Illinois License Act topic guide

Interference with contracts or agency relationships

Illinois does not ban competition for future clients. It bans tactics that disregard present contracts and representation. Read each question for four facts: the agreement's status, the licensee's knowledge, who initiated contact, and whether the conversation concerns a future relationship or the current transaction.

Last updated: August 1, 2026

What does current Illinois authority require?

Short answer: An Illinois licensee may not induce a party to break a sale, lease, or brokerage agreement to substitute a new agreement with a third party. A licensee also may not negotiate directly with a person known to have an exclusive brokerage agreement with another broker unless that broker specifically authorizes it. A consumer may initiate a discussion about a possible future agreement. If the licensee initiates, current Rule 1450.770 requires the written expiration-date request and the cumulative 10-day, 14-day, and shared-source conditions.

Official section: Illinois II.F: Interference with Contracts or Agency Relationships
Broker weight: Part of 40% of the Illinois state portion
Expected scored items: The current PSI broker outline assigns 16 of 40 state items to this area

Interference with Contracts or Agency Relationships exam weight
Official section	Broker weight	Expected scored items
Illinois II.F: Interference with Contracts or Agency Relationships	Part of 40% of the Illinois state portion	The current PSI broker outline assigns 16 of 40 state items to this area

The state outline effective June 24, 2026 tests interference with contracts or agency relationships within the License Act area. This guide applies Section 20-20(a)(32) and (33), Article 15, and Rule 1450.770 as of August 1, 2026. Rule 1450.770 was amended effective July 13, 2026. Separate contract, telemarketing, privacy, antitrust, and professional-responsibility rules can add restrictions to a real solicitation.

Where is this tested on the Illinois outline?

Topic: Protected relationships
What to know: Sale contract, lease, brokerage agreement, listing agreement, buyer agreement, tenant agreement, exclusive relationship, non-exclusive relationship, sponsoring broker, designated agent, client, customer, current term, expiration, termination, renewal, and protection period
Best exam move: Identify the exact agreement and confirm whether it is current and exclusive before applying the strongest direct-contact restriction.

Topic: Inducing a breach
What to know: Induce, persuade, pressure, false statement, promise, cancellation, breach, sale agreement, lease agreement, brokerage agreement, substitute agreement, third party, purpose, early termination, fee avoidance, and disciplinary ground
Best exam move: Look for purposeful conduct aimed at breaking the present agreement so a replacement agreement can be installed.

Topic: Direct negotiation prohibition
What to know: Negotiation, sale, exchange, lease, known representation, exclusive brokerage agreement, another broker, bypass, price, concession, contingency, commission, direct message, seller, buyer, landlord, tenant, and specific authorization
Best exam move: When the licensee knows of exclusivity, route negotiation through the authorized broker unless that broker expressly permits direct negotiation.

Topic: Consumer-initiated future discussion
What to know: Consumer initiates, inbound call, email, direct message, possible future agreement, exclusively listed property, exclusive buyer agreement, exclusive tenant agreement, current obligation, expiration, no inducement, and no current negotiation
Best exam move: Allow the future-oriented discussion, then reject any step that turns it into advice to breach or negotiation of the current deal.

Topic: Licensee-initiated expiration request
What to know: Written request, mail, email, sponsoring broker, exclusive agreement, expiration date, written response, 10 calendar days, expiration information, 14 calendar days, shared broker information, cumulative conditions, and possible future agreement
Best exam move: Apply all four Rule 1450.770 conditions; the 10-day nonresponse alone is not permission.

Topic: Lawful competition and prospecting
What to know: General advertisement, geographic farming, service promotion, public audience, future availability, truthful comparison, market update, database, social post, cold outreach, knowledge, current exclusivity, do-not-call, opt-out, and noninterference
Best exam move: Distinguish broad lawful marketing from targeted conduct intended to displace a known current agreement.

Topic: Verification of agreement status
What to know: Automatic expiration, written termination, extension, renewal, shared broker source, MLS status, stale record, seller statement, buyer statement, sponsoring-broker confirmation, written request, calendar day, and documented file
Best exam move: Verify status from reliable current information rather than treating expired online marketing as proof that representation ended.

Topic: Communication through the other broker
What to know: Offer presentation, counteroffer, showing coordination, access, inspection, notice, authorized channel, listing broker, buyer broker, designated agent, cooperating broker, client direction, confidentiality, and specific permission
Best exam move: Use the represented party's broker for transaction negotiations and obtain specific authorization before bypassing that channel.

Topic: Agency status and compensation
What to know: Designated agency, written brokerage agreement, no agency, dual agency, cooperating compensation, payment source, promise of payment, Section 15-40, legal agent, client, customer, disclosure, and informed consent
Best exam move: Determine agency from the statutory and written relationship, not from who offers or pays compensation.

Topic: Ending and future representation
What to know: Lawful expiration, mutual termination, contractual termination right, annual right, 30 days written notice, release, client choice, attorney advice, future effective date, new written agreement, protection period, accounting, and confidentiality
Best exam move: A new relationship may begin after the old one lawfully ends, but the second licensee should not engineer the ending through breach advice.

Topic: Supervision and records
What to know: Sponsoring broker, designated managing broker, company policy, training, solicitation campaign, written request, email record, agreement status, authorization, complaint, discipline, false promise, unprofessional conduct, and audit trail
Best exam move: Document the source, timing, authorization, and communication because interference cases often turn on knowledge and purpose.

Interference with Contracts or Agency Relationships complete outline
Topic	What to know	Best exam move
Protected relationships	Sale contract, lease, brokerage agreement, listing agreement, buyer agreement, tenant agreement, exclusive relationship, non-exclusive relationship, sponsoring broker, designated agent, client, customer, current term, expiration, termination, renewal, and protection period	Identify the exact agreement and confirm whether it is current and exclusive before applying the strongest direct-contact restriction.
Inducing a breach	Induce, persuade, pressure, false statement, promise, cancellation, breach, sale agreement, lease agreement, brokerage agreement, substitute agreement, third party, purpose, early termination, fee avoidance, and disciplinary ground	Look for purposeful conduct aimed at breaking the present agreement so a replacement agreement can be installed.
Direct negotiation prohibition	Negotiation, sale, exchange, lease, known representation, exclusive brokerage agreement, another broker, bypass, price, concession, contingency, commission, direct message, seller, buyer, landlord, tenant, and specific authorization	When the licensee knows of exclusivity, route negotiation through the authorized broker unless that broker expressly permits direct negotiation.
Consumer-initiated future discussion	Consumer initiates, inbound call, email, direct message, possible future agreement, exclusively listed property, exclusive buyer agreement, exclusive tenant agreement, current obligation, expiration, no inducement, and no current negotiation	Allow the future-oriented discussion, then reject any step that turns it into advice to breach or negotiation of the current deal.
Licensee-initiated expiration request	Written request, mail, email, sponsoring broker, exclusive agreement, expiration date, written response, 10 calendar days, expiration information, 14 calendar days, shared broker information, cumulative conditions, and possible future agreement	Apply all four Rule 1450.770 conditions; the 10-day nonresponse alone is not permission.
Lawful competition and prospecting	General advertisement, geographic farming, service promotion, public audience, future availability, truthful comparison, market update, database, social post, cold outreach, knowledge, current exclusivity, do-not-call, opt-out, and noninterference	Distinguish broad lawful marketing from targeted conduct intended to displace a known current agreement.
Verification of agreement status	Automatic expiration, written termination, extension, renewal, shared broker source, MLS status, stale record, seller statement, buyer statement, sponsoring-broker confirmation, written request, calendar day, and documented file	Verify status from reliable current information rather than treating expired online marketing as proof that representation ended.
Communication through the other broker	Offer presentation, counteroffer, showing coordination, access, inspection, notice, authorized channel, listing broker, buyer broker, designated agent, cooperating broker, client direction, confidentiality, and specific permission	Use the represented party's broker for transaction negotiations and obtain specific authorization before bypassing that channel.
Agency status and compensation	Designated agency, written brokerage agreement, no agency, dual agency, cooperating compensation, payment source, promise of payment, Section 15-40, legal agent, client, customer, disclosure, and informed consent	Determine agency from the statutory and written relationship, not from who offers or pays compensation.
Ending and future representation	Lawful expiration, mutual termination, contractual termination right, annual right, 30 days written notice, release, client choice, attorney advice, future effective date, new written agreement, protection period, accounting, and confidentiality	A new relationship may begin after the old one lawfully ends, but the second licensee should not engineer the ending through breach advice.
Supervision and records	Sponsoring broker, designated managing broker, company policy, training, solicitation campaign, written request, email record, agreement status, authorization, complaint, discipline, false promise, unprofessional conduct, and audit trail	Document the source, timing, authorization, and communication because interference cases often turn on knowledge and purpose.

The CONTACT method for Illinois interference questions

Confirm the agreement. Identify its type, parties, sponsoring broker, exclusivity, start, expiration, termination, and any renewal.
Observe who initiated. Separate consumer-initiated future contact from licensee-initiated solicitation.
Name the proposed conduct. Classify general marketing, future-service discussion, current negotiation, contract advice, or replacement agreement.
Test knowledge and authority. Ask what the licensee knew and whether the exclusive broker specifically authorized direct negotiation.
Apply the current timeline. For licensee-initiated future discussion, require written mail or email plus the 10-day, 14-day, and shared-source conditions.
Check the purpose. Reject pressure or false promises intended to break the current agreement and substitute a third-party agreement.
Track the proof. Preserve the request, response, shared-source search, consumer contact, authorization, and agreement dates.

Situation: General public advertising
May the licensee proceed?: Generally yes
Key condition: No targeted breach or separate solicitation violation

Situation: Consumer initiates future-agreement discussion
May the licensee proceed?: Yes
Key condition: Keep discussion future-oriented

Situation: Licensee initiates with known exclusive consumer
May the licensee proceed?: Only through rule pathway
Key condition: Written request plus all timing and source conditions

Situation: No reply for 10 calendar days
May the licensee proceed?: Not enough alone
Key condition: Also apply 14-day and shared-source tests

Situation: Direct current negotiation with represented person
May the licensee proceed?: No
Key condition: Unless exclusive broker specifically authorizes

Situation: Pressure to cancel and sign replacement
May the licensee proceed?: No
Key condition: Prohibited inducement to breach

Situation: Agreement lawfully expired
May the licensee proceed?: Potentially yes
Key condition: Verify expiration and any new agreement

Situation: Cooperating broker pays compensation
May the licensee proceed?: Agency unchanged by pay alone
Key condition: Use written and statutory relationship

Illinois contact and interference map
Situation	May the licensee proceed?	Key condition
General public advertising	Generally yes	No targeted breach or separate solicitation violation
Consumer initiates future-agreement discussion	Yes	Keep discussion future-oriented
Licensee initiates with known exclusive consumer	Only through rule pathway	Written request plus all timing and source conditions
No reply for 10 calendar days	Not enough alone	Also apply 14-day and shared-source tests
Direct current negotiation with represented person	No	Unless exclusive broker specifically authorizes
Pressure to cancel and sign replacement	No	Prohibited inducement to breach
Agreement lawfully expired	Potentially yes	Verify expiration and any new agreement
Cooperating broker pays compensation	Agency unchanged by pay alone	Use written and statutory relationship

Which Illinois distinctions matter most?

Terms: Competition vs. interference
Difference: Competition seeks future business through lawful marketing. Interference uses conduct aimed at breaking or bypassing an existing protected agreement.
Question cue: Win the next opportunity versus displace the current contract improperly.

Terms: Consumer-initiated contact vs. licensee-initiated contact
Difference: A consumer under an exclusive agreement may initiate a future-agreement discussion. A licensee who initiates must satisfy the current written-request and timing route.
Question cue: Inbound future inquiry versus targeted outbound solicitation.

Terms: Future agreement discussion vs. present transaction negotiation
Difference: A future discussion concerns services after the current relationship ends. Present negotiation addresses price, terms, concessions, or performance in the active sale, exchange, or lease.
Question cue: Later representation versus today's deal terms.

Terms: Inducing breach vs. accepting a lawful future client
Difference: Inducement causes or pressures a party to break an agreement for substitution. Accepting a new agreement after lawful expiration or termination does not by itself establish inducement.
Question cue: Cause the break versus engage after the relationship ended independently.

Terms: Knowledge vs. assumption
Difference: The direct-negotiation ground expressly turns on the licensee knowing of the exclusive agreement. Deliberately ignoring clear notice does not create a safe practice strategy.
Question cue: Known exclusive status versus genuinely unknown status.

Terms: Authorization from represented person vs. authorization from broker
Difference: Section 20-20(a)(33) permits direct negotiation when specifically authorized by the broker holding the exclusive agreement, not merely when the represented consumer asks to bypass that broker.
Question cue: Client preference versus required broker authorization.

Terms: Ten-day nonresponse vs. completed rule pathway
Difference: No written response within 10 calendar days is one condition. The 14-day information condition and shared-source unavailability must also be satisfied.
Question cue: First timing fact versus all cumulative facts.

Terms: Compensation source vs. agency
Difference: A payment or promise of payment can explain economics but does not determine which consumer the licensee represents.
Question cue: Who pays versus who is the client.

Interference with Contracts or Agency Relationships tested distinctions
Terms	Difference	Question cue
Competition vs. interference	Competition seeks future business through lawful marketing. Interference uses conduct aimed at breaking or bypassing an existing protected agreement.	Win the next opportunity versus displace the current contract improperly.
Consumer-initiated contact vs. licensee-initiated contact	A consumer under an exclusive agreement may initiate a future-agreement discussion. A licensee who initiates must satisfy the current written-request and timing route.	Inbound future inquiry versus targeted outbound solicitation.
Future agreement discussion vs. present transaction negotiation	A future discussion concerns services after the current relationship ends. Present negotiation addresses price, terms, concessions, or performance in the active sale, exchange, or lease.	Later representation versus today's deal terms.
Inducing breach vs. accepting a lawful future client	Inducement causes or pressures a party to break an agreement for substitution. Accepting a new agreement after lawful expiration or termination does not by itself establish inducement.	Cause the break versus engage after the relationship ended independently.
Knowledge vs. assumption	The direct-negotiation ground expressly turns on the licensee knowing of the exclusive agreement. Deliberately ignoring clear notice does not create a safe practice strategy.	Known exclusive status versus genuinely unknown status.
Authorization from represented person vs. authorization from broker	Section 20-20(a)(33) permits direct negotiation when specifically authorized by the broker holding the exclusive agreement, not merely when the represented consumer asks to bypass that broker.	Client preference versus required broker authorization.
Ten-day nonresponse vs. completed rule pathway	No written response within 10 calendar days is one condition. The 14-day information condition and shared-source unavailability must also be satisfied.	First timing fact versus all cumulative facts.
Compensation source vs. agency	A payment or promise of payment can explain economics but does not determine which consumer the licensee represents.	Who pays versus who is the client.

How does the Illinois rule apply?

The seller makes the first call

Scenario: A seller under an exclusive listing calls a competing licensee and asks what services that brokerage could provide after the current listing expires next month. The licensee explains a future marketing plan but does not discuss canceling the present agreement.

The exclusively represented consumer initiated the contact.
The discussion concerns a possible future agreement and does not negotiate the current sale or encourage breach.

Answer: The future-oriented discussion is permitted under Rule 1450.770. The licensee should document who initiated and avoid present-contract interference.

The incomplete expiration-request route

Scenario: A broker emails an exclusive buyer's sponsoring broker for the agreement's expiration date. Ten calendar days pass without a written response, so the broker immediately solicits the buyer without checking shared broker information or waiting through day 14.

The 10-day nonresponse is only one of the current rule's cumulative conditions.
The licensee did not satisfy the 14-day information condition or the shared-source condition.

Answer: The licensee acted too soon and outside the Rule 1450.770 pathway. Ten days is not an automatic safe harbor.

A buyer tries to bypass the listing broker

Scenario: A buyer's agent knows the seller has an exclusive listing. The seller privately asks the agent to negotiate a lower price directly to keep the listing broker out of the conversation. The listing broker has not authorized direct negotiation.

The agent knows about the seller's exclusive brokerage agreement.
The seller's request is not the specific authorization from the broker required for direct negotiation.

Answer: The buyer's agent must not negotiate directly with the seller. The offer or price discussion should go through the listing broker unless that broker specifically authorizes otherwise.

A promise to erase an existing agreement

Scenario: A licensee tells a landlord, falsely, that the current exclusive leasing agreement is unenforceable and promises to find a tenant immediately if the landlord stops cooperating with the existing broker and signs a replacement that day.

The statement pressures the landlord to break the current brokerage agreement.
The purpose is to substitute a new agreement with the competing brokerage, and the false legal claim adds separate risk.

Answer: This is classic interference for exam purposes. The licensee should not induce breach or provide unsupported legal conclusions about another contract.

Where do candidates misread the Illinois rule?

Trap: A licensee may never communicate with an exclusively represented consumer.
Correction: The consumer may initiate a possible future-agreement discussion, and the rule provides a controlled licensee-initiated pathway.

Trap: Any consumer request authorizes direct transaction negotiation.
Correction: Known exclusive representation requires specific authorization from the broker before direct negotiation.

Trap: Ten days without a response ends the exclusive agreement.
Correction: Nonresponse does not terminate the agreement and is only one condition for a limited future-discussion pathway.

Trap: The 10-day and 14-day conditions are alternatives.
Correction: Rule 1450.770 lists them with the written-request and shared-source conditions as cumulative requirements.

Trap: A future-agreement discussion permits advice to cancel now.
Correction: The second licensee may discuss future service but must not induce breach of the existing agreement.

Trap: An online expired label conclusively proves representation ended.
Correction: The agreement may have been extended or replaced; verify current contract status from reliable information.

Trap: A seller's private instruction overrides the exclusive listing broker.
Correction: For the direct-negotiation exception, the exclusive broker must provide the specific authorization.

Trap: Inducement requires a cash payment.
Correction: Pressure, false promises, advice, or other conduct can be used to induce a breach; money is not required by the disciplinary ground.

Trap: A cooperating fee determines which party the recipient represents.
Correction: Compensation does not determine agency under Section 15-40.

Trap: Once the old agreement ends, confidentiality disappears.
Correction: The former broker's statutory confidentiality and accounting duties survive termination, and the new broker should not solicit protected information.

Interference with Contracts or Agency Relationships trap corrections
Trap	Correction
A licensee may never communicate with an exclusively represented consumer.	The consumer may initiate a possible future-agreement discussion, and the rule provides a controlled licensee-initiated pathway.
Any consumer request authorizes direct transaction negotiation.	Known exclusive representation requires specific authorization from the broker before direct negotiation.
Ten days without a response ends the exclusive agreement.	Nonresponse does not terminate the agreement and is only one condition for a limited future-discussion pathway.
The 10-day and 14-day conditions are alternatives.	Rule 1450.770 lists them with the written-request and shared-source conditions as cumulative requirements.
A future-agreement discussion permits advice to cancel now.	The second licensee may discuss future service but must not induce breach of the existing agreement.
An online expired label conclusively proves representation ended.	The agreement may have been extended or replaced; verify current contract status from reliable information.
A seller's private instruction overrides the exclusive listing broker.	For the direct-negotiation exception, the exclusive broker must provide the specific authorization.
Inducement requires a cash payment.	Pressure, false promises, advice, or other conduct can be used to induce a breach; money is not required by the disciplinary ground.
A cooperating fee determines which party the recipient represents.	Compensation does not determine agency under Section 15-40.
Once the old agreement ends, confidentiality disappears.	The former broker's statutory confidentiality and accounting duties survive termination, and the new broker should not solicit protected information.

Can you apply the rule to a fresh scenario?

These questions are original study items aligned to the published outline. They are not copied, recalled, or predicted PSI questions.

1. A seller with an active exclusive listing calls another Illinois licensee to discuss services after expiration. What is the best answer?

The licensee may discuss a possible future agreement because the consumer initiated
The licensee must immediately negotiate the current sale directly
The current listing automatically terminates
The licensee may advise the seller to breach today

Show answer and explanation

Answer: A

Rule 1450.770 permits a consumer-initiated future-agreement discussion. It does not authorize current negotiation or inducement to breach.

2. After a written expiration-date request, the exclusive broker gives no written response for 10 calendar days. What else must the requesting licensee consider before initiating a future-agreement discussion?

Nothing; the agreement ended automatically
The 14-day information condition and availability from shared broker information
Only whether the property has a sign
Only the amount of the current commission

Show answer and explanation

Answer: B

The current rule's written request, 10-day response, 14-day information, and shared-source conditions work together.

3. A licensee knows a seller is exclusively represented. Who can specifically authorize the licensee to negotiate directly with the seller?

Any neighbor
The broker holding the exclusive agreement
An unlicensed marketing assistant
The county recorder

Show answer and explanation

Answer: B

Section 20-20(a)(33) bars the direct negotiation unless specifically authorized by the broker with the exclusive agreement.

4. Which conduct most clearly fits Illinois contract interference for disciplinary purposes?

Publishing a truthful general brokerage advertisement
Accepting a client after verified expiration
Pressuring a tenant to break an exclusive agreement so a replacement agreement can be signed
Sending an offer through the authorized broker

Show answer and explanation

Answer: C

The conduct is intended to break the current brokerage agreement and substitute a new one with a third party.

5. A listing brokerage offers compensation to a buyer's brokerage. What does that payment establish about agency?

The buyer's broker automatically represents the seller
The payment alone does not determine agency
The buyer becomes unrepresented
The transaction automatically becomes dual agency

Show answer and explanation

Answer: B

Section 15-40 makes compensation nondeterminative. Agency depends on the statutory and written consumer relationship.

How should you review this Illinois topic?

Session: 1. Classify the protected agreement
Focus: Sale, lease, listing, buyer, tenant, brokerage, exclusive, non-exclusive, current, expired, terminated, extended, and renewed
Proof you are ready: Identify the agreement and current status in twenty short fact patterns.

Session: 2. Separate contact types
Focus: General advertising, consumer-initiated contact, licensee-initiated contact, future discussion, current negotiation, direct contact, and broker authorization
Proof you are ready: Classify fifteen communications without confusing a future discussion with a current negotiation.

Session: 3. Memorize the request pathway
Focus: Written mail or email, sponsoring broker, expiration date, 10 calendar days, 14 calendar days, information received, shared broker source, and cumulative requirements
Proof you are ready: Rebuild the timeline from memory and explain why each shortcut fails.

Session: 4. Apply the disciplinary grounds
Focus: Inducing breach, purpose to substitute, third party, knowledge, exclusive agreement, direct negotiation, specific authorization, false promise, and discipline
Proof you are ready: Resolve twenty breach and negotiation scenarios at 90% accuracy.

Session: 5. Connect agency and post-termination duties
Focus: Designated agency, compensation, no agency, client, customer, confidentiality, accounting, expiration verification, protection period, and new written agreement
Proof you are ready: Explain why payment, contract status, and agency require separate analyses.

Session: 6. Apply CONTACT
Focus: Agreement, initiator, conduct, knowledge, authorization, timeline, purpose, proof, and consequence
Proof you are ready: Score at least 90% on fresh Illinois interference questions.

Interference with Contracts or Agency Relationships focused study plan
Session	Focus	Proof you are ready
1. Classify the protected agreement	Sale, lease, listing, buyer, tenant, brokerage, exclusive, non-exclusive, current, expired, terminated, extended, and renewed	Identify the agreement and current status in twenty short fact patterns.
2. Separate contact types	General advertising, consumer-initiated contact, licensee-initiated contact, future discussion, current negotiation, direct contact, and broker authorization	Classify fifteen communications without confusing a future discussion with a current negotiation.
3. Memorize the request pathway	Written mail or email, sponsoring broker, expiration date, 10 calendar days, 14 calendar days, information received, shared broker source, and cumulative requirements	Rebuild the timeline from memory and explain why each shortcut fails.
4. Apply the disciplinary grounds	Inducing breach, purpose to substitute, third party, knowledge, exclusive agreement, direct negotiation, specific authorization, false promise, and discipline	Resolve twenty breach and negotiation scenarios at 90% accuracy.
5. Connect agency and post-termination duties	Designated agency, compensation, no agency, client, customer, confidentiality, accounting, expiration verification, protection period, and new written agreement	Explain why payment, contract status, and agency require separate analyses.
6. Apply CONTACT	Agreement, initiator, conduct, knowledge, authorization, timeline, purpose, proof, and consequence	Score at least 90% on fresh Illinois interference questions.

Do not count recognition as mastery. Close the notes and explain the rule, apply it to a new fact pattern, and identify why each distractor fails.

Practice the Illinois rule in context

From concept to decision

Drill this topic, then review the explanation

Pass Illinois gives you original national and Illinois questions, topic-by-topic study, clear explanations, timed practice, flashcards, progress tracking, and Math Coach. Start free, find the weak distinction, and focus the next session there.

Try original questions Get Pass Illinois

Questions students ask about Interference with Contracts or Agency Relationships

What is interference with a real estate contract in Illinois?

For License Act exam purposes, the central violation is inducing a party to break a sale, lease, or brokerage agreement for the purpose of substituting a new sale, lease, or brokerage agreement with a third party. A second ground bars direct negotiation with someone the licensee knows has an exclusive brokerage agreement with another broker unless that broker specifically authorizes it.

Can an Illinois licensee contact a consumer represented by another broker?

The answer depends on the purpose and the relationship. General advertising is not automatically interference, and a consumer may initiate a discussion about a possible future agreement. A licensee cannot induce breach or directly negotiate a transaction with a person known to be exclusively represented unless the other broker specifically authorizes it. The current rule also controls licensee-initiated future-agreement discussions.

May a consumer with an exclusive listing contact another Illinois licensee?

Yes. Rule 1450.770 permits a licensee to discuss a possible future brokerage agreement when the exclusively represented consumer initiates the contact. The discussion concerns a future relationship. It does not authorize the second licensee to induce an early breach, negotiate the current transaction directly, or treat the existing agreement as already ended.

How may an Illinois licensee ask when another exclusive agreement expires?

The licensee may send a written request by mail or email to the sponsoring broker holding the exclusive agreement. For a licensee-initiated future-agreement discussion, the current rule then requires no written response within 10 calendar days, no expiration information received within 14 calendar days, and inability to obtain the information from another source of shared broker information. These conditions work together.

Does no response after 10 days automatically permit solicitation in Illinois?

No. Ten calendar days is only one element of Rule 1450.770(b)(3)(B). The licensee also must not have received the requested information within 14 calendar days, and the information must be unavailable from another source of shared broker information. Even then, the permissible subject is a possible future brokerage agreement, not interference with the existing one.

Can an Illinois licensee negotiate directly with a represented buyer or seller?

Not if the licensee knows that person has an exclusive brokerage agreement with another broker, unless that broker specifically authorizes the direct negotiation. Communicating routine logistics or presenting information through the authorized broker is different from bypassing the broker to negotiate transaction terms.

Is every expired-listing solicitation illegal in Illinois?

No. A genuinely expired brokerage agreement ordinarily no longer creates current exclusivity, although surviving duties, protection clauses, renewed agreements, do-not-call rules, advertising rules, and accurate statements can still matter. The licensee should verify actual expiration rather than assume that a stale database label ended the relationship.

May an Illinois licensee tell a consumer how to cancel another broker's agreement?

A licensee should not advise a consumer to breach or interpret another brokerage agreement as legal counsel. The consumer may review the contract, speak with the sponsoring broker, and obtain an attorney's advice. The licensee can explain a proposed future service after the current relationship lawfully ends when the contact rules allow that discussion.

Does compensation determine whether an Illinois agency relationship exists?

No. Section 15-40 says payment or a promise of payment is not determinative of agency. Agency follows the statutory and written relationship, including designated-agency and disclosure rules. A cooperating-broker payment does not by itself make the recipient the payer's agent.

Are these official Illinois broker exam questions?

No. They are original study questions aligned to interference with contracts and agency relationships in the Illinois outline effective June 24, 2026. The statute and Rule 1450.770 were checked through August 1, 2026, including the rule amendment effective July 13, 2026.

Primary sources

The current official outline controls the tested scope. Statutes, regulations, and official agency materials control when a general study rule and a jurisdiction-specific rule differ.

Editorial status

Checked against primary sources

The Pass Illinois editorial team last checked this guide on August 1, 2026. Every practice question is an original study item, and the source links above let you verify the rules that support the lesson.

Read our editorial and corrections process

Interference with contracts or agency relationships

What does current Illinois authority require?

Where is this tested on the Illinois outline?

The CONTACT method for Illinois interference questions

Which Illinois distinctions matter most?

How does the Illinois rule apply?

The seller makes the first call

The incomplete expiration-request route

A buyer tries to bypass the listing broker

A promise to erase an existing agreement

Where do candidates misread the Illinois rule?

Can you apply the rule to a fresh scenario?

1. A seller with an active exclusive listing calls another Illinois licensee to discuss services after expiration. What is the best answer?

2. After a written expiration-date request, the exclusive broker gives no written response for 10 calendar days. What else must the requesting licensee consider before initiating a future-agreement discussion?

3. A licensee knows a seller is exclusively represented. Who can specifically authorize the licensee to negotiate directly with the seller?

4. Which conduct most clearly fits Illinois contract interference for disciplinary purposes?

5. A listing brokerage offers compensation to a buyer's brokerage. What does that payment establish about agency?

How should you review this Illinois topic?

Practice the Illinois rule in context

Drill this topic, then review the explanation

What should you study next?

Questions students ask about Interference with Contracts or Agency Relationships

Primary sources

Checked against primary sources

Was this guide useful?