KEY POINTS:
Auckland agents dominated the latest round of complaints and disciplinary procedures heard by an arm of the Real Estate Institute.
Of the 11 complaints which went before the institute's regional disciplinary sub-committees, nine were from the northern region, which includes Auckland.
Misleading real estate advertising and knowingly giving
false information in a property deal were two issues which sparked complaints against agents, resulting in fines and costs being imposed.
But most of the information on the cases has been suppressed because the body which oversees the complaints procedure says it cannot supply it.
Institute chief executive Christine Le Cren said no further details of the cases could be provided because the institute had to adhere to the Privacy Act.
But she said cases going before the Real Estate Agents Licensing Board would be made public.
Clayton Cosgrove, the Associate Justice Minister, will meet institute executives next month to hear their suggestions on bringing more transparency and independence to the way they police their agents. Suggestions that disciplinary activities be taken over by a separate industry ombudsman or watchdog will be canvassed.
The first institute regional disciplinary sub-committee case in the string of 11 complaints showed a salesperson at Harcourt's Image Realty had advertised a property without making investigations to verify permits for the property. A fine of $600 with $450 costs was imposed.
The same matter was subject to a second complaint against the firm, found to have failed to be fully conversant with the Fair Trading Act by advertising a property in circumstances that were misleading. A fine of $750 plus $450 costs was imposed.
A sales manager at Crown Real Estate, a member of the Harveys Group, failed to deal with the sale of a property appropriately when the sale became a multi-offer situation and was fined $400 plus $450 costs.
The same matter was at issue when the manager failed to give the buyer the chance to increase his offer and misled that buyer to believe he had a backup offer.
"The backup clause in the sale and purchase agreement was never signed by the vendor or purchaser," the institute found. A fine of $200 and a GST payment of $2055 was ordered.
A salesperson at Barfoot & Thompson failed to adequately advise buyers of a property and an order to pay $500 with costs of $2812.50 was made.
A salesperson at PGG Wrightson failed to provide good service in marketing a property and a fine of $600 plus $450 costs was made.
A salesperson at Realty Excellence, a member of Ray White Real Estate, failed to establish who was selling a property "when it was known to the salesperson that the vendors were in fact three trustees of a trust". A fine of $500 was imposed.
In the same case, the institute body found the salesperson concluded and confirmed an agreement to sell the property knowing that the vendors who were trustees had not consented to the sale. An order was made for a fine of $750 plus costs of $450.
A principal officer at First National's Moving Realty failed to carry out a statutory duty on the sale and purchase of a property. A fine of $750 plus $450 costs was ordered.
A salesperson at Harcourt's Phoenix Realty in the South Island "knowingly incorrectly advised the purchaser that the property was not subject to a body corporate when in fact it was". A fine of $750 and $450 costs was made.
A salesperson at LJ Hooker's Central & Lakes Realty failed to adhere to the Real Estate Agents Act 1976 in handling a deal in Alexandra. The agent did not provide a registered independent valuation of the property within 14 days of a contract for its sale. A fine of $500 plus $450 costs was made.
Institute president Murray Cleland wants higher penalties for agents who break the rules, but Cosgrove wants the institute to refer more cases against agents to the licensing board, which can deregister, de-licence or suspend people.
Rules for agents
* Agents must adhere to the Real Estate Agents Act 1976.
* A Code of Ethics and Rules of Practice must also be followed.
* These are governed by the Real Estate Institute.
* Agents who break the rules or code go before an institute body.
* Regional disciplinary sub-committees have just heard 11 cases.
* But the complainants' details and agents' names are suppressed.