BANGOR, Maine — Dueling lawsuits have been filed in state and federal court that pit a well-known local Realtor against a Veazie couple for whom she marketed a house and their attorney.

Mark and Brenda Michaud sued Tricia Quirk and Dawson Inc. in Penobscot County Superior Court alleging that Quirk told a couple ready to ink a sales agreement that she could build them a house for the $325,000 they had offered for the Michauds’ home.

Quirk turned around and sued the couple, their lawyer, A.J. Greif, and his firm, Gilbert and Greif, in federal court, alleging the Michauds illegally recorded her conversation with the potential buyers. Quirk’s attorney, John Lucy of Bangor, also filed a motion to stay the state action, which would keep the lawsuit in state court from going forward until the federal suit has been resolved.

Lucy declined Friday to discuss the lawsuits.

“I don’t have any further comment beyond the complaint at this time,” the attorney said in an email.

Greif said the recording referred to in the federal lawsuit was captured with the Michauds’ “nanny cam,” a hidden camera system marketed to parents who want to keep an eye on their children and their caregivers while the parents are at work or away from home for other reasons.

“I wish, as do the Michauds, that Ms. Quirk had worked as hard to sell their home as she has to avoid being deposed,” Greif said Friday in a telephone interview. “Since Oct. 14, 2011, we’ve been hoping that she would show up at our office and tell us under oath her side of the story.

“Instead, she’s filed a frivolous federal lawsuit, apparently naming me, over a nanny tape I’ve never listened to,” he continued. “How she could have any expectation of privacy in someone else’s home and call a nanny tape a wiretap is beyond me.”

The lawsuit Greif filed on July 11 in Penobscot County Superior Court alleged that Quirk breached her duty to represent the Michauds in the sale of their home. It also alleged that Quirk violated the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act.

The Michauds’ home had been on the market with an asking price of $349,000 for more than a year when in November 2009 a couple visited the Veazie house with Quirk in preparation for making a final offer of $325,000, according to the complaint.

“Without any inquiry by the [couple] defendant Quirk said …: ‘For the same money I can build you a very similar house,’” the complaint said. “Because of the statements and later actions by defendant Quirk, the [couple] elected to have defendant Quirk build a home for them rather than have her communicate an offer of $325,000 to the [Michauds].”

The Michauds are seeking a minimum of $150,000 in damages from Quirk, the difference between the $175,000 they originally paid for the home and the $325,000 they would have received from the couple.

The couple who allegedly planned to purchase the home were not named as defendants in the complaint.

Lucy sued the Michauds, Greif and his firm in federal court in Bangor on Dec. 1, 2011. That complaint alleged the Michauds “secretly and unlawfully intercepted numerous private oral communications of Quirk and others through the use of a hidden electronic recording device.”

“To intercept the oral communications without the knowledge or consent of Quirk or others,” the complaint said, “the Michauds purchased a small electronic recording device which they secretly hid, out of sight on a fireplace mantel or under a table, where it would not be discovered by those present during open houses and showing of their property when the Michauds were not present.”

Lucy alleged that by recording people in their home without their permission, the Michauds violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986. The law, also referred to as the wiretap act, protects wire, oral and electronic communications while they are being made, are in transit, and when they are stored on computers, according to the U.S. Department of Justice website. A section of the law “prohibits the intentional, actual or attempted interception, use, disclosure, or ‘procure[ment] [of] any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, oral, or electronic communication,’” the website states.

In addition to the federal lawsuit, Lucy filed a motion in Penobscot County Superior Court seeking to stay that action until the federal lawsuit has been settled. Greif’s colleague, Julie Farr, has filed a motion opposing the stay and urged that the Michauds’ lawsuit should go forward.

An answer to the federal lawsuit is not expected to be filed until after the first of the year. It most likely would include a motion to dismiss.

Greif said Friday that he was not aware of any case law in the United States that prohibited the use of nanny cams by parents in their homes.

“We have seen countless parents discover through a nanny cam that their nanny has spoken inappropriately to their children,” he said. “What the Michauds have done is perfectly legal.”

The Michauds’ home still is on the market, according to Greif.

40 replies on “Dueling lawsuits pit real estate agent against Veazie couple, their lawyer”

  1. It is my opinion that Tricia Quirk is an unethical real estate agent.  Just this past summer, I saw an advertisement for a piece of land in Brewer.  Ms. Quirk was the listing agent.  The picture of the land clearly showed the Penobscot River (unobstructed view).  It was a beautiful plot of land.  When I went over to look at the land, the photo was of land that belonged to a condominium association somewhat near the land for sale.  The land for sale looked nothing like the picture.  And unless you built a three story house, you probably wouldn’t even see the river at all.  Also, the acreage was listed in different amounts in two different advertisements.  When I confronted Ms. Quirk about this, she acknowledged it was the lower acreage and that she had intended on changing it in the ad.  Several weeks later, I saw the ad with the higher acreage.

  3. ”
    Your agency point is interesting.  If she was representing both sellers and buyer – ” 

    Indeed it is. 
    And if she represents both, as is the nature of all multi-list services, she has an ethical obligation to inform the the buyers that she represents  the sellers interests equally and then do so. 

    Every divorcee is taught that in her real estate  101 rel estate salesperson  prep course
    … so is she really  broker too ? 

    If indeed she is  broker, and a “Realitor” too, that mean she  doubly responsible… no three times … to know and up hold the ethics of the trade . 

    The buyers  went to her to find  a finished house to buy, not to build one… with a whole other set of risks. 

  5. ”
    Not unless she disclosed to both the buyer and the seller that she was also representing herself as the builder as well. ” 

    As if  the multi list agreement permit that. 

  6. Sounds like a great big swamp to me. 

    Just the free market system at work. Watch out for snakes…. er… I mean buyer AND SELLER beware.

  8. Hey all you folks out there with your homes listed with Tricia….better be hunting for a new agent.  This won’t stand the light of day!

  9. If I were in  the market looking to spend that kind of money on a  home I would be very happy to have an agent like Ms. Quirk who at least gave me the opportunity to make a choice in housing.  As a client that is very beneficial…that is a lot of money and buying a home its important to get what you want..maybe building would better suit their needs.  I do not know the gal but it looks to me like she is a good agent.  

      1. Yes…I think so…been checking on her record and she sells MANY houses.  Also was thinking about the cost of this particular house..That is a lot of profit and  with this economy…maybe a bit of greed on both parts.  How long had the house been up for sale..does anyone know ?  

          1. So they might be getting desperate..and looking for a reason to sue …somebody ?  I see no reason for such legal jargon~

        3. 1 year, who knows how much longer it would have been on the market with Ms. Quirk , trying to deflect sales towards her own houses rather then the one she was contracted to sell..

    2. Mags62. If you list your house with Ms. Quirk no matter what price range and she has a house she can build potential clients for the same price range, do you think she is representing you as a client or is she showing you’re house and telling people she can build one to suit at the same price fair to you??  Mrs Quirk became an employee of the homeowners when a contract was signed…  after having said all that I believe you must have a personel relationship with Ms. Quirk.. Blinded

      1. I do not know Ms Quirk..but I certainly seen her listings in those real estate books all around town..the ones at restaurants ..etc…I have noticed she lists very high end properties. To answer your question..Since she does sell many properties..I would list with her….BUT…I would discuss with her about showing the place and then telling someone to build the same house.  If it was a different house made to the other clients specifications I would have no problem.  I know when I bought my house I looked at many till I found the right one..Had I had the time( which I didn’t) and an offer to build at the same price I would have jumped at the opportunity.

  11. Sounds like if Tricia Quirk lost her job over this, she could easily get a job selling cars at Bumper2Bumper. She’d fit right in!

  12. dawson  real estate to salesman, i would like to make an offer on that cadillac ,salesman i can build ya one cheaper than that ,salesmans boss, your fired ! bye bye tricia !

  15. For years off and on, I’ve heard remarks from people who joke that the Quirks think they own the City of Bangor.  If that’s true, I think Tricia just lost her corner lot.

  16. This is really a rather sad story, just another reason to be cynical about business in general. It’s all about the money. It does make you wonder how many times Quirk/Dawson have engaged in this reprehensible manner. What may be sadder still is the fact that this time next year they’ll still be doing business and we, the masses, will have forgotten all about it. 

  17. Just sayin’, but how would you know what user names appear “again and again”, unless you were also taking the same time reading the comments?  What’s different here?

  18. ERA Dawson should fire her. Would you do business with a company that has someone employed with these accusations?

  20. You absolutely CAN have an expectation of privacy (from a real and a legal standpoint) in someone else’s home.  If you visit a friend or relative and stay, do you not expect that your bedroom or bathroom time is private?  Of course you do.

  21. How many of the 131 “Likes” to this post represent other real estate agents?

    My next question is: Why do so many people – 131 and climbing -feel this way?

    On the pretense of showing a property for one client, Ms Quirk unveils a better deal and quickly wraps up a sale of a brand new house.  

    Representing a client wishing to sell their home should have been her top priority.   But naturally, if someone has 325 grand to toss around, it should be obvious to  others in similar situations  that there’s more in the sale of a new home, than there would be in the meager commission received for selling a second hand home.  The temptation must always be there with someone holding the cards.  Why sell for peanuts, when I can make a few grand?

    Not all real estate agents are also in the business of manufacturing and marketing homes.  And, apparently the state has no rules for separating builder from real estate agent.  Unfortunately it’s a bad deal for the people selling their home, when they learn that the real estate agent’s other business excluded the sale of their home. 

    The  Nanny Cam glaringly exposed an unethical transaction. A reputable agent should not have any concerns or worries about being captured on a Nanny Cam, or, anything else.

     Unfortunately, questionable practices by other real estate agents do not surface so readily.

    1. I think your right on. a 7% commission shouldnt be meager (22,750)to anyone. I am guessing after splitting  commission with another agent, and Jon Dawson getting his 4%, it just wasnt enough for ms. quirk. building her own house, would put a lot more money in her pocket and wouldnt have to share in the commission. I wouldnt think Jon Dawson could be to happy with her either.
      I am wondering why Tricia didnt try and keep this out of the courts and press, by settling with the Michauds for 150k? I would think her repuatation would be worth it. I think she is finished, i wouldnt use her.

  22. The Quirks spend millions in advertizing per year.. I was suprized BDN carried the Story.. I bow to you on this Story BDN!!!

  23. Why would anyone use her then or now???  Do you like things that shine?? I myself don’t deal with Vanities… I deal with Humans

  24. Wow!  The poor buyers that ended up signing with Tricia to build a house (if they go through with it) and even if they don’t….They are going to get dragged in and out and back in again, be deposed and go to court likely on their dime!  Would be fun to have her as your general contractor now, that will be a great relationship to build your home….If she was representing just the buyers it makes a bit more sense at least but the article made it sound like it was “her” listing and representing the sellers…very bad!

Comments are closed.