In the 2014-15 year, a total of 627 complaints were made to the authority covering 4.4 per cent of all agents. A total of 142, or 1.5 per cent, of licensees had a decision of unsatisfactory conduct or misconduct upheld against them. That's in one year. Over 10 years, that adds up to a significant number of rogue agents - although there will be some cases of repeat offending.
The trouble with commission sales is that they're often conducted under time pressure in search of a deal. It's a common theme in complaints, says the REAA. "[Negotiations] are often in stressful and fast-moving situations and there is a lack of communications from the agent," says its chief executive, Kevin Lampen-Smith.
Of course, plenty of real estate sales go well. Nonetheless, buyers and sellers need to educate themselves and be on guard.
Bad agents, says Real Estate Institute director Bryan Thompson, are the minority.
"The problem is a real estate transaction is a very stressful part of a person's life. When something goes wrong it is just awful, whether it is a rogue or more commonly an omission."
The REINZ and other bodies such as the REAA are working to educate agents about their responsibilities, says Thompson.
Some of the stories from REAA hearings relate to vulnerable people such as first-home buyers and older folk. May Smith, who owned a house in Sandringham, Auckland, which she put up for sale with agent Mark Birdling of Bayleys. Birdling, according to an REAA decision, pressured Mrs Smith to sign a sale-and-purchase agreement. She should have been given the opportunity to have considered the offer overnight, take legal advice and consult her son. Birdling was censured and fined $2000.
In another case, agent Jodie Kitto lost her real estate licence as a result of her dealings with 77-year-old Colin Frankham. Kitto door-knocked Mr Frankham and convinced the widower to sign what he thought was a document giving permission to market his property. It was a blank sale-and-purchase agreement.
Vendor bidding, an astonishing practice, has resulted in many complaints to the authority, such as one against Harcourts agent Andrew Sullivan. The complainant, who bid by phone, recorded the entire conversation, which proved his case. The vendor was bidding, but the buyer received ambiguous answers about this from his agent and ended up bidding $20,000 more than he needed to.
Harcourts' solicitor unsuccessfully tried to convince the REAA committee that the recording shouldn't have been used as evidence because it was obtained without the agent's knowledge or consent. However, when it comes to complaints against real estate agents, the more that a buyer or seller has in writing or recorded, the better.
Often complaints refer to buyers and sellers having a verbal understanding with an agent and a "he said", "she said" plays out in the hearing. A Mr C complained about Barfoot & Thompson Greenlane agent Dianne Martens. Mr C understood he had an agreement in which his marketing costs would be reimbursed if the property was sold by any Barfoot agent, not just Martens, but that didn't prove to be the case.
The committee concluded it was remiss of Martens at the time of listing the property to not capture the agreement in writing or clarify the arrangement about commission. Even when it became clear there was a misunderstanding, Martens didn't raise the issue.
Cases of agents selling to their friends, family and colleagues often occur. This would be fine if the buyers were bidding in an open and honest auction or tender. However, it's not unheard of for an agent to find ways to convince the unwitting vendor to sell below market value.
Professionals agent Kevin Stevenson lost his real estate licence for, among other things, forging signatures and failing to inform a buyer the vendor was a salesperson in his office.
Just how vigilant consumers need to be at every step of the real estate sale and purchase process was outlined in a complaint against Harcourts agent Margaret Danzer in Christchurch.
A complainant found that Danzer had rewritten his original offer, removed clauses, changed the destination of the deposit funds, penalty interest rates, and added a different finance clause. With a deadline that day, the complainant was unable to seek legal advice on the new sale-and-purchase agreement. The vendor was willing to extend the deadline, but the complainant wasn't told.
Oamaru Century 21 agent Lesley de Ruyter lost her licence over a deal in which she misled her own sister, costing the latter $50,000.
Buyers and sellers should always search the authority's online decisions database before deciding which agent to use. Some agents have had multiple complaints upheld against them.
In the REAA's list of top offenders supplied to the Weekend Herald, only one agent still holds a licence.
Australian author Neil Jenman is the scourge of the real estate industry for highlighting the unsavoury tactics which are employed by some agents.
There are also local services such as The First Home Buyers Club, which provide education for buyers.
Not all the practices listed in the book such as bait advertising are legal here.
Having said that, the REAA has heard cases where agents here still use bait advertising, which gives buyers false hope. Barry Rolton, of Total Realty in Christchurch, was found to have used bait advertising.
One of the most common real estate sales ruses, says Jenman, is for unscrupulous agents to win a listing by lying about how much they can get for the property, in the knowledge that they can massage the vendor's expectations down later.
Almost anyone who has sold a property will have experienced what happens next. It's called conditioning, in which sellers are given all sorts of reasons their property won't achieve the price that the agent initially led them to expect.
Jenman describes auctions as "trickery and deception on a massive scale".
They are about conditioning sellers down and pushing buyers up in price so that the agent gets paid, he says.
On the day, consumers can be hammered into submission and forced to make instant decisions.
