Illinois License Act study guide
Interference with contracts or agency relationships
A seller can ask another brokerage about next month without ending this month's listing. That conversation changes character if the second licensee starts negotiating today's offer or pressures the seller to break the current agreement. Read the agreement status, who initiated contact, the proposed conduct and the required authorization separately.
Last reviewed:
The short answer
Illinois has separate grounds for inducing a party to break a sale, lease or brokerage agreement to substitute a third-party agreement, and for directly negotiating a sale, exchange or lease with someone the licensee knows is exclusively represented unless that person's broker specifically authorizes it. Rule 1450.770 separately permits a possible future brokerage discussion when the consumer initiates contact, or through a licensee-initiated route requiring all four written-request, 10-day, 14-day and shared-source conditions. Permission to discuss future services does not end the current agreement.
Reviewed for October 2026 against Section 20-20(a)(32)-(33) and the brokerage rule amended July 13, 2026. PSI lists interference at Illinois II.F within the broader License Act category. This page has no separately published question quota, and the booklet's category percentage and displayed question column should not be converted into a claimed 16 questions on this topic. These are original teaching scenarios, not recalled PSI items or a validated readiness test.
Check the agreement, the conversation and the exception
- Identify the agreement and its current status. A sale contract, lease and brokerage agreement can all matter under the inducement ground. For direct negotiation under subsection (33), identify known exclusive representation. A listing's online status is not conclusive proof that the agreement expired or was released.
- Ask who initiated contact. Rule 1450.770(b)(3)(A) allows the exclusively represented consumer to initiate a possible future brokerage discussion. Do not reclassify a licensee's targeted outreach as consumer-initiated merely because the consumer answers it.
- Describe what is being proposed. Future service discussion is different from negotiating a current transaction or persuading someone to breach for a replacement agreement. The future-discussion rule authorizes discussion; it does not automatically authorize signing a conflicting agreement or beginning representation now.
- For licensee-initiated future discussions, check every condition in Rule 1450.770(b)(3)(B): a written mailed or emailed expiration-date request to the sponsoring broker holding the exclusive agreement; no written mailed or emailed response within ten calendar days; no receipt of the requested information from that broker or sponsoring broker within fourteen calendar days; and inability to obtain it from another shared broker-information source.
- For direct negotiation of a sale, exchange or lease with a person known to be exclusively represented, obtain the specific authorization required from that broker or use the authorized broker channel. The represented consumer's wish to bypass the broker is not the statutory exception.
- Preserve the relevant facts and keep other duties in view. Record requests, responses, information sources, initiator, proposed scope and specific authorization. Agreement termination, surviving duties, compensation, advertising and lawful outreach require their own analysis; the narrow contact rule is not permission to disregard them.
| Issue | Controlling test | What does not solve it |
|---|---|---|
| Inducing breach: Section 20-20(a)(32) | Inducing a party to break a sale, lease or brokerage agreement for substitution with a third-party agreement | Calling it competition, claiming the old fee is too high or assuming only exclusive agreements matter |
| Direct negotiation: Section 20-20(a)(33) | Sale, exchange or lease negotiation directly with a person known to be exclusively represented; specific authorization from that broker is the exception | The represented consumer privately asks to bypass the broker |
| Future discussion: Rule 1450.770(b)(3)(A) | Exclusively represented consumer initiates the contact | The licensee initiated, then the consumer replied |
| Licensee-initiated future discussion: (B)(i) | Written mailed or emailed request to the current sponsoring broker for the expiration date | An unrecorded oral request to a neighbor |
| Same route: (B)(ii) | No written mailed or emailed response within ten calendar days | Treating ten days alone as permission or termination |
| Same route: (B)(iii) | Requested information not received from the broker or sponsoring broker within fourteen calendar days | Ignoring information actually received within that period |
| Same route: (B)(iv) | Requested information cannot be obtained from another shared broker-information source | Refusing to check an available shared source |
| After genuine expiration or lawful termination | Verify status, any replacement or extension, and remaining obligations | Assuming every commission, accounting, confidentiality or protection-period issue vanished |
The distinctions that matter
| Distinction | How it works | What to notice |
|---|---|---|
| Inducement and direct negotiation | Subsection (32) addresses a party being induced to break a sale, lease or brokerage agreement for substitution with a third-party agreement. Subsection (33) addresses direct transaction negotiation with knowledge of exclusive representation, subject to broker authorization. | Do not add an exclusivity requirement to the text of (32), or require proof of a replacement contract to recognize the different (33) problem. |
| Future services and a current transaction | Explaining a possible later marketing plan differs from bargaining over the active sale's price, concessions or lease terms. | Even a consumer-initiated call can cross the line when the conduct changes. The call's origin does not authorize every subject discussed afterward. |
| Ten days and fourteen days | The rule separately addresses a written response within ten calendar days and receipt of the requested information within fourteen calendar days. The shared-source condition is additional. | The periods are cumulative conditions, not alternatives and not ten plus fourteen successive waiting days. None of them terminates the old agreement. |
| An agreement end date and a protection period | Current exclusivity and a later commission protection provision are different questions. Rule 1450.770(n) has a specific required protection-period term for residential properties of four units or fewer. | For those agreements, the rule requires no commission or fee under the agreement during the protection period if a valid written brokerage agreement is entered with another sponsoring broker. Do not generalize that provision to every commercial contract or use it to justify inducing breach before expiration. |
| A termination right and a promise that any agreement can be cancelled | Current Section 10-25 requires definite automatic expiration and, if longer than one year, an annual client termination right on no more than thirty days' prior written notice. | This is not a universal right to cancel every agreement at any time on thirty days' notice. A specific release, date, extension or other contractual right requires the actual facts. |
| Payment, agency and post-engagement duties | Payment alone does not determine agency under Section 15-40. Subject to its written-agreement qualification, Section 15-30 preserves accounting and confidentiality obligations after the engagement. | An agreement ending does not itself establish that every commission or other obligation ended. Do not use a former relationship as permission to misuse protected information. |
Work through the facts
The seller asks about next month
An exclusively listed seller independently calls another licensee to ask about services after the listing expires next month. The licensee explains future services without proposing early termination, a current conflicting agreement or direct negotiation of the active sale.
- The consumer initiated contact.
- The subject is a possible future brokerage agreement under Rule 1450.770(b)(3)(A).
- No supplied fact turns the discussion into inducement or current transaction negotiation.
Answer: The stated future-service discussion fits this route. The old agreement continues according to its terms; the call itself ends nothing.
Ten days have passed, but the route is incomplete
A licensee emails the correct sponsoring broker for the expiration date. Ten calendar days pass without a written response. The fourteen-day information condition has not yet been satisfied and shared broker sources have not been checked.
- The written request and ten-day facts address only part of (B).
- The fourteen-day information and shared-source conditions are also required.
- The nonresponse does not terminate the current exclusive agreement.
Answer: Do not initiate the future discussion through this incomplete route. Ten days alone is not a safe harbor.
Information arrives during the fourteen-day period
The proper written request receives no written response within ten calendar days, but the requested expiration information is actually received from the holding broker on the twelfth calendar day. The consumer has not initiated contact.
- The hypothetical supplies satisfaction of the ten-day nonresponse condition.
- Receipt within fourteen days defeats the separate information-not-received condition.
- The rule does not permit discarding timely information merely because the first interval elapsed.
Answer: The licensee-initiated nonresponse route is not established by these facts. Knowing the date is not a license to ignore the rule or interfere with the existing agreement.
The information is available elsewhere
A proper written request receives no response or expiration information through the fully elapsed ten- and fourteen-day periods. The requesting licensee can obtain the expiration date from another shared broker-information source.
- The two elapsed periods do not settle all conditions.
- Condition (B)(iv) requires inability to obtain the requested information from another shared source.
- The source is available in this scenario.
Answer: The shared-source condition is not satisfied. Do not label this a completed exception merely by counting days.
Every stated condition is satisfied
The exercise states that a correct mailed or emailed expiration-date request was made; the ten- and fourteen-calendar-day periods have fully elapsed without the specified response or information; and the requested information cannot be obtained from another shared broker-information source. No other outreach restriction is at issue in the exercise.
- All four conditions of the licensee-initiated route are expressly supplied.
- The permitted subject is a possible future brokerage agreement.
- The existing agreement remains in place unless it independently lawfully ends.
Answer: The narrow future-discussion route is available on these stipulated facts. It does not authorize present transaction negotiation, breach inducement or a conflicting immediate engagement.
The seller requests a private price negotiation
A buyer's agent knows a seller is exclusively represented. The seller asks the buyer's agent to bargain over today's price directly because the seller is unhappy with the listing broker. That broker has not authorized direct negotiation.
- The proposed conduct is current sale negotiation.
- The agent knows of the seller's exclusive brokerage agreement.
- The consumer's invitation is not specific authorization from the holding broker.
Answer: Use the authorized broker channel rather than bargaining directly on these facts. An inbound call does not convert present transaction negotiation into permitted future-service discussion.
Specific permission has a scope
The exclusive listing broker specifically authorizes a buyer's agent to discuss the buyer's proposed inspection-credit amount directly with the represented seller. No authority is given to replace the listing or negotiate the seller's brokerage fee.
- Subsection (33) includes the broker-authorization exception.
- The permission is specific to the inspection-credit discussion.
- It does not authorize unrelated conduct or breach inducement.
Answer: The stated authorized negotiation fits the exception within its scope. Preserve clear evidence of what was authorized; do not invent a universal statutory written-authorization requirement from this recommended documentation practice.
A false cancellation promise
A competing licensee falsely tells a landlord that the existing brokerage agreement is invalid and urges the landlord to break it now to sign a substitute agreement with the competing brokerage. The exercise states that the existing agreement is valid.
- The conduct targets breaking the existing agreement.
- The stated purpose is substitution with a third-party agreement.
- The inducement ground concerns sale, lease and brokerage agreements; it does not depend on calling every agreement exclusive.
Answer: The facts fit the Section 20-20(a)(32) concern and can raise separate false-statement issues. The exercise is not a legal ruling that a real landlord's contract is invalid or a calculation of private damages.
Mistakes to avoid
- Every contact with a represented consumer is forbidden. Classify the conduct. The rule permits specific future-discussion routes; it does not permit every topic merely because contact occurred.
- The consumer called me, so I can negotiate their current deal directly. The known-exclusive direct-negotiation rule requires specific authorization from that broker, even if the consumer invited the bypass.
- Ten days with no reply ends the agreement. It ends nothing. The licensee-initiated future-discussion route also requires the fourteen-day and shared-source conditions.
- Ten plus fourteen means I must always wait twenty-four days. They are separate conditions in one route, not consecutive extensions to add together. Use the rule's actual response and information facts.
- Nonexclusive means any inducement is permitted. Subsection (32) does not state an exclusivity limitation for its inducement-to-break-and-substitute ground. Do not confuse it with (33).
- An expired website label establishes a lawful new engagement. Verify the actual agreement, extensions, replacement agreements and any independently surviving obligations.
- Thirty days' notice cancels every brokerage agreement whenever the client wants. The statutory annual right applies to agreements longer than one year; definite expiration and any other termination terms require separate analysis.
- A public advertisement lets me republish another broker's listing freely. Advertising particular exclusively listed property brings permission and broker-identification requirements under Rule 1450.715. A generic competition example is not blanket advertising approval.
Check your understanding
These are original teaching questions, not recalled or predicted PSI questions. Answer first, then explain why the other choices fail.
1. An exclusively represented seller independently calls another licensee to ask only about possible services after expiration. What does Rule 1450.770(b)(3)(A) permit?
- A possible future brokerage discussion within the stated scope
- Immediate cancellation of the old agreement
- Unrestricted negotiation of today's sale
- An automatic right to use confidential information
Show answer and explanation
Answer: A. A possible future brokerage discussion within the stated scope
The consumer-initiated future-discussion route applies. It does not end the old agreement, authorize breach or remove the separate current-negotiation restriction.
2. A licensee initiates a targeted message and the represented consumer replies. Which conclusion is sound?
- The current agreement automatically expires
- The reply automatically makes the original contact consumer-initiated
- The licensee initiated; a consumer reply alone does not establish the consumer-initiated route
- No contact rule can apply to messages
Show answer and explanation
Answer: C. The licensee initiated; a consumer reply alone does not establish the consumer-initiated route
Identify who initiated rather than relabeling the exchange after a reply. The separate licensee-initiated route and its conditions must be considered, along with the actual conduct.
3. A correct written expiration request receives no written response within ten calendar days. Nothing else is established. What follows?
- The agreement ended on day ten
- The requester must pay the other broker's fee
- The other required conditions must still be checked
- The requester may negotiate every current transaction
Show answer and explanation
Answer: C. The other required conditions must still be checked
Ten-day nonresponse is only (B)(ii). The written request, no requested information within fourteen calendar days and inability to obtain it from another shared broker-information source must all be satisfied for that route.
4. The proper request receives no written response during the first ten calendar days, but the requested expiration information arrives from the holding broker on day twelve. Has the no-information-within-fourteen-days condition been met?
- No, the requested information arrived within fourteen calendar days
- Yes, because day ten passed
- Yes, because only postal replies count
- Yes, if the requester dislikes the expiration date
Show answer and explanation
Answer: A. No, the requested information arrived within fourteen calendar days
The information receipt defeats (B)(iii) on these stated facts. The conditions are cumulative; satisfying the ten-day condition does not excuse ignoring information received within the fourteen-day period.
5. The request and elapsed-period facts are satisfied, but the requested expiration date is obtainable from a shared broker-information source. Which answer is correct?
- All four conditions are met
- The old agreement is void
- Shared information never matters
- The shared-source unavailability condition is not satisfied
Show answer and explanation
Answer: D. The shared-source unavailability condition is not satisfied
Condition (B)(iv) expressly requires that the requested information cannot be obtained from another shared broker-information source. The question supplies the opposite fact.
6. All four Rule 1450.770(b)(3)(B) conditions are expressly satisfied. What is the narrow permitted subject?
- A current sale negotiated directly without the holding broker's authorization
- A possible future brokerage agreement
- Advice to breach the present contract
- A replacement agreement that begins immediately in conflict with the current one
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B. A possible future brokerage agreement
The rule authorizes discussion of a possible future agreement. It does not terminate present exclusivity or override the separate statutory grounds for inducement and unauthorized direct negotiation.
7. A licensee knows a seller has an exclusive brokerage agreement. Who supplies the specific authorization exception for direct transaction negotiation under Section 20-20(a)(33)?
- Only the county recorder
- Any consumer who wants to avoid their broker
- Any buyer's neighbor
- The broker holding that exclusive agreement
Show answer and explanation
Answer: D. The broker holding that exclusive agreement
Subsection (33) says specifically authorized by that broker. The represented consumer's instruction to bypass the broker does not itself satisfy this exception.
8. A seller independently calls the buyer's agent and asks to negotiate today's price directly. The agent knows of the exclusive listing and has no listing-broker authorization. Which answer fits?
- Do not negotiate directly; the current-transaction restriction remains
- Only the seller's dissatisfaction matters
- The inbound call permits every subject
- The call automatically becomes a future-service discussion
Show answer and explanation
Answer: A. Do not negotiate directly; the current-transaction restriction remains
An inbound contact does not transform negotiation of a current sale into a future brokerage discussion. Knowledge of exclusivity and absence of the holding broker's specific authorization are the decisive facts.
9. A licensee induces a party to break an existing nonexclusive brokerage agreement so that a substitute agreement with a third party can replace it. Is lack of exclusivity a complete defense under subsection (32)'s text?
- Yes, only exclusive contracts matter anywhere
- No, the inducement ground does not state that exclusivity limitation
- Yes, if the substitute fee is lower
- Yes, because brokerage agreements are excluded
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B. No, the inducement ground does not state that exclusivity limitation
Subsection (32) concerns inducing a party to break a sale, lease or brokerage agreement for substitution with a third-party agreement. Subsection (33) is the different ground that expressly refers to known exclusive representation.
10. The holding broker specifically permits discussion of an inspection credit directly with the seller. What is the sound approach?
- Remain within the specifically authorized negotiation and preserve its scope
- Tell the seller all protected client information
- Assume every current agreement is cancelled
- Treat it as permission to replace the listing too
Show answer and explanation
Answer: A. Remain within the specifically authorized negotiation and preserve its scope
The statutory exception can apply to the specifically authorized negotiation. It does not authorize unrelated replacement, breach inducement or confidentiality violations. Clear documentation is prudent; subsection (33) does not itself state a universal writing requirement for this authorization.
11. An online listing is marked expired, but the consumer says the agreement was extended yesterday. What should the competing licensee do?
- Assume the consumer is unrepresented
- Verify current agreement status rather than relying solely on the online label
- Negotiate the current deal directly without checking
- Ignore the extension because a website is always conclusive
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B. Verify current agreement status rather than relying solely on the online label
The relevant fact is the current agreement, not merely an online marketing label. Verify extensions and status and apply the contact and negotiation rules to the actual facts.
12. A brokerage agreement lasts longer than one year. Which statement describes current Section 10-25?
- Definite automatic expiration and an annual termination right on no more than thirty days' prior written notice are required
- Every agreement ends after ten days without a broker response
- Definite expiration is unnecessary if there is any cancellation clause
- Every client can cancel at any time for any reason on exactly thirty days' notice
Show answer and explanation
Answer: A. Definite automatic expiration and an annual termination right on no more than thirty days' prior written notice are required
The statute requires definite automatic expiration and adds the annual client right for a term longer than one year. It is not a universal any-time termination rule or a replacement for the separate contact conditions.
13. A listing brokerage pays an agreed cooperating amount to the buyer's brokerage. What does that fact alone establish about agency?
- The buyer has no broker
- Payment alone does not determine agency
- The transaction automatically becomes dual agency
- The buyer's broker must represent the seller
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B. Payment alone does not determine agency
Section 15-40 separates payment from the agency relationship. The agreements, statutory relationships and conduct require their own analysis; compensation is not an authorization to bypass exclusive representation.
14. A residential property of four units or fewer has a brokerage agreement with a protection period. During that period, the consumer enters a valid written brokerage agreement with another sponsoring broker. What required term does Rule 1450.770(n) address?
- The old agreement could never have earned any fee on any other facts
- No commission or fee is due under the stated agreement during that protection period under the specified condition
- The licensee may induce breach before expiration
- Every commercial contract is also automatically cancelled
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B. No commission or fee is due under the stated agreement during that protection period under the specified condition
The rule requires this protection-period term for the specified residential scope and valid written other-sponsoring-broker agreement. It is not a universal discharge of every fee claim or permission to interfere with the current agreement before it ends.
Common questions
What counts as interference for the Illinois broker exam?
Separate the two statutory grounds. Section 20-20(a)(32) concerns inducing a party to break a sale, lease or brokerage agreement to substitute a third-party agreement. Subsection (33) concerns direct sale, exchange or lease negotiation with knowledge of another broker's exclusive representation, unless that broker specifically authorizes it. A fact pattern can raise one or both.
Can a represented consumer call another brokerage?
Rule 1450.770(b)(3)(A) allows the consumer to initiate a possible future brokerage discussion. Keep the actual subject future-oriented. The consumer's call does not end the current agreement or authorize current negotiation, breach inducement or immediate conflicting representation.
Can the second licensee initiate a future discussion?
For the covered exclusive relationships, (B) requires all four conditions: a written mailed or emailed expiration request to the holding sponsoring broker; no written mailed or emailed response within ten calendar days; no receipt of the requested information from that broker or sponsoring broker within fourteen calendar days; and inability to obtain the information from another shared broker-information source. The permitted subject remains a possible future agreement.
Are the ten-day and fourteen-day tests alternatives?
No. They address different facts within the same cumulative route. A qualifying request and ten-day nonresponse do not excuse information actually received within fourteen days or information available through another shared source. They are not ten plus fourteen successive extensions, and no interval automatically terminates the agreement. The scenarios use fully elapsed periods or explicitly stated receipt times. They do not establish the service date, counting convention or holiday treatment for a disputed real notice.
Does a consumer's permission allow bypassing their broker?
Not by itself for subsection (33). The exception requires specific authorization from the broker holding the exclusive agreement. A consumer's dissatisfaction, private invitation or preference to save a fee does not supply that authorization.
Must the broker authorization always be written?
Subsection (33) requires specific authorization and does not itself prescribe a universal written form for it. Preserve clear evidence of who authorized what and the scope. Other applicable agreements, brokerage policies or rules may add requirements. Do not turn a prudent documentation practice into a statutory quotation.
Does a nonexclusive agreement eliminate interference risk?
No. The direct-negotiation ground expressly concerns known exclusive representation, but the separate inducement-to-break-and-substitute ground does not use that limitation. Absence of one element in one ground is not blanket permission under all contract, conduct and advertising rules.
Can a new agreement be accepted after expiration?
Verify that the prior engagement actually expired or lawfully ended and check extensions, replacement agreements and other obligations. Current exclusivity, an earned fee, a protection provision and surviving duties are different questions. The future-discussion rule alone does not settle a private fee dispute or authorize an immediate conflicting agreement.
What about a protection period?
Rule 1450.770(n) requires a specific term for a brokerage agreement involving residential property of four units or fewer that has a protection period: no commission or fee is due under that agreement during the protection period if a valid written brokerage agreement is entered into with another sponsoring broker. Apply the actual scope and facts. This is not a general rule for every commercial agreement or permission to induce breach before termination.
Does thirty days' notice always let the client leave?
No. Current Section 10-25 requires definite automatic expiration and, for a term longer than one year, an annual client termination right on no more than thirty days' prior written notice. A particular release, earlier termination right, notice, extension or fee consequence needs its own analysis. Do not promise that every agreement can be cancelled immediately or without consequence.
Is general advertising always unlawful interference?
A truthful general brokerage advertisement does not by itself establish the stated inducement or direct-negotiation facts. That is not blanket approval of a campaign. Targeted future-agreement discussions still require their rule analysis, and advertising a particular property exclusively listed by another sponsoring broker requires permission and broker identification under Rule 1450.715. Other applicable outreach and advertising restrictions remain.
Does a licensing violation automatically decide a damages lawsuit?
This page explains License Act disciplinary grounds and the specified administrative contact rule. It does not establish every element, defense, causation issue or remedy of a separate private claim. Do not turn an exam classification into a promise of a particular judgment or commission recovery.
What is a useful way to review these questions?
Name the agreement, current status, initiator, proposed conduct, knowledge and authorization. For the licensee-initiated route, mark each of the four conditions separately. Explain the missing condition in the nearest wrong choice. A practice percentage alone is not a validated measure of readiness.
Keep practising
Your next practice step
Put Illinois agency into practice
Identify the client, designation, consent and disclosure timing before choosing an answer.
These web resources are free. The app has a separate free starter tier and optional paid full access.
Official sources and scope
The July 13, 2026 rule supplies the four-part future-discussion route; the statute separately supplies the inducement and direct-negotiation grounds. Current Section 10-25 governs expiration and the additional annual right, even where a rule summary uses different shorthand. The examples stipulate elapsed periods rather than deciding a disputed service date or calculating a private deadline. A completed contact pathway is not a ruling on contract validity, fees, outreach legality or civil damages.
- 225 ILCS 454/20-20(a)(32)-(33): inducement and direct negotiation
- 68 Ill. Adm. Code 1450.770: current brokerage contact and agreement rule
- 68 Ill. Adm. Code 1450.715(a)(1): another broker's exclusive property advertising
- 225 ILCS 454/1-10: brokerage, exclusive-agreement, client and customer definitions
- 225 ILCS 454/10-25: definite expiration and additional annual termination right
- 225 ILCS 454/15-30: duties after the engagement
- 68 Ill. Adm. Code 1450.755(a)(3): transaction records, including brokerage agreements
- 225 ILCS 454/15-40, current rule that compensation does not determine agency
- PSI June 24, 2026: Illinois II.A and IV.A.1-4 agency and disclosures
This is exam preparation, not advice for a specific transaction. State law and the applicable facts control. Our editorial and corrections process explains how to report an issue.