Holding listings is the same problem, since listing property is named in the definition. The last choice overstates it in the other direction: the section expressly preserves the referral activity, and an inactive license is renewed and can be reactivated, unlike one that has lapsed.

A Massachusetts licensee reaches renewal without being able to certify the required continuing education. What happens?

• a.The Board renews it in full and allows a six-month grace period to comply
• b.The license simply expires and the licensee must retake the licensing examination
• c.The Board refuses the renewal outright and the licensee must apply again as new
• d.The Board renews the license on inactive status and the licensee cannot practice✓

M.G.L. c.112 s.87XX1/2 provides that every person who fails to furnish written certification that the required courses were completed 'shall be granted inactive status by the board upon renewal of his license,' and the same section bars an inactive licensee from acting as a broker or salesperson. PSI bulletin 4460 states the current requirement as twelve hours, to be completed before renewing as active. So the license does continue to exist, which rules out both an outright refusal and a lapse that would send the licensee back to the examination room. And there is no grace period in the section: the certification has to be in hand at renewal, or the renewal comes back inactive.

A Massachusetts broker mails flyers telling homeowners that values are about to fall because families of another race are moving into the neighborhood. Under the license law this is:

• a.Prohibited solicitation carrying a fine of one thousand to twenty-five hundred dollars✓
• b.Permitted market commentary, provided the broker can document the recent price trend
• c.A matter for the Commission Against Discrimination alone, and not for the Board of Registration
• d.Permitted where the flyer names no individual homeowner and no specific street

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA(k) makes it a ground for discipline to solicit the sale or listing of residential property on the ground of an alleged change of value due to the entry into the neighborhood of persons of another race, economic level, religion, or ethnic origin, or to distribute material designed to induce an owner to sell for that reason. The section then adds its own criminal penalty of not less than one thousand nor more than twenty-five hundred dollars, imprisonment of up to six months, or both. Documenting a price trend is beside the point, because the offense is the racial predicate rather than the accuracy of the forecast. The Board has its own jurisdiction independent of the Commission. And the prohibition covers distributed material generally, so omitting names and streets does not save it.

A Massachusetts salesperson wants to take a referral payment directly from a cooperating brokerage. May she?

• a.Yes, the payment is allowed once she has told her own broker of the amount
• b.Yes, direct payment between two licensed firms is expressly permitted here
• c.No, a salesperson may take pay for licensed acts only from her own broker✓
• d.No, unless she happens to be affiliated with both brokers at the same time

M.G.L. c.112 s.87RR says no salesperson shall be entitled to any fee, commission, or other valuable consideration, or solicit or accept the same, from any person except his licensed broker, and s.87VV repeats the prohibition from the other direction. Disclosure does not cure it, because the statute bars accepting the money rather than concealing it. The idea that firm-to-firm payment is allowed confuses the cooperating brokers, who may of course split a fee between themselves, with the individual salesperson, who is paid through her own broker. And the last choice describes something else the same statutes forbid outright: s.87RR provides that no salesperson shall be affiliated with more than one broker at the same time.

A Massachusetts salesperson breaks a rule the license law lays down. What is the supervising broker's exposure?

• a.The broker is exposed only where he personally directed the salesperson's act
• b.The broker is responsible together with the salesperson for that violation✓
• c.The broker is exposed only if the salesperson is an employee and not a contractor
• d.The broker has no exposure once he certifies the salesperson's training records

M.G.L. c.112 s.87RR provides that the salesperson shall be under such supervision of the broker as to ensure compliance with the section, and that the broker 'shall be responsible with the salesman' for any violation of s.87AAA committed by the salesperson. Joint responsibility is the point, so limiting it to acts the broker personally directed would read the supervisory duty out of the statute. Employment form makes no difference either: the same sentence says a salesperson may be affiliated as an employee or as an independent contractor and may be paid on a commission-only basis, and still places him under the broker's supervision. Certifying training is not a defense the section recognizes, and no such certification appears in it.

An unlicensed person brokers a Massachusetts sale and then sues the seller for the commission he was promised. What is the outcome?

• a.The suit fails, because only a licensed broker can recover for such services✓
• b.The suit succeeds if he applies for a license before judgment is entered
• c.The suit succeeds, because the seller's written promise is a binding contract
• d.The suit fails, but the Board can order the seller to pay a reasonable fee

M.G.L. c.112 s.87RR closes with a bar on recovery: no person shall recover in any suit in the courts of the commonwealth for compensation for services as a broker performed within the commonwealth unless he was a duly licensed broker at the time such services were performed. That timing is what defeats the second and third answers. The promise may be perfectly clear and still unenforceable, because the statute withholds the remedy rather than questioning the agreement, and a license obtained later cannot reach back to the moment the services were rendered. The Board has no power to order payment in any event; its jurisdiction under s.87AAA and s.87BBB runs to licenses, not to contract claims between private parties.

When does Massachusetts law treat a buyer as conclusively having consented to a designated agency relationship?

• a.When the buyer signs the disclosure no later than the offer or the sale agreement✓
• b.When the buyer signs the disclosure at any time before the closing on the property takes place
• c.When the buyer is told orally of designated agency at the first personal meeting
• d.When the listing broker files a copy of the signed disclosure with the Board

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA3/4(d) creates a conclusive presumption of consent where the party has signed a disclosure form substantially containing the descriptions in the section 'no later than the date that the buyer makes or submits an offer to purchase the property or that a purchase and sale agreement is executed, whichever is first.' The deadline is the earlier of those two events, so a signature obtained any time before closing comes too late to earn the presumption. An oral conversation cannot trigger a presumption the statute ties to a signed form, though the same subsection does excuse written notice to open-house visitors provided the relationship is conspicuously disclosed. And nothing in the section calls for filing anything with the Board.

A Massachusetts broker listing a property quietly buys it himself through a trust he controls, telling the seller nothing. Which ground for discipline fits?

• a.Failing to give the buyer and the seller a copy of the purchase and sale agreement
• b.Accepting a net listing letting him keep any surplus over a stated sale price
• c.Commingling money belonging to his principal with money of his own
• d.Acting as broker and undisclosed principal in the very same transaction✓

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA(b) names exactly this: acting in the dual capacity of broker and undisclosed principal in the same transaction. The vice is that the broker sits on both sides while the seller believes she has an agent working only for her. The other three choices are also grounds under the same section, which is what makes them tempting, but none describes what happened. One of them concerns the delivery of transaction paperwork, a failure of administration rather than of loyalty. Another concerns a form of listing in which the broker's pay is tied to whatever the price exceeds a set figure, and nothing of that kind is described here. The third concerns the handling of a principal's money, which is not what went wrong when the broker turned out to be the buyer.

Since August 1, 2025, who pays a Massachusetts rental broker's fee?

• a.Always the tenant, as the party who will actually occupy the rental unit
• b.Whichever party the broker names in the advertisement for the rental unit
• c.Only the landlord or tenant who engaged the broker under a contract✓
• d.Both parties in equal shares, unless the lease says otherwise

M.G.L. c.112 s.87DDD1/2, as amended by St.2025 c.9 s.43 effective August 1, 2025, now says a licensee may solely contract with a prospective tenant to find rental property, or solely contract with a landlord to find a tenant, and that 'any fee shall only be paid by the party, lessor or tenant who originally engaged and entered into a contract with the licensed broker or salesperson.' Charging the tenant by default is the practice the amendment was passed to end. The advertisement cannot decide it either, since the statute keys the fee to the contract rather than to what the broker publishes. And splitting it between both sides contradicts the word solely, which contemplates one engaging party.

A Massachusetts licensee may act as a dual agent in a residential sale only where:

• a.The broker charges a single commission and divides it evenly between both parties
• b.Neither party objects once the arrangement is announced to them at the closing table
• c.Both the buyer and the seller give informed written consent on the Board's form✓
• d.The buyer and the seller each have a lawyer throughout the transaction

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA3/4(b) permits a licensee to represent both prospective purchasers and sellers 'only with the informed written consent' of both, obtained in the form prescribed by the Board and signed and dated. Three things are doing work there: consent, in writing, on the Board's form. How the commission is set or divided has nothing to do with it, since the conflict lies in the representation rather than in the money. Silence is not consent, and by the closing the transaction is over, so an unopposed announcement then would come far too late. Counsel on both sides is good practice and no substitute for the statutory form; the section makes no allowance for represented parties.

Beyond the initial written consent, what further step does the Massachusetts dual agency statute require?

• a.Notice of the dual agency once the listed property is first shown✓
• b.Written notice to every visitor who attends an open house at the property
• c.A fresh written consent each time the parties exchange a counteroffer
• d.Approval of the arrangement by the Board before the sale agreement signs

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA3/4(b) allows consent to be taken when the agency relationship is created, but adds that 'notice of a dual agency relationship shall also be given to the prospective purchaser and to the seller after a listed property is first shown to the purchaser.' The reason is practical: consent given in the abstract is easy to forget by the time a real property and a real conflict appear. Nothing in the section repeats the exercise at each counteroffer. The open-house answer states the opposite of the statute, which expressly does not require written notice to every visitor so long as the relationship is conspicuously disclosed. And the Board prescribes the consent form but does not approve individual transactions.

A Massachusetts broker appoints designated agents for the buyer and for the seller in the same deal. What follows?

• a.The broker becomes a facilitator and owes neither party any agency duty
• b.The broker is presumed a dual agent who exclusively represents neither party✓
• c.What the buyer's agent learns is imputed to the seller's designated agent
• d.The appointing broker is released from liability for a designated agent's breach

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA3/4(c) says that when a broker has appointed designated agents for both a buyer and a seller, the broker 'shall be presumed to be a dual agent, who does not exclusively represent either the buyer or seller.' The presumption follows from the fact that the firm now stands on both sides of the same deal. A facilitator under subsection (f) is someone who represents nobody, which is not what a broker who has appointed agents for both sides has done. The imputation answer inverts the statute, which provides that information known to a designated agent is not imputed to the appointing broker or to other affiliated licensees. And the same subsection says appointment does not limit the appointing broker's liability.

A Massachusetts listing broker wants to offer subagency to another firm. What has to happen first?

• a.The seller must be told about vicarious liability and must consent in writing✓
• b.The Board of Registration must register the arrangement before it can take effect
• c.The buyer must waive in writing any claim arising out of the subagent's conduct
• d.The subagent firm must carry errors and omissions cover in the seller's name

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA3/4(e) provides that no licensee shall enter into or offer a subagency agreement to another licensee when marketing a property for sale without informing the seller about vicarious liability and obtaining the seller's written consent. The disclosure is specific: the seller is being told that she may answer for the conduct of a firm she never hired. Registration with the Board appears nowhere in the section, which places the duty on the listing broker and the remedy in the seller's hands. The buyer is not the party at risk of vicarious liability and so is not the one whose waiver the statute wants. And no insurance requirement of any kind is imposed here.

Which failure is named in the Massachusetts license law itself as a ground to suspend or revoke?

• a.Failing to give the buyer and the seller a copy of the sale agreement✓
• b.Failing to record the executed sale agreement at the county registry of deeds
• c.Failing to keep the signed offer to purchase on file for six full years
• d.Failing to send the Board a copy of every listing agreement that is signed

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA(i) lists, among the findings that let the Board suspend, revoke, or refuse to renew, that the licensee 'failed to give to both the buyer and seller a copy of the purchase and sale agreement.' The rule is simple and easy to breach in a busy office, which is presumably why it earned its own clause. Purchase and sale agreements are not recorded in the ordinary course; the deed is what reaches the registry, so the first alternative describes something that does not happen. The retention period offered is not one this section sets. And there is no statutory duty to copy the Board on listing agreements, which the Board sees only if it calls for records in an investigation.

A Massachusetts broker is holding a buyer's deposit. Which conduct is a statutory ground to suspend or revoke his license?

• a.Placing the deposit in a bank outside the town where the property sits
• b.Holding the deposit until closing rather than releasing it to the seller
• c.Mixing the deposit with his own money, or failing to account for it✓
• d.Depositing the money before the seller has signed the offer to purchase

Two clauses of M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA cover this ground. Clause (d) reaches a licensee who has failed, within a reasonable time, to account for or remit money belonging to others that came into his possession as a broker, and clause (h) reaches one who has commingled the money or other property of his principal with his own. The bond required of every broker by s.87TT points the same way, since it is conditioned on the broker's faithful accounting for all funds entrusted to him. The other choices describe ordinary conduct: the statute fixes no geography for the bank, holding a deposit through to closing is the normal course, and taking a deposit while the offer is pending is routine.

At the signing of the first written contract to purchase, what must a Massachusetts licensee do about home inspection?

• a.Recommend at least three licensed inspectors drawn from the Board's own list
• b.Take the buyer's written waiver if the buyer decides to decline an inspection
• c.Arrange the inspection and deliver the report before the agreement signs
• d.Hand the buyer the state consumer brochure and name no particular inspector✓

M.G.L. c.112 s.87YY1/2 requires the licensee, at the time of the signing of the first written contract to purchase, to hand over a brochure published by the office of consumer affairs and business regulation about the home inspection process, and forbids recommending a specific home inspection company or inspector. A complete list of licensed inspectors prepared by the Board may be supplied on request, which is the opposite of narrowing it to three. The prohibition lifts only where a written agreement or written agency disclosure shows the broker is acting exclusively as the buyer's broker. No waiver is contemplated by the section, and the licensee is not the one who arranges or delivers the inspection.

A Massachusetts law effective in August 2024 restricts home inspection waivers. What does it forbid a seller or the seller's agent from doing?

• a.Letting a buyer shorten the inspection period to fewer than seven days
• b.Accepting any offer from a buyer who has already had the house inspected
• c.Selling a house at auction without first obtaining a full home inspection
• d.Conditioning acceptance of an offer on the buyer giving up the right to inspect✓

M.G.L. c.143 s.101, added by St.2024 c.150 s.45 effective August 6, 2024, directs the executive office of housing and livable communities to make regulations ensuring that no seller of a residential structure or condominium unit, or an agent of the seller, conditions acceptance of an offer on the buyer's agreement to waive or restrict the right to have the property inspected, or accepts an offer from a buyer who signals in advance an intent to waive. The section says nothing about how short an inspection period may be. It does not touch a buyer who has already inspected, which is the ordinary case. And auctions run by a licensed auctioneer are one of its express exceptions, alongside sales to close family members.

A Massachusetts seller offers to let the broker keep everything above six hundred thousand dollars. What is that?

• a.An open listing, allowed provided the seller signs a written agreement
• b.An exclusive agency listing, allowed if the surplus is disclosed at closing
• c.A facilitator agreement, allowed because no agency relationship is created
• d.A net listing, which the license law names as a ground for discipline✓

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA(l) lets the Board discipline a licensee who has accepted from a prospective seller a net listing, described there as an agreement to sell real estate for a stated price authorizing the broker to keep as commission any money received above that price. The arrangement puts the broker's interest against the seller's on every dollar of the sale price, which is why it is prohibited rather than merely disclosed. Open listings and exclusive agency listings are lawful forms and are defined by who else may earn a commission, not by how the broker is paid, so relabeling the arrangement does not rescue it. A facilitator under s.87AAA3/4(f) represents neither party and is a form of service, not a compensation scheme.

What does the Massachusetts license law require a broker to reveal about a listed property?

• a.Only a defect that a licensed home inspector would be able to discover
• b.Any material defect in the listed property that the licensee knows about✓
• c.Only a defect the seller has already put in writing on a disclosure form
• d.Only a defect that would cut the property's market value by a tenth

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA3/4(c) states that a designated agent and the appointing broker or salesperson 'shall each have an obligation to reveal known material defects in a listed property.' Knowledge is the trigger, which is why the answer keyed to what an inspector could find is wrong in both directions: it would excuse a defect the licensee knows about but no inspector would catch, and it would impose a duty to investigate that the sentence does not create. Limiting the duty to what the seller has written down would let a seller extinguish it by staying silent on the page. And no threshold of lost value appears anywhere in the section; materiality is not measured as a percentage.

A Massachusetts salesperson tells a buyer the roof was replaced last year, knowing that it was not. Which ground for discipline fits?

• a.Accepting an undisclosed rebate or profit on an expenditure made for a principal
• b.Knowingly making a substantial misrepresentation in performing a licensed act✓
• c.Inducing a party to break an existing contract or lease for the licensee's gain
• d.Paying a fee to a person who is required to be licensed but who is not

M.G.L. c.112 s.87AAA(a) allows the Board to suspend, revoke, or refuse to renew where it finds that the licensee, in performing or attempting to perform an act authorized by his license, knowingly made any substantial misrepresentation. A false statement about the age of the roof made with knowledge of its falsity is that clause in miniature. The other three are real grounds under the same section but describe different conduct: clause (f) covers accepting or charging an undisclosed commission, rebate, or profit on expenditures for a principal; clause (g) covers inducing a party to break a contract or lease for the licensee's personal gain; and clause (e) covers paying or splitting commissions with someone required to be licensed who is not.

A Massachusetts brokerage is throwing out old client files holding financial details. What does state law require?

• a.The files must be kept in a locked office for a further seven full years
• b.The paper must be redacted, burned, pulverized, or shredded before disposal✓
• c.The clients must each be sent notice thirty days before the disposal
• d.The files must be handed to the Board of Registration for safekeeping

M.G.L. c.93I s.2 sets minimum standards for disposing of records containing personal information: paper documents must be redacted, burned, pulverized, or shredded so the data cannot practicably be read or reconstructed, and electronic media must be destroyed or erased to the same standard. The chapter also allows a third-party disposal contractor, subject to controls, and exposes a violator to a civil fine of up to one hundred dollars per data subject, capped at fifty thousand dollars per instance, recoverable by the attorney general. Nothing there prescribes a retention period, so seven years in a locked office is invented. No advance notice to clients is required. And the Board of Registration is a licensing body, not a repository for closed files.

Before suing a Massachusetts brokerage under the state consumer protection statute, what must a consumer do?

• a.Send a written demand for relief at least thirty days before filing suit✓
• b.Get a finding of probable cause from the office of the attorney general
• c.Give the brokerage sixty days to cure and then post a bond with the court
• d.File a complaint with the Board of Registration and wait for its ruling

M.G.L. c.93A s.9(3) requires that at least thirty days before filing, a written demand for relief identifying the claimant and reasonably describing the unfair or deceptive act and the injury be mailed or delivered to the prospective respondent. A respondent who makes a reasonable written tender within thirty days can cap its exposure; one who refuses in bad faith risks two to three times actual damages. The demand requirement is waived only in narrow cases, such as a counterclaim or a respondent with no Massachusetts place of business or assets. The Board's jurisdiction is over licenses and is not a precondition to a consumer suit, the attorney general issues no probable cause finding here, and no bond is required.

Massachusetts premises contain paint with dangerous levels of lead. When does the owner's duty to abate or contain arise?

• a.When a child under six years of age lives in the premises✓
• b.When the building was put up before nineteen seventy-eight
• c.When any tenant asks the owner in writing for a lead inspection
• d.When the premises are advertised for rent to a family with children

M.G.L. c.111 s.197(a) is triggered by occupancy, not by age of construction: whenever a child under six years of age resides in premises in which paint, plaster, or other accessible structural material contains dangerous levels of lead, the owner shall abate or contain it. The same subsection gives a new owner ninety days after a change of ownership where a child under six will become or continue to be a resident. The pre-1978 date belongs to the federal disclosure and renovation rules and does not set the Massachusetts duty. A tenant's written request does not create the obligation, which runs from the facts on the ground. And advertising is not the trigger; s.151B independently forbids refusing to rent because of the lead law.

A Massachusetts home on a septic system is being sold. When is a Title 5 inspection not required?

• a.Where the buyer agrees in writing to replace the system after the closing
• b.Where the system was installed within the previous fifteen calendar years
• c.Where the transfer is between spouses, siblings, or a parent and a child✓
• d.Where the town holds a betterment lien covering the cost of a new system

M.G.L. c.21A s.13 gives the Department of Environmental Protection the State Environmental Code, of which Title 5 is the sewage part, and then carves out the transfers that need no inspection: between current spouses, between parents and their children, between full siblings, and where the grantor transfers the property into a trust at least one of whose beneficiaries is of the first degree of relationship to him. Those are relationships, not conditions the parties can create. A private promise to replace the system later does not fit, since the exemptions turn on who the parties are. The section names no age of system that excuses inspection. And a betterment lien is a municipal financing device with no bearing on the inspection requirement.

Who inspects a Massachusetts home for smoke and carbon monoxide alarm compliance when it is sold?

• a.The local board of health, under its state sanitary code jurisdiction
• b.The buyer's home inspector, who issues the certificate at the closing
• c.The building commissioner, acting under the state building code alone
• d.The head of the local fire department, who enforces both requirements✓

Both statutes point at the same official. M.G.L. c.148 s.26F requires the seller to equip a residential building with approved smoke detectors upon sale or transfer and puts enforcement in the head of the fire department. M.G.L. c.148 s.26F1/2(c) requires that every residential dwelling be inspected by the head of the fire department for carbon monoxide alarm compliance upon sale or transfer, and subsection (e) again names him as the enforcer. The municipal department that polices housing habitability works from a different chapter altogether and has no role in alarm sign-off. A home inspector works for the buyer and issues no municipal certificate. And while the building code can set stricter alarm rules for new construction, the sale inspection still runs through the fire department.

An owner wants to fill part of a bordering wetland on a Massachusetts lot. What has to come first?

• a.A variance from the local zoning board of appeals and a municipal building permit
• b.A license from the Department of Environmental Protection alone, obtained by mail
• c.A notice of intent to the conservation commission and an order of conditions✓
• d.A vote of town meeting approving the alteration of the wetland resource

M.G.L. c.131 s.40, the Wetlands Protection Act, bars removing, filling, dredging, or altering a bank, riverfront area, wetland, beach, dune, flat, marsh, meadow, or swamp bordering on waters without first filing written notice of intent and 'receiving and complying with an order of conditions,' with all appeal periods elapsed. The notice goes to the conservation commission, with a copy to the Department of Environmental Protection by certified mail, which is why the answer routing it to the Department alone is incomplete rather than merely inconvenient. Zoning relief and a building permit answer a different question, about use and construction. And the statute assigns the decision to the commission, not to town meeting.

Which characteristic does Massachusetts housing law protect that the federal Fair Housing Act does not?

• a.The presence of children who will occupy the rented premises
• b.A tenant's national origin or the country where she was born
• c.A tenant's receipt of a public rental assistance subsidy✓
• d.A tenant's religious creed or the congregation she belongs to

M.G.L. c.151B s.4(10) makes it unlawful for a person furnishing credit, services, or rental accommodations to discriminate against a recipient of federal, state, or local public assistance or against a tenant receiving a housing subsidy such as rental assistance, or because of any requirement of that program. There is no federal counterpart, which is why source-of-income cases are brought under state law. National origin, familial status, and religion are all federal protected classes and are protected in Massachusetts too, so none of them distinguishes the two schemes. Massachusetts also adds age, ancestry, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity, genetic information, and veteran or armed forces status to the federal list.

Which Massachusetts rental falls outside the reach of the state's main housing discrimination provision?

• a.A single apartment in a two-family house that the owner occupies✓
• b.A single apartment in a twelve-unit building the owner occupies
• c.A single-family house that the owner rents out through a broker
• d.A single apartment in a three-family house the owner has left

M.G.L. c.151B s.4(7) carries an express proviso that the subsection shall not apply to the leasing of a single apartment or flat in a two family dwelling, the other occupancy unit of which is occupied by the owner as his residence. Both halves matter: two units, and the owner living in the other one. A twelve-unit building is a multiple dwelling covered by s.4(6), and owner occupancy does not exempt it. A three-family house has too many units and, on these facts, no resident owner. And a single-family house rented through a broker is not exempt either, because the involvement of a licensee is precisely the circumstance the fair housing provisions are written to reach.

How long does a Massachusetts tenant have to bring a housing discrimination complaint to the Commission Against Discrimination?

• a.One hundred eighty days after the alleged act of discrimination
• b.Two years after the alleged act of discrimination
• c.Ninety days after the alleged act of discrimination
• d.Three hundred days after the alleged act of discrimination✓

M.G.L. c.151B s.5 states that any complaint filed under the section must be so filed within three hundred days after the alleged act of discrimination. The shorter periods offered are familiar from other schemes and are the reason this figure gets tested: a licensee who assumes the federal ninety or one hundred eighty day habits will misadvise a client about a live claim. Two years overshoots the administrative window, though it should not be confused with the separate period for a court action under s.9. Filing matters to a broker for a further reason: a final Commission finding against a licensee carries consequences for the license itself, quite apart from anything the Commission awards the complainant.

A tenant with a disability needs a bathroom doorway widened in a Massachusetts building of twelve units. Who bears the cost?

• a.The tenant, because a modification is always at the tenant's own expense
• b.The owner, because the building has ten or more dwelling units✓
• c.The town, from the accessibility fund the state building code sets up
• d.Neither, because a landlord may simply refuse a structural modification

M.G.L. c.151B s.4(7A) makes refusing to permit a reasonable modification a form of handicap discrimination, and it splits the cost by building type. The general rule places the expense on the handicapped person, but the statute then provides that in publicly assisted housing, multiple dwelling housing of ten or more units, or contiguously located housing of ten or more units, the reasonable modification shall be at the expense of the owner. A twelve-unit building sits above that line, so the answer that makes the tenant pay in every case states the federal default rather than the Massachusetts rule. There is no municipal accessibility fund in the building code. And outright refusal is the conduct the subsection prohibits.