Missouri Real Estate Broker Exam — All Questions

A Missouri licensee meets a prospective buyer at a residential property. The buyer has not signed any agreement with a broker. When must the licensee give the buyer the broker disclosure form prescribed by the Commission?

• a.At the earliest practicable opportunity before the buyer is shown a second property
• b.At the earliest practicable opportunity after a written offer has been prepared
• c.At the earliest practicable opportunity during or following the first substantial contact✓
• d.At the earliest practicable opportunity within seventy-two hours of the first contact

Section 339.770.1 sets the trigger as contact, not paperwork: in a residential real estate transaction the licensee shall provide the written broker disclosure form "at the earliest practicable opportunity during or following the first substantial contact" with a seller, landlord, buyer, or tenant "who has not entered into a written agreement for services." Tying the duty to the preparation of an offer is the Ohio rule, not Missouri's, and it would let a consumer be worked with for weeks before learning who the licensee represents — the very thing the statute is written to prevent. Counting properties shown has no basis in the section at all. And Missouri fixes no measured deadline such as seventy-two hours; the standard is the practicable one keyed to first substantial contact, which can fall due the same afternoon.

A buyer has already signed a written buyer's agency agreement with a designated broker. The buyer then visits a competing firm's open house and speaks with that firm's licensee. Under section 339.770, what must that second licensee do about the broker disclosure form?

• a.Nothing — no other licensee is required to make the disclosure once a written agreement exists✓
• b.Provide the form, because an open house is itself a first substantial contact
• c.Provide the form, unless the buyer's own broker has already filed it with the Commission
• d.Provide the form, because each licensee owes the disclosure independently of any agreement

Section 339.770.2 is explicit: "When a seller, landlord, buyer, or tenant has already entered into a written agreement for services with a designated broker, no other licensee shall be required to make the disclosures required by this section." The disclosure form exists to tell an unrepresented consumer where a licensee stands; a consumer who already has a written brokerage agreement has that information. Treating the duty as independent of any agreement reverses the subsection. The open-house answer confuses the trigger in subsection 1, which applies only to a person who has not entered into a written agreement. And nothing in the section requires a broker to file any disclosure with the Commission; the form runs from the licensee to the consumer.

A Missouri licensee has no written agreement with a prospective buyer. Which act obliges the designated broker to enter into a written agency agreement before proceeding, because it is NOT among the ministerial acts defined in section 339.710?

• a.Attending an open house and answering the buyer's questions about that property
• b.Showing the buyer a property that is listed with another brokerage✓
• c.Setting an appointment for the buyer to view a property at a later date
• d.Showing the buyer through a property being sold by its owner on the owner's own behalf

Section 339.780.3 requires the written agency agreement before any act enumerated in section 339.010 "except ministerial acts defined in section 339.710," so the whole question is whether the act appears on that list. Section 339.710(19) names, among others, "(c) Attending an open house and responding to questions about the property from a consumer," "(d) Setting an appointment to view property," and "(h) Showing a customer through a property being sold by an owner on his or her own behalf." All three of those are therefore carved out. Showing a property listed with another brokerage appears nowhere in the list — paragraph (h) is confined to the for-sale-by-owner situation — so it is an enumerated act that triggers the written agreement. The statute calls ministerial acts those that are "informative in nature and do not rise to the level which requires the creation of a brokerage relationship."

Section 339.780.3 was amended effective August 28, 2025. For a designated broker acting as a single agent for a buyer or tenant, what does the current subsection require?

• a.The written agency agreement must be entered into before engaging in any enumerated act✓
• b.The written agency agreement must be entered into before the first written offer is delivered
• c.The written agency agreement must be entered into before or while engaging in an enumerated act
• d.The written agency agreement must be entered into before the buyer's first property viewing

From 2005 until 2025 the subsection opened "Before or while engaging in any acts enumerated in section 339.010," which let the paperwork catch up to the activity. L. 2025 H.B. 595 & 343 merged with H.B. 596 deleted two words, and since August 28, 2025 the subsection reads "Before engaging in any acts enumerated in section 339.010, except ministerial acts defined in section 339.710, a designated broker acting as a single agent for a buyer or tenant shall enter into a written agency agreement with the buyer or tenant." The agreement must now precede the act rather than accompany it. The offer-delivery and first-viewing answers substitute events the subsection never names; the trigger is any enumerated act that is not ministerial, which can arrive well before either of them.

Under section 339.780.3, what must a Missouri single-agency agreement with a buyer or tenant contain?

• a.The terms of compensation and a statement of the property types the agreement covers
• b.The licensee's duties and responsibilities specified in section 339.740 and a definite expiration date
• c.The licensee's duties and responsibilities specified in section 339.740 and the terms of compensation✓
• d.The terms of compensation and the client's written consent to any future dual agency

The subsection names exactly two contents: "The agreement shall include a licensee's duties and responsibilities specified in section 339.740 and the terms of compensation." Missouri is unusual here in what it leaves out. Most states force a definite expiration date into a buyer agreement; section 339.780.3 imposes none, so an expiration date is a matter for the parties rather than a statutory content requirement. Nor does the subsection limit itself by property type — it covers a buyer or a tenant and any property — so a schedule of covered property types is not required. Consent to dual agency is governed separately by section 339.750.1, under which a licensee may act as a dual agent "only with the consent of all parties to the transaction"; it is not a required term of the single-agency agreement.

A Missouri dual agent learns from the seller that the seller would accept less than the asking price. What does section 339.750 permit the dual agent to do with that information?

• a.Disclose it to the buyer, because a dual agent owes both clients material information
• b.Withhold it, because it may not be disclosed without the consent of the client it concerns✓
• c.Disclose it to the buyer, because price information stops being confidential at dual agency
• d.Withhold it, unless the buyer specifically asks the dual agent about the seller's position

Section 339.750.4 lists five items a dual agent "shall not disclose ... without the consent of the client to whom the information pertains," and the second is "That a seller or landlord is willing to accept less than the asking price or lease rate for the property." Consent, not the buyer's curiosity, is what unlocks it, so conditioning the answer on the buyer asking gets the test wrong. The first distractor states the general rule in subsection 3 — a dual agent may pass along material information gained from one client — but subsection 3 opens "Except as provided in subsections 4 and 5," and this is precisely the exception. The idea that price information loses protection on entering dual agency inverts the statute: dual agency is why the list exists.