Hi, this is my first post in this forum and I must admit that I didn't read every single post in this thread, but I will do so shortly.
Firstly, I'm a real estate sales agent and will give you my take on things:
Every agency is being seriously and heavily audited as we speak. There are several investigations by consumer affairs taking place. An agent in Bentleigh was recently exposed and disgraced in newspapers etc. There are more to come, believe me.
As far as under-quoting is concerned. If a property is advertised for $500k to $550k and on auction day it passes in with the vendor's reserve revealed at $580k then this is both misleading and illegal only if the written agreement (Exclusive Sales or Auction Authority) reflects this. There are several traps on these authorities which many agents are now paying for!
There are 3 sections on the authority which are being looked at carefully by Consumer Affairs. The "Vendors Reserve", the "Agents Estimated Selling Price" and the example of commission (Commission will be $xxxx if sold for $xxx,xxx). If these 3, along with the advertised price to the public do not marry up then there's a problem.
I won't go into this in too much detail right now, but am happy to answer questions either via PM or in the forum. The reason I am posting is to express my disgust towards agents who under-quote (especially those who severely under-quote). This leads to
a) buyers and potential vendors mistrusting agents
b) confusing the buyers and deterring them from properties that have genuine and honest quote ranges on them, and most importantly
c) misleading the public, and in some instances this causes people to fork out hundreds of dollars for pre-auction building/pest inspections (which really sucks when money is tight for some buyers). Oh yeah, and
d) it also brings out the silly buyers who don't understand that emotionally driven purchases do actually exist. Sorry but I have seen some unexpectedly high emotional bids take place on some stunning homes. It happens, and I've sold several homes well above my vendor's reserve.
The whole "under-quoting" thing has also seen buyer confidence completely break-down over the past few years. Many buyers avoid auctions as a result.
I work in an industry where half of my colleagues (past and present) aren't really well educated, but sat a 6 week course which gave them a sheet of paper allowing them to act as a real estate agent. The test is really quite simple. Remembering the legislation is really not that hard either. The estate agent's act is one of the most abused acts and it's about time Consumer Affairs is doing something about this.
In short, if you believe that an agent is under-quoting, or has under-quoted recently. Simply dob them in, because there's a strong chance that they haven't filled in their paper-work accurately either. This is how they come apart
Firstly, I'm a real estate sales agent and will give you my take on things:
Every agency is being seriously and heavily audited as we speak. There are several investigations by consumer affairs taking place. An agent in Bentleigh was recently exposed and disgraced in newspapers etc. There are more to come, believe me.
As far as under-quoting is concerned. If a property is advertised for $500k to $550k and on auction day it passes in with the vendor's reserve revealed at $580k then this is both misleading and illegal only if the written agreement (Exclusive Sales or Auction Authority) reflects this. There are several traps on these authorities which many agents are now paying for!
There are 3 sections on the authority which are being looked at carefully by Consumer Affairs. The "Vendors Reserve", the "Agents Estimated Selling Price" and the example of commission (Commission will be $xxxx if sold for $xxx,xxx). If these 3, along with the advertised price to the public do not marry up then there's a problem.
I won't go into this in too much detail right now, but am happy to answer questions either via PM or in the forum. The reason I am posting is to express my disgust towards agents who under-quote (especially those who severely under-quote). This leads to
a) buyers and potential vendors mistrusting agents
b) confusing the buyers and deterring them from properties that have genuine and honest quote ranges on them, and most importantly
c) misleading the public, and in some instances this causes people to fork out hundreds of dollars for pre-auction building/pest inspections (which really sucks when money is tight for some buyers). Oh yeah, and
d) it also brings out the silly buyers who don't understand that emotionally driven purchases do actually exist. Sorry but I have seen some unexpectedly high emotional bids take place on some stunning homes. It happens, and I've sold several homes well above my vendor's reserve.
The whole "under-quoting" thing has also seen buyer confidence completely break-down over the past few years. Many buyers avoid auctions as a result.
I work in an industry where half of my colleagues (past and present) aren't really well educated, but sat a 6 week course which gave them a sheet of paper allowing them to act as a real estate agent. The test is really quite simple. Remembering the legislation is really not that hard either. The estate agent's act is one of the most abused acts and it's about time Consumer Affairs is doing something about this.
In short, if you believe that an agent is under-quoting, or has under-quoted recently. Simply dob them in, because there's a strong chance that they haven't filled in their paper-work accurately either. This is how they come apart
