<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/broadbeach-qld-4218">Broadbeach</a> offers plenty of reasons to live vertically, but moving from a substantial family home into an apartment can expose the compromises of high-density living. Privacy, room for guests and usable living space tend to matter more when an apartment is intended as a permanent home rather than an occasional coastal base.

A typical residential floor at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-eveleigh-broadbeach-7-9-surf-parade-broadbeach-qld-4218">The Eveleigh</a>, on Surf Parade,&nbsp;contains just four apartments. The 94-residence development by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/hirsch-faigen">Hirsch &amp; Faigen</a> is predominantly made up of expansive three-bedroom homes, with a limited collection of half-floor penthouses above.

Across the apartment floors, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/rothelowman">Rothelowman</a> has used the relatively limited number of residences to give each home greater access to natural light and outlook. Living spaces extend towards full-height glazing, while a series of bay windows frame selected views across the Pacific Ocean, city and hinterland rather than treating the building edge as a continuous wall of glass.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360965]

“The apartment floors deliver a collection of homes that embrace controlled outlook via a series of bay windows deliberately framing moments of view,” Rothelowman Director Kim Lowman said.

From outside, those projecting forms contribute to the tower’s faceted profile. Strong horizontal and vertical elements establish its proportions, while the changing position of the sun alters the light, shadow and reflection across the façade throughout the day.

The same attention moves inside the apartments, where the material palette combines warm timber, natural stone, metallic detailing and softer curved forms. Kitchens sit within the main living zone, with stone island benches, integrated joinery and European appliances, before the living areas extend towards the glazing and the outlook.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360981]

Three genuine bedrooms provide room to accommodate family and guests, while two secure car spaces and storage address some of the practical considerations that can become more noticeable when moving from a larger home. Feedback from the display suite has centred on the warmth and restraint of the interiors, with buyers commenting that the residences feel like homes rather than conventional coastal apartments.

A limited collection of half-floor penthouses occupies the upper levels, increasing the scale of the living spaces and adding private balconies and elevated finishes. From this position, the outlook extends between the ocean and hinterland.

Outside the private residences, The Eveleigh separates its shared spaces between the podium and rooftop. The podium is centred on wellness, with subtropical landscaping surrounding a swimming pool and pool terrace, yoga garden, private gymnasium, sauna and hot and cold plunge facilities. Landscaped retreats and pavilions provide additional places to sit away from the main recreation areas.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360966]

Higher in the building, a rooftop pavilion and private dining suite sit alongside resident lounge, barbecue and outdoor dining areas, opening towards panoramic views across the ocean, city and hinterland.

“Buyers are no longer just looking for an apartment, but a lifestyle where they can relax, reset, and enjoy a balanced way of living,” Hirsch &amp; Faigen Director of Sales Matt George said.

Interest to date has come from established owner-occupiers and interstate lifestyle purchasers, including buyers planning a future move to the Gold Coast. Many are coming from larger homes and want to reduce ongoing maintenance without giving up space for family and guests, privacy, two car spaces or the ability to entertain at home.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360969]

Much of that daily life can also take place beyond the building without requiring a drive. Kurrawa Beach and Pratten Park are an easy walk from Surf Parade, while Pacific Fair, Oracle Boulevard, The Oasis, restaurants, cafés, entertainment and public transport are also within walking distance.

The Eveleigh is Hirsch &amp; Faigen's fourth Gold Coast development since entering the market in 2021, following The Hemingway at Palm Beach, The Emerson at Kirra and Yves at Mermaid Beach. Each of the preceding projects sold out before completion.

“Broadbeach had been on our radar throughout our time operating on the Gold Coast,” the developer said. “Following our projects in Palm Beach, Kirra and Mermaid Beach, Broadbeach represented the natural next step for the business.”

The Surf Parade site brought together proximity to the beach, protected coastal outlooks and walkability to dining, shopping and recreation. Hirsch &amp; Faigen also identified the street as an emerging premium residential address, with enough separation from Broadbeach's busier destinations to retain a quieter environment at home.

The Eveleigh is now under construction by Maxcon, with completion forecast for mid-2028. Three-bedroom residences are currently available from $2.87 million.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=149670]

Joel Robinson

The Eveleigh brings house-like apartments to Broadbeach

A long-stalled Campbelltown development site is back in play, with new plans for 139 apartments set to supersede a mixed-use scheme approved almost a decade ago but never built.

The new proposal for 28 Cordeaux Street would deliver 116 market and 23 affordable apartments in a part 14-storey building, bringing a substantial new project into a Campbelltown market where new apartment supply remains limited.

Plans have been filed over the 3,092 sqm corner site at Moore-Oxley Street, around 600 metres from Campbelltown Railway Station and the city-centre retail core.

The site already carries a mixed-use residential approval dating to 2016. Doroch Architects has now been engaged on a larger replacement scheme, which is progressing as a State Significant Development Application following a Housing Delivery Authority determination in August 2025.

The apartment mix comprises 39 one-bedroom, 72 two-bedroom and 28 three-bedroom residences. Two-bedroom apartments make up just over half of the project, while three-bedroom homes account for 20 per cent.

<img alt="First look: New 139-apartment plans revive long-stalled Campbelltown city centre site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="136dd5b9-3791-4da6-9e31-76f533f5b4de" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Campbelltown%20da2.png?VersionId=LgOSy9nwf5u.MGswBBwaGGxuX8QpHSl_" />

Of the 139 apartments, 23 will be delivered as affordable housing under the in-fill affordable housing provisions of the Housing SEPP. The affordable component represents 15 per cent of the residential gross floor area and will be managed by a registered Community Housing Provider.

Doroch has sought to break the scale of the building into two distinct elements, with a masonry podium of around four storeys establishing the street edge before the residential tower steps back above.

The corner position has shaped that approach. Cordeaux Street faces toward the commercial and civic centre, while Moore-Oxley Street leads into the lower-scale residential neighbourhood to the south, and the design verification report describes the site as "bridging the commercial core to the north and established residential areas to the south."

The podium will be expressed predominantly in face brick, while the upper levels shift to brushed and grooved concrete cladding with darker metal detailing. Recessed sections, deep balcony edges and landscaping break down the upper form, with an approximately 11.8-metre setback to the northern boundary addressing the adjoining St Peters Anglican School.

<img alt="First look: New 139-apartment plans revive long-stalled Campbelltown city centre site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="c8b3d2d3-c561-4bfc-a5d9-a68c0c10dac1" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Campbelltown%20da1.png?VersionId=AeAEyJU02Gk2k5noUj2StziCvdQ7fW4B" />

Campbelltown has been starved of new residential developments in the last decade.

The only other notable development set to come to market this year is ALAND's Queen Square, a mixed-use precinct on over two hectares that will comprise apartments above a vibrant ground-level retail and hospitality dining precinct.

First look: New 139-apartment plans revive long-stalled Campbelltown city centre site

First Look: Sherlock Construction pitches apartments for low-rise Deception Bay

Queensland builder-developer MAYD has revealed the first look at its major North Kirra beachfront development, lodging amended plans that reduce the number of apartments and increase the proportion of larger residences.

The project is planned across a substantial 4,742 sqm amalgamated site spanning seven lots at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/2-6-pacific-parade-bilinga-qld-4225">2-6 Pacific Parade</a> and 27-33 Golden Four Drive in Bilin​ga, directly opposite Nor​th Kirra Beach.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/mayd-group">MAYD</a> secured the site for $32.5 million in 2025, in what was one of the Gold Coast's largest property transactions of the year.

The development will be delivered across two stages, with the first stage carrying an estimated gross realisation value of around $360 million.

The latest amendments seek to reduce the overall apartment count and shift the project further toward the owner-occupier market, with larger residences designed for buyers wanting considerably more space than traditionally offered in a beachfront apartment.

The residential mix will include townhomes, oversized two-bedroom apartments, substantial three-bedroom residences and four-bedroom homes.

MAYD has appointed Cera Stribley to lead the architecture and interiors, with the Melbourne-based design practice drawing on the beachfront setting through a series of ocean-facing terraces and heavily landscaped balconies.

Strong horizontal forms and curved balconies will define the exterior, with subtropical landscaping integrated throughout the building to soften the built form and increase the connection between the residences and the beachfront.

The project will also include an extensive collection of resident wellness and lifestyle facilities, continuing the broader shift across the Gold Coast's luxury apartment market toward larger homes supported by resort-style amenity.

<img alt="MAYD" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="d1bcbb05-e659-4b47-8bd4-1e595315e2ad" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-27%20at%202.05.03%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=jj0XEud1X1DuLt7_KyElhjMdZGOXmLHP" />

MAYD Founder Todd Mould said North Kirra was increasingly appealing to buyers attracted to the more established, lower-density character of the southern Gold Coast.

"North Kirra presents one of the most compelling luxury residential opportunities currently emerging in Australia, combining absolute beachfront with the character and authenticity that buyers are increasingly seeking, and the same sense of tight-knit community that defined Burleigh and Currumbin perhaps 10 or 15 years ago," Mould said.

"With Gold Coast Airport on its doorstep, it also offers a level of accessibility that broadens its appeal across almost every market demographic."

The project comes as the southern Gold Coast continues to attract an increasing share of high-end apartment development and buyer activity.

Kirra in particular has emerged as one of the region's more tightly held beachfront markets, with its relatively low-density character, established surf and hospitality scene and proximity to Gold Coast Airport differentiating it from the higher-density markets further north.

Mould said those characteristics had informed the approach MAYD and Cera Stribley had taken to the project.

"We've worked closely with Cera Stribley to create a vision that is deeply connected to its surroundings," he said.

"Inspired by the coastline itself, the architecture has been shaped around space, privacy and resort-style living, creating a collection of homes that reflects the next generation of luxury on the southern Gold Coast."

MOTIV Managing Director Carly Cottam, who has been appointed to market the project, said buyer attention had continued to move south along the Gold Coast.

"Purchasers who may once have defaulted to Broadbeach, Main Beach or Surfers Paradise are increasingly recognising the value of a genuine beachfront location that offers lower density, strong amenity and a more established sense of community," Cottam said.

"Kirra has a powerful combination of growing demand and genuine scarcity. Beachfront supply is inherently constrained, the area remains relatively low density, and buyers are increasingly placing a premium on locations that feel established, uncrowded and authentic rather than heavily developed."

Cottam said the proximity to Gold Coast Airport was also proving increasingly important for interstate and second-home buyers.

"Being minutes from Gold Coast Airport makes it particularly compelling for interstate buyers, frequent travellers and second-home purchasers who can access an authentic coastal lifestyle almost immediately after stepping off a flight."

The acquisition takes MAYD's active development portfolio to more than $500 million, with the North Kirra project representing one of its largest undertakings to date.

MAYD is targeting an early 2027 launch.

First look at MAYD's North Kirra mixed-use precinct

<main data-perf-region="main">
Castle Hill, the longtime hub of the Hills District, has been one of the major beneficiaries of Sydney's Metro expansion, with improved connectivity helping drive continued population growth, development and buyer demand across the Hills District.

But despite that growth, the suburb has seen relatively few major new apartment projects brought to market over the past 18 months.

Hills District developer Reve Group is looking to fill that gap with <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/nova-r-ve-castle-hill-2-garthowen-crescent-castle-hill-nsw-2154">Nova Rêve</a>, a major new mixed-use precinct on the corner of Garthowen Crescent and Old Castle Hill Road, a short walk from Castle Hill Metro Station and Castle Towers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377679]

The project will comprise three residential towers alongside a hotel, restaurants, cafes and a skybar, more than 1,600 sqm of ground-floor retail and almost an acre of landscaped gardens.

It represents the largest project undertaken by Reve Group, the development arm of the Kassis family, which has been building across the Hills District for more than 30 years through Kassis Homes.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377675]

Nova Rêve also represents a significant step up from the family's first apartment development, Grand Rêve, which was delivered nearby on Garthowen Crescent.

Grand Rêve introduced larger, house-like apartment layouts and premium inclusions including Wolf and Sub-Zero appliances to the Castle Hill market.

Nova Rêve takes that approach to a precinct scale, combining the residential component with hospitality, retail and substantial public and resident landscaping.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377685]

Reve Group Managing Director Sam Kassis said the project reflected the family's three decades of building in the Hills, which has evolved from trophy homes on quarter-acre blocks to larger-scale apartment development.

"Grand Rêve was our first apartment project here and it showed us what this pocket of Castle Hill could be. Nova Rêve is the refinement of that idea: not just apartments, but a place the whole suburb can use," Kassis said.

A key part of that approach is the hotel, which has been designed to operate as an amenity for the wider Castle Hill community rather than solely hotel guests.

It will include restaurants, cafes, skybars and all-day dining, alongside conference and event facilities catering to business functions, community groups and private events.

At ground level, more than 1,600 sqm of shops and cafes will open onto the surrounding streets and landscaped areas.

Almost an acre of gardens designed by Land and Form Studios will run through the precinct, incorporating pathways, seating, barbecue areas and children's play spaces.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377680]

Reve Group's Romio Georges said creating an active ground plane had been central to the planning of Nova Rêve.

"There are gardens with pathways, barbecues, seating and play areas, shops and cafes opening onto the street, and a hotel with restaurants and a skybar that anyone in Castle Hill can walk into," Georges said.

The project's elevated position on one of Sydney's highest ridgelines will also provide apartments with outlooks toward the Sydney skyline, surrounding parkland and the Blue Mountains.

More than 80 per cent of the apartments will occupy corner positions, with Turner responsible for both the architecture and interiors.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=152737]

<h3 data-end="3697" data-section-id="q3n5ak" data-start="3672">&nbsp;</h3>
</main>

Nova Rêve arrives as Reve Group bets on Castle Hill's next growth phase

Underquoting

<html><body>
The NSW government will amend underquoting laws to cover not only employees of real estate agencies but their representatives, independent contractors, subsidiaries or any related entities who act for them.
The amendments will widen the net to prevent illegal underquoting after Sydney agency BresicWhitney escaped allegations after a loophole deemed that two of its agents were not "employees" as required under the current act.
The changes were introduced in the NSW Parliament today.
In 2015, the NSW Fair Trading took BresicWhitney to court alleging it "falsely understated the likely selling price of residential property to consumers" through its two agents Nic Krasnostein and Walter Burfitt-Williams.
BresicWhitney's defence that they were not employed by BresicWhitney but by a subsidiary company, BWEA Employees Pty Ltd, was accepted by the courts.
The Magistrate accepted this defence and all charges were dismissed due to a legal technicality based on a statutory interpretation of ‘employee’ in the Act and the fact that there is no deeming provision in the Act for vicarious criminal liability.
"These changes will close a corporate loophole that has allowed agents to escape liability under the Act, and will provide consumers with additional protection," Minister for Innovation and Better Regulation Victor Dominello said.
"Underquoting is illegal, misleads prospective buyers and undermines the property market."
“These changes will close a corporate loophole that has allowed agents to escape liability under the Act, and will provide consumers with additional protection.”
Since the new underquoting laws came into effect in January, the practice of price baiting including the use of inducements such as "offers above" and "offers over" had declined, the government suggested.
But illegal off-market open for inspections without contracts have been on the rise. 
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Property 101: BresicWhitney underquoting law to come to NSW Parliament this week

<html><body>
Melbourne real estate agency Hockingstuart has been fined $330,000 fine after admitting to underquoting properties advertised for sale.
The punishment was handed down in the Federal Court with Justice John Middleton saying the matter was serious.
“Price is an essential piece of information about the property being offered for sale for prospective buyers,” he said.
“Buyers should be able to rely on correct information to make an informed decision.”
Simon Jovanovic, CEO of hockingstuart advised he takes "very seriously" the need for his franchisees to accurately price properties in marketing.
"Our Richmond office has already implemented a number of changes including establishing a rigorous in-house compliance program to ensure this doesn’t happen again.
"As Justice Middleton referred to in his judgment, this is a substantial penalty for a company the size of hockingstuart Richmond.
"We are disappointed with the severity of the penalty handed down and the example being made of our Richmond office for what is an issue that impacts the real estate industry as a whole," Simon Jovanovic said.
Sitesh Bhojani, for the director of CAV, told the court one Hockingstuart, Richmond, agent, Daniel Atsis, told a vendor who had expressed concerns about the advertising of his property via email that “unfortunately there’s a culture of underquoting in Richmond. The price range is used more as a marketing tool than an indication.”
The court heard that another implicated agent, Trent Stewart, wrote to a client: “We want to get the best price for you, and the best way to do that is to create an illusion of a bargain”.
The agency admitted to misleading and deceiving buyers in 2014 and 2015. It was fined $30,000 for each of the 11 breaches of consumer laws by its Richmond branch associated with houses listed across Richmond and Kew.
“The manipulation of the ‘agent’s estimate of selling price’ for the properties did demonstrate the lengths that Hocking Stuart Richmond went to in creating its enticing (but illusory and misleading) marketing web. There was a conscious decision to engage in the conduct.”.
Victoria Consumer Affairs told the court Hockingstuart misled buyers about 11 properties including 310/59 Coppin Street, Richmond, which sold for $545,000.
The sale of 278 Mary Street, Richmond, for $955,000 in August 2014 was another of the properties investigated. 
Other properties named in the legal action were a two-bedroom apartment in Docker Street, Richmond, which sold for $667,000 and a grand Edwardian in Kew’s Barkers Road, sold for $955,000.
In NSW the major case of alleged underqoting saw the magistrate of Blacktown Local Court dismissing all charges against BresicWhitney Estate Agents Pty Ltd earlier this year.
After a considerably delayed trial, the dismissal came on a technicality concerning the term ‘employee’ in the Property Stock and Business Agents Act 2002 (the Act).
In this case the ‘operating’ arm of the business was the licence holder and undertook the business of a real estate agent.
A subsidiary company ‘employed’ the employees.
As a result the court found the ‘employees’ who made the statements about price, which were less than the estimated selling price in the agency agreement, were not technically employed by the licensed agent.
"This is not the policy intent of the provisions and in his findings the Magistrate acknowledged the likelihood that the business was structured in a way that would insulate it to some degree against liability in the event of such matters," a department spokesperson advised.
The NSW consumer watchdog advised the more serious price discrepancy alleged was at Double Bay, where the publicly published price guidance reputedly did not match the private agency agreement documentation in the office paperwork.
The Murilla apartment at 62/543-545 New South Head Road had a reported price guide of over $1.5 million, but Fair Trading investigations revealed the selling price estimate in the agency agreement at the low end of $1.6 million.
The prosecutions were only the third in a decade. 
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2015/03/16/cartoon%20march%2016.jpg" alt="">
Source: Sunday Telegraph
 
 
 
</body></html>

Hockingstuart fined $330,000 for underquoting

<html><body>
Unlawful and unethical marketing strategies, which are at the heart of a large percentage of auction campaigns, will be the demise for many vendors.
A failure for vendors and a bigger failure for the real estate industry. 
No price guide. Is it the new under-quoting?
Ignorance or blatant disregard?
To begin, when agents seemingly don't understand nor can confidently form an opinion about property prices, they should seriously get out of the industry and go back to selling cars.
Pushing vendors for an auction campaign and all because agents fail to understand the dynamics of real estate and appraising property is not the method to achieve the best outcomes. Confusion and misdirection does not lead to clarity.
In my many dealings with local agents, I have found that many agents not onl do not understand how to appraise property, they also don’t understand property marketing 101. Both are essential in the process to achieve the best result for vendors.
For many, the quickest and easiest method is to “take the property to auction.” Real estate agents see this as the fail-safe method. The good old, “I can’t be blamed for the low price – its market forces…” excuse.
In my opinion, achieving the best outcomes for the vendor is not about; speed of sale nor how easy it would be for the agent to manage the sale.
The above therefore translates to being a major issue for vendors. My reasoning will be summed up in this article, and under the following four points. 
Why so many agents push for auction campaigns
1)     When many agents push for “auction campaigns.” What do they really want to achieve?
a.     Tie-up the vendor and have them commit to accept a price on the day. All due to the vendor’s large expenditure in their auction marketing campaign.
b.     They don’t want to work for the vendor for long and rightfully earn the commission.
c.     There is a belief that when a property is auctioned off; the market dictates the best price on the day. This, in turn, forces the vendor to accept anything on the day. Even if it is below what buyers were willing to pay. See tweets by @REshortsell
2)     Agents have in the past, purposely and will continue to under-quote the property to draw a crowd. To the vendor this appears as;
a.     A good turnout. Therefore, whatever the final bid is, determines the so called value of the property on the day.
3)     Agents have purposely under-quoted to draw a crowd, and to the buyer this appears as;
a.     A need to bid and bid emotionally, due to an overwhelming fear of missing out on the property. Thus creating, the control needed for the agent to show the vendor the bidder’s participation; to give the illusion of success.
4)     Agents want a quick turnaround and a quick commission fix.
a. Auction campaigns run for four weeks and the agents are guaranteed a commission at the end with great certainty. This is all due to the pressure placed on the vendor, as noted above. Pressure also added by the large marketing fees paid to run the auction campaign.
Now to the nut-and-bolts: Why this article? Why today?
I attended an recent auction in Parramatta. This auction was one promoted by a local, prominent and brand-name agency. What I was witness to will make Fair Trading NSW take special notice.
I will detail the conversations and the agent’s arrogance below. One may also note, his ignorance or even deliberate arrogance in regards to the auction process.
Conversation with the listing agent: words to the effect;
Me: Do you mind telling me the price-guide?
Agent: I can’t disclose the price-guide because the vendor won’t allow me to.
Me: If you can’t disclose the guide, then what is your opinion of value of the property?
Agent: I can’t say as there are no comparable sales in the area. [Keep in mind; this is advertised as two bedroom penthouse unit in Parramatta with a large balcony]
Me: Really, no comparable sales?  Couldn’t you base it on square meters, location and perhaps aesthetic value?
Agent: No! There are no comparable sales and I don’t know what it would sell for. [I heard something similar with respect to well documented auctions at Millers Point…]
Me: In the agency agreement; you must have given the vendor a price-guide, right?
Agent: Yes, we have to [by law].
Me: So, you must, as an agent, be able to form an opinion of the value of the property; I’m not going to hold you to it.
Agent: I don’t have to disclose what I gave to the vendor to you. And besides, there are no comparable sales. If you wanted a price-guide, you should have called me before the auction.
Me: I did call you twice; you told me the new legislation doesn’t allow real estate agents to give price-guides. Why is that?
Agent: It’s against the law and Fair Trading NSW guide lines tells us not to give guides.
Me: Is that so… But you gave the vendor a guide right? Can you show me the agency agreement, or tell me what you wrote on it?
Agent: No, I don’t have to show it to you.
The agent turns away and focuses on other potential, interested and registered bidders.
Buyer: Will the building next to this one, block out the view, when it is completed?
Agent: No it is against the law to block out the views, that’s why they are building it in two sections.
I smiled and shook my head as I walked away in total disbelief of the conversation I just had and the one I overheard. A conversation not dissimilar to the one’s where agents “spruikers” tell investors that they have insurance cover for 7 years, in high-rise apartment blocks. And pigs fly…
The outcome:
There was a crowd of approximately 26 people. The opening bid was $850,000. Subsequently, the property was passed in at $860,000 with only one bidder; whom strangely bid against himself.  
Overhearing the agent’s discussions with both the vendor’s representative and bidder at the time; we found out:
1)     The reserve had been set at $950,000 by the vendor and on the day.
2)     The agent's sale expectations was closer to the $1,000,000 + due to other sales.
3)     The agent also miraculously, appeared to know (had a revelation one might say) what other similar units in the area were being sold for.
Surprise, surprise. It appears the agent did give the vendor an estimated value of the property. One that was a lot higher than what it was passed in at.
For now we are noticing more and more; agents like this one, hide behind their misinterpretation of the FT NSW guide lines and what the guide lines were purposed for.
Furthermore, when more and more buyers are educated to counter the foolish, unethical and illegal tactics used by agents in their auction campaigns; buyers gain the advantage. Agents in turn, place their vendors at a high risk of losing $10’s if not $100’s of thousands of dollars.
Foolishly, both the agent and auctioneer, further allowed the property to be passed in at a low price. A price lower than the reserve. No vendor-bid was given, to help in maintaining a better chance of achieving the desired result, when the sale reverts to a private-treaty sale.
Why did they get a low offer in the first instance? This was all because the agent wanted to draw a crowd. No price-guide is the new under-quoting.
Well, in this auction, the “dumb and dumber” tactics backfired and more will continue to fail like this auction campaign.  Perhaps it’s time vendors made agents more accountable, particularly when they are charged high marketing fees.
Nonetheless, the losers in all this and like many other auctions, are the vendors. The vendor placed his trust in a professional that would guide them on the best method of sale.
The agent failed to both: to provide the best service to the client and present an ethical marketing campaign to engage the consumers (the buyers). Buyers want transparency, not the smoke and mirrors approach adopted by foolish agents.
Not quoting a price guide and going to auction with so many other comparable properties on the market, was a recipe for failure.
The campaign failed: it did however, draw a very large crowd but a crowd that was not willing to play the agent’s game. They could see right through the unethical conduct of the agent.
In this case, I am familiar with the vendors. I know for a fact they would not be bullied by the agent into accepting a lower than anticipated [quoted] price.
Reasons for marketing property by an auction campaign
The main principles for taking property for auction resound so clearly, as I write this article and sip down to the end of my coffee.
1)     Uniqueness (truly no comparable sales).
2)     Motivation:
a.     Forced sale by court order.
b.     Quick and urgent sale for personal reasons.
c.     Time constraint.
3)     Development potential: building or land.
4)     An unfinished project even.
Now there are many more, however, the above is a good beginner’s guide. For the same reasons above, there are also alternate methods of sale and ones that can achieve a better outcome. This is a better outcome in relation to both the price and the way the sales process is handled.
George Rousos: Real estate trainer, course developer and compliance coach at Industry Training Consultants, shares an alternate approach to a public auctions. 
My tip for real estate agents
If in total doubt and a value can’t be determined to be within the guide lines set out by FT NSW; call a licensed valuer. A licensed valuer can assist agents that have issues with forming a realistic price-guide.
Transparency is what buyers are looking for. If some agents believe they can fool buyers; think again. Buyers more than ever, are equipped with tools to help determine price values. In some areas, buyers are also contracting the services of “buyers advocates” to assist them.
However, it must be said that some agents just don’t believe they need, nor want professional help. Some simply feel they are above the law and protected by their real estate office-brand. Some simply run on an overdose of “auction and how to crunch the vendor” seminars.
EDWIN ALMEIDA is licensee in charge of <a href="https://www.just-think.com.au/" target="_blank">Just Think Real Estate</a>.<a href="https://www.just-thin.com.au/"> </a>
He is also the creator of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/JustThinkProperty" target="_blank">Oz Real Estate.TV</a> and a presenter for <a href="https://propertyinvestingvault.com/" target="_blank">propertyinvestingvault.com</a>.
</body></html>

ealmedia-arK4DBYLjS

No price guide is the new underquoting: Edwin Almeida

<html><body>
Real estate agents in Victoria could be forced to publish indicative selling prices on listings as soon as early 2017 following the underquoting controversy in the state. 
The government plans to make it compulsory for an agent to attach an information statement to their listings.
Under the new laws, agents must provide prospective buyers with a comprehensive market analysis including three recent comparable sales, an indicative selling price, and the median price for the suburb. 
Common terms on property listings such as 'contact agent', 'price on application' and 'sale by negotiation' may disappear.
Only a 10 percent price range will also be allowed, with words and symbols suggesting figures such as '$1.2 million+' or 'offers over $1.2 million' will not be allowed.
Agents will have 24 hours to update advertising materials if a vendor has rejected a written offer above the advertised price, or the agent’s price estimate changes. 
The REIV have backed the possible changes, suggesting it will be a significant step forward and will greatly benefit those looking to buy property in Victoria.
REIV chief executive officer Geoff White said that the changes will create a more transparent market, providing clear information to all stakeholders.
“A key objective of the new laws has been to ensure that they are effective in a rising or a falling market, and we believe they have delivered on this objective," he said.
“The changes will provide consistency in pricing of property and the information provided to both vendors and buyers."
The changes come as part of the state governments crackdown on underquoting, where an agent misleads a prospective buyer about the likely sale price.
RealAs however suggest the new underquoting laws will fail.
They suggest some rogue real estate operators which underquote property prices to unsuspecting property buyers will continue to do so despite the laws.
Here is why RealAs believe the Victorian Underquoting Laws will fail:
- Advertising price ranges of more than 10 percent is banned
- Words or symbols in advertising such as 'offers above,' 'from' or '+' will be banned
- How does consumer Affairs Victoria ensure the comparable sales are truly comparable to the property for sale?
- Advertising must promptly updated if the seller rejects a written offer to purchase, or the agent's price estimate changes
- Agents found guilty of underquoting could lose their sales commissions
- Agents have to prove on request from Consumer Affairs Victoria how they arrived at the estimated price
- Real estate agents caught underquoting will face hefty fines, with new offences with penalties of more than $31,000
- The new laws are part of the Labor Government's work to make the real estate industry fairer. The Government has consulted with the REIV which has backed the reforms.
- Rogue Victorian real estate agents which want to underquote under the proposed laws will continue to do so.
To read more about the new underquoting laws <a href="https://www.premier.vic.gov.au/new-underquoting-laws-for-victoria/" target="_blank">click here</a>. 
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Property 101: Legislation changes as Victoria cracks down on underquoting

<html><body>
The hockingstuart Richmond real estate agency has admitted it underquoted on property listings.
Hockingstuart Richmond was accused of 11 contraventions of Australian Consumer Law relating to deceptive conduct and misleading representations relating to land sale.
Tony Nolan QC, for the estate agency, told the Federal Court hockingstuart would be “admitting every fact” during the hearing yesterday. The sentence hearing gets underway next week.
The realAs website noted the agency has improved its price guidance as in June 2015 hockingstuart Richmond was inaccurately quoting properties by 22 percent on average, ie a $1,000,000 agent quoted house would typically sell for $1,228,000.
Now they are one of the most accurate quoters of property prices at 11 percent on average.
Hockingstuart issued a statement saying it took seriously its responsibility to accurately price properties.
“Our network of 50 offices successfully helps 20,000 Victorians buy and sell their homes each year so it is disappointing to see this outcome,” the statement said.
“As master franchisor, we are doing everything in our power to reduce the risk of this happening again.
"We have recently run a number of refresher courses in accurate pricing across the entire group and will continue to work with all offices to audit their sales files — ensuring this training has been embedded at all agent levels.”
The consumer watchdog’s half-year report noted 12 major underquoting investigations underway, but the CAV is yet to take legal action against any other agencies.
</body></html>

Hockingstuart Richmond admit to underquoting

<html><body>
The magistrate of Blacktown Local Court has handed down judgement dismissing all charges against BresicWhitney Estate Agents Pty Ltd for falsely understating the estimated selling prices when marketing properties in 2014.
After a considerably delayed trial, the dismissal came on a technicality concerning the term ‘employee’ in the Property Stock and Business Agents Act 2002 (the Act).
In this case the ‘operating’ arm of the business was the licence holder and undertook the business of a real estate agent.
A subsidiary company ‘employed’ the employees.
As a result the court found the ‘employees’ who made the statements about price, which were less than the estimated selling price in the agency agreement, were not technically employed by the licensed agent.
"This is not the policy intent of the provisions and in his findings the Magistrate acknowledged the likelihood that the business was structured in a way that would insulate it to some degree against liability in the event of such matters," a department spokesperson advised.
While the prosecution was taken under the old laws, the Government is now seeking urgent legal advice.
"Consumers can be assured any legal loopholes will be closed," the spokesperson advised.
No legislative timetable has been yet offered on the prospect of a BresicWhitney amendment.
Fair Trading is also still considering its position in relation to any appeal.
The consumer watchdog advised the more serious price discrepancy alleged was at Double Bay, where the publicly published price guidance reputedly did not match the private agency agreement documentation in the office paperwork.
The Murilla apartment at <a href="https://www.bresicwhitney.com.au/buy/543-545-new-south-head-road-double-bay-9956" target="_blank">62/543-545 New South Head Road</a> had a reported price guide of over $1.5 million last November, but Fair Trading investigations revealed the selling price estimate in the agency agreement at the low end of $1.6 million.
The late 1950s, A.M. Bolot-designed, company title apartment (below) was reported in the Wentworth Courier as sold for $1.79 million (and at $1.76 million by the Sunday Telegraph) through agent Walter Burfitt-Williams. The three bedroom sub-penthouse had 176 square metres space in the eight storey block above Redleaf Pool at the corner of New South Head and Victoria roads. The previous time it was marketed for sale was in 1989.
<img src="/images/2015/03/16/oduble-bay-march-16-one.jpg" alt="" width="764" height="450">
When contacted by The Sunday Telegraph cost of living editor, John Rolfe, before its front page splash, Walter Burfitt-Williams said: “The owner gave us instructions.”
At Surry Hills an 1890s terrace house at <a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-surry+hills-118276043" target="_blank">14 Collins Street</a> was advertised last November with a price guide of over $1.05 million, but the estimate in the agency agreement was $1.1 to $1.2 million. The guidance was lifted from $1,025,000 during the marketing campaign.
The two bedroom terrace (below) actually sold for $1.07 million through Nic Krasnostein, so it appears, with benefit of hindsight, he may have been overly ambitious in his pitch to the vendor. It sold to an investor who sought to rent it out at $850 a week. It had previously sold at $610,000 in 2005.
<img src="/images/2015/03/16/surry%20hills%20mar%2016%20one.jpg" alt="">
The prosecutions were only the third in a decade.
“We believe we’ve found evidence to prove the agent has under quoted,” Commissioner Rod Stowe told The Sunday Telegraph who published a Warren cartoon too.
<img src="/images/2015/03/16/cartoon%20march%2016.jpg" alt="">
Source: Sunday Telegraph
Property Observer had previously reported possible underquoting activity from an undisclosed agency was under investigation.
Operation Balaya, an investigation specifically developed to look at real estate compliance, was launched on agencies operating in the inner-city.
Officers were also checking licences, certificates, current continuing professional development, professional indemnity insurance and current and past financial year qualified audits.
“During its inspections, NSW Fair Trading identified certain information that requires further investigation to establish whether or not representations made by a real estate agency in relation to a number of recent sales were misleading,” the then Minister for Fair Trading Matthew Mason-Cox said.
“Agents who engaged in this illegal practice could face a maximum penalty of $22,000 or depending on the severity of the breaches an agency could have its licence cancelled.”
The NSW Premier Mike Baird elevated the issue into an election policy.
The department has until June 3 to make a decision on any appeal.
“While the prosecution was taken under the old laws, the government is seeking urgent legal advice and consumers can be assured any legal loopholes will be closed,” it said.
</body></html>

BresicWhitney underquoting loophole let-off to trigger legislative amendment review

<html><body>
SPONSORED POST
The property landscape in Victoria is set for an overhaul with new laws to restrict underquoting practices. New regulations imposed by the Victorian Government intend to protect buyers and create a more transparent property market.
The new regulations require agents to be forthcoming with realistic estimates by providing at least three comparable sales to interested parties. The comparable sales reports will need to be for properties recently sold within the same area and demonstrate a likeness to their current listing.
Along with the new guidelines come harsher penalties for agents who disregard the need for quoting accuracy. A financial penalty of $28,000, double the existing fine, will be imposed, as well as forfeiture of any commission obtained from the sale.
With underquoting the cause of distress for many consumers, Victorian buyer agent <a href="https://wiserealestateadvice.com.au" target="_blank">WiseRealestateAdvice.com.au</a> Mark Ribarsky says that this is “a win for his clients and prospective purchasers everywhere”.
The changes will come as a relief to many people in the areas most affected by over quoting in recent years. Buyers in Box Hill, Vermont and Mount Waverly have faced underquoting resulting in sale prices of up to 33 percent above quoted estimates in recent years. 
The new mandates will provide buyers with a more realistic view of the houses they can afford to direct their time and energy into properties within their reach.
For more information, <a href="https://wiserealestateadvice.com.au" target="_blank">click here</a>.
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

Underquoting overhaul in Victoria

<html><body>
Estate agents have been told an underquoting audit program will be conducted by NSW Fair Trading commencing today, Monday 7 March lasting for two weeks.
The program will target agents in both Sydney metropolitan and regional locations.
The inspectors will be looking at published advertisements and the Estimated Selling Price contained within agency agreements.  
They will also review and consider the evidence utilised in developing the estimated selling price.
The department has viewed the industry as coping well with the new laws and overall compliance. 
But in the first seven weeks since the laws were introduced on the 1 January 2016, Fair Trading received 68 complaints relating to underquoting. 
"Complaints are from named individuals, anonymous complainants and other real estate agents," a department spokesperson said.
To coincide with the new underquoting laws starting, Fair Trading ran a public awareness campaign to raise awareness and understanding among NSW real estate agents and consumers seeking to buy and sell residential property in NSW.
The campaign advertisements were run throughout January 2016 directing people to underquoting information on the Fair Trading website.
Fair Trading’s online display advertising delivered almost 1 million impressions.
A Facebook campaign was run concurrently with the digital advertising and generated more than 685,000 impressions. 
Fair Trading has information tailored specifically to support agents specifically, a publication was produced – <a href="https://fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/biz_res/ftweb/pdfs/About_us/Publications/Underquoting_guidelines_for_residential_property.pdf" target="_blank">Underquoting guidelines for residential property</a>, including a checklist to help agents with their obligations.  
Also, the mandatory fact sheet, which agents need to supply to sellers when entering into an agency agreement to sell their home, was updated to refer to the new underquoting laws. 
Fair Trading has conducted 119 agent education lessons following a review of more than 5000 advertisements. 
Fair Trading also issued two trader education letters for failing to comply with an undertaking to update advertisements. 
"Fair Trading will take action in regards to any future or ongoing contravention, which can include penalty infringement notices, and civil pecuniary penalties."
</body></html>

Underquoting estate agent blitz launched by NSW Fair Trading

<html><body>
Sydney may have forgotten Natalie Jean Wood. But Real Estate Agents haven’t forgotten to underquote; when it comes to auctioning a property.
I definitely have something to say about what I perceived may well be, blatant underquoting strategies used in the marketing of the Surry Hills property: 139 Kippax Street, <a href="/expert-insights/buying/surry-hills-terrace-listing-of-the-woman-sydney-forgot">the home once owned by Natalie Wood</a>.
It will take more than a coffee to calm me down, particularly after my client spent $4,000 doing Due Diligence (DD) prior to the auction.
The price guide that was given to me and other interested parties I spoke with at the time, was: $550,000-$650,000.
First cab off the rank, and to immediately dispel any misconceptions you may have. Misconceptions about me being a disgruntled buyer’s agent and particularly since I didn’t purchase the property, on behalf of my client.
<ol start="1">
<li>Part of the DD we undertook revealed that land in the area was worth approximately $10,000-$11,000/sqm.</li>
<li>There was some value in the building regardless of what the refurbishment works would cost, and</li>
<li>We were under no illusion that we would obtain the home for the lower end of the price guide which was given.</li>
</ol>
It’s not rocket science
It’s not rocket science to work out property (price-guide) values that are closer to true market values. To ascertain these we look at the following:
<ol start="1">
<li>Land value as compared to other sales in the local area.</li>
<li>Value of existing structure/building (taking into account what is required or not required to be altered, changed or fixed) and integrity of existing structure.</li>
<li>Aesthetic values including but not limited to: visual appeal, location, heritage, charm or story behind the property, views and surrounding landscape and demographics.</li>
<li>Calculate costs to repair/refurbish/build and compare with current properties on the market and recent property sales. properties that would be of similar ilk.</li>
<li>If still in doubt? call a professional valuer for their opinion.</li>
</ol>
Therefore, for an agent or agency to hide behind the worn and dated argument of “no comparable sales” is just sheer ignorance or intentional use of sleight of hand tactics. I have written about these issues previously.
1) The what-if test. 
2) Dumb to underquote and dumber not to know property values.
Dialogue with agency
Correspondence and conversations with the agent, all led us to believe that the agent truly didn’t know the value of the property. On the alternative, we also thought that there may be an underlying driver to draw a crowd. We know the latter to be under-quoting.
If other buyers were going to be persuaded by either one of the above premises, we believed that this would work in our favor.
The low-ball price-guide may actually keep the value of the property low, this is what we presumed anyway. We felt that the low price-guide coupled with the added features of the home; the circumstance of the deceased owner and the dilapidated condition of the property, was a mix that would work in our favor.
Nonetheless, our limit was set at $900,000 and this took into account our estimated land value as well as the intrinsic and heritage value of the property. Yes, and the history that came with the home.
Again, we knew that the agent was off the mark completely. However, the agent insisted that the “buyer’s feedback” was $550,000-$650,000 and with the interest obtained, it may reach the $700,000 mark. I beg to differ.
A professional agent would have done and assessed the value more along the lines of $850,000-$900,000 and thus presenting a correct price-guide. A guide that is not reliant on; “buyer’s feedback” nor left to ignorance. But, I was not engaged to teach them how to do their job.
Don't you just hate it, when you call an agent and ask for the 'price-guide' and they respond with: don't know at this point in time, once we hold a few opens we will gauge the "buyer's feedback". Get real !!! and moving on...
The outcome
Well, my buyer was not successful; as much as I tried to slow things down, there were others that wanted the property at all costs. The home sold for $1,105,000.
One may well say, ‘market forces’ were at play once the auction reached and went beyond the $950,000 mark. 
Warning to agents
Now, if you really want to accept the argument that: any so called out-of-line sale price is influenced by the lack of comparable sales to go by and play the ignorance card, or even take ill advice from vendors? Perhaps it’s time a Professional Valuer was called in, to assist you.
Obtaining and contracting the services of a valuer, is a better option to support and protect you as you. After all, you are the professional real estate agent. Don't hang your hat on statements such as: "market forces" nor "the vendor made me do it" in the belief that these will protect you from prosecution.
EDWIN ALMEIDA is licensee in charge of <a href="https://www.just-think.com.au/" target="_blank">Just Think Real Estate</a>.<a href="https://www.just-thin.com.au/"> </a>
He is also the creator of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/JustThinkProperty" target="_blank">Oz Real Estate.TV</a> and a presenter for <a href="https://propertyinvestingvault.com/" target="_blank">propertyinvestingvault.com</a>.
</body></html>

Sydney may have forgotten Natalie Jean Wood, but real estate agents haven’t forgotten to underquote: Edwin Almeida 

<html><body>
Underquoting laws start from 1 January 2016. They apply to all residential properties for sale on or after 1 January 2016.
An agent is underquoting the selling price of a property if they make or publish a statement about its price that is less than their reasonable estimate of the property’s likely selling price that is contained in the agency agreement.
This is an offence under the Property, Stock and Business Agents Act 2002 (the Act). Agents face fines of up to $22,000 for failing to comply with the law. Agents may also lose their commission and fees earned from the sale of an underquoted property. These commissions and fee payments will go towards the Property Services Compensation Fund, which supports consumers who have experienced financial loss as a result of property agent misconduct.  
Know your responsibilities – read the Underquoting guidelines
Agents should make sure they are carrying out their new obligations by downloading Fair Trading’s <a href="https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/biz_res/ftweb/pdfs/About_us/Publications/Underquoting_guidelines_for_residential_property.pdf" target="_blank">Underquoting guidelines for residential property</a>.
<h1 class="bodyheading">Key requirements </h1>
An agent should never state or publish an estimated selling price that is less than what is in the agency agreement.
An estimated price communicated to sellers and potential buyers must represent what an agent reasonably believes a property is likely to sell for. An agent and seller can choosenot to publish or make any statement about the likely selling price of the property. However, if they do publish or make any statements about price, they must comply with the new requirements.
As an agent, you must:
<ul>
<li>
include your reasonable estimate of a property's likely selling price in the agency agreement (also called the sales agreement)</li>
<li>
provide evidence to the seller of how you estimated the selling price</li>
<li>
ensure the highest price in a price range does not exceed the lower price by more than 10% (for example, $500,000-$550,000)</li>
<li>
record in writing statements made about the price while a property is marketed</li>
<li>
ensure your estimated selling price remains reasonable by:</li>
<li>
revising it as soon as you know (or should be aware) of evidence or circumstances that changes it
</li>
<li>
notifying the seller of the revised price
</li>
<li>
amending the agency agreement with the revised estimate
</li>
<li>take all reasonable steps as soon as is practical to update any marketing of the property with the revised estimated selling price.</li>
</ul>
You must not:
<ul>
<li>
provide any price estimate less than what you have reasonably estimated that a property is worth (as recorded in the agency agreement with the seller) - this applies to advertising the property or in any communication with prospective buyers about the property's likely selling price</li>
<li>
use any statements such as "offers above" or "offers over" an amount, or "plus" a particular price (for example, $500,000+), which could underquote or obscure a property's estimated value.</li>
</ul>
 
<h1 class="bodyheading">Questions and answers about underquoting </h1>
<h1 class="bodyheading">Do the laws apply to properties sold before 1 January 2016? </h1>
No. The underquoting requirements apply to all residential properties for sale on 1 January 2016 and into the future. However, if you have already entered into an agency agreement with a seller before 1 January 2016 and the agreement is still operating, then you will not have to comply with the requirement to update your estimated selling price, however you may wish to do this as a matter of good practice.
You must still comply with all other requirements for advertising and making statements about your estimated selling price as it currently appears in the agency agreement, as well as all the new record keeping requirements. That means that if you have properties advertised for sale at a price that is less than the estimated selling price in your agency agreement, then you must take all reasonable steps, as soon as is practical, to change or withdraw those advertisements. This includes flyers and any other printed material and all online material.
All agency agreements entered into on or after 1 January 2016 must comply with all the new requirements.
<a class="gotop" href="https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/ftw/Property_agents_and_managers/Agency_responsibilities/Underquoting.page#top">I used to advertise ‘offers over $890K’ for a property when my estimated selling price was $900,000-$990,000. Can’t I do this?  </a>
No. Statements such as ‘offers over $890K’ and other statements like ‘offers above’ or ‘$890K plus’ do not provide buyers with enough information to determine whether the property is within their price range. At worst, such statements can mislead buyers by indicating that a property could likely sell for the minimum offer advertised when the property will likely sell for much higher.
Remember that from 1 January 2016, you must not:
<ul>
<li>do any advertising that includes such references (for example ‘offers above $900,000’, ‘offers over $900,000’ or ‘$900,000+’)</li>
<li>indicate a selling price that is any lower than the reasonable estimated selling price as recorded in the agency agreement.</li>
</ul>
The requirements make sure consumers don’t waste money and time on property inspections by banning any price information that underquotes an agent’s estimated selling price.
<a class="aname" name="The_seller_wants_me_to_advertise_a_lower_price_than_the_estimated_selling_price_to_attract_market_interest._What_should_I_do?" href=""></a>
<h2>The seller wants me to advertise a lower price than the estimated selling price to attract market interest. What should I do? </h2>
You should make sure that the seller is aware of your legal obligations to never indicate a selling price lower than your estimated selling price. Your role is to get the seller the highest possible price for the property through fair, effective marketing and enabling competition between buyers for whom the property is likely to be affordable.  
You may wish to direct the seller you represent to the Fair Trading website or supply them with Fair Trading information on the underquoting reforms. This should help them to understand the purpose of the underquoting laws and the consequences if you illegally underquote a property.
You must also take the time to explain how you arrived at the estimated selling price for their property and provide evidence for why this is a reasonable estimate of the likely selling price.
<a class="aname" name="What_if_the_seller_wants_more_than_I_think_is_the_estimated_selling_price?" href=""></a>
<h2>What if the seller wants more than I think is the estimated selling price? </h2>
If the seller wants to sell the property for more than your estimated selling price, you may choose to:
<ul>
<li>advertise at a higher price that meets the seller’s instructions. or</li>
<li>decide not to disclose any price.</li>
</ul>
As long as you do not advertise or disclose any price that is less than the estimated selling price in the agency agreement, then underquoting has not occurred.
You should also let the seller know that the following pricing statements may be considered false or misleading under the Australian Consumer Law:
<ul>
<li>quoting the estimated selling price where the seller has advised that they will only sell for a higher price or</li>
<li>advertising a property at a price that is less than a previously rejected offer (unless the seller is now prepared to accept a lower offer).</li>
</ul>
<a class="aname" name="Why_does_the_estimated_selling_price_need_to_be_up-to-date?_" href=""></a>
<h2>Why does the estimated selling price need to be up-to-date?  </h2>
The laws recognise the dynamic market forces in the real estate sector and require agents to review and amend their estimate in line with market feedback and other relevant factors impacting a property's likely selling price.
Agents must not continue to market a property at an estimated selling price that they know, or should know, is no longer a reasonable estimate. Agents must: notify the seller if they revise their estimated selling price, provide evidence of the reasonableness of the revised estimate, amend the agency agreement (the seller’s consent is not required to do this) and take all reasonable steps to update their marketing materials as soon as is practical.
<a class="gotop" href="https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/ftw/Property_agents_and_managers/Agency_responsibilities/Underquoting.page#top" style="line-height: 1.3em;">What should I consider a reliable offer, and when should it influence the estimated selling price?  </a>
You should request all offers in writing. If you consider that any offer or offers received changes the likely selling price of the property, you should revise your estimated selling price. Be sure to amend the agency agreement and advise the seller in writing, providing them with the evidence of the reasonableness of your revised price estimate.  
The local newspaper has gone to print with my previous estimated selling price. Am I breaching the laws? <a class="gotop" href="https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/ftw/Property_agents_and_managers/Agency_responsibilities/Underquoting.page#top"></a>
Certain updates may not be possible but you must be able to demonstrate that you have made reasonable attempts to update any marketing material that no longer shows your reasonable estimated selling price.
It may not be practical to retract published newspaper advertising. However, if you have the opportunity to update price information before it is printed, or can update any online marketing for the property, you must do so as soon as is practical.
<a class="aname" name="How_can_I_market_multi-unit_residential_property_or_multi-lot_residential_subdivisions?" href=""></a>
<h2>How can I market multi-unit residential property or multi-lot residential subdivisions? </h2>
If you give any price indication about the properties’ likely selling prices, any advertising you do must include the following: the estimated selling prices for the lowest and highest priced properties in each category of unit (eg. studio, one bedroom, two bedroom etc.).
Advertisements for multi-unit property marketed collectively can do this in two ways:
<ul>
<li>giving the price ranges for each category, with the low end of the range being the estimated selling price of the lowest priced unit in the category and the higher end of the range being the most expensive property in that category. For example: one bedroom units available - price range: $550K-$700K. In this example, $550K represents the estimated selling price of the lowest priced one bedroom unit and $700K is the estimated selling price of the highest priced one-bedroom unit. This would need to be done for each category.  or </li>
<li>stating the estimated selling price in the agency agreement of the lowest and highest priced units for each property category (instead of using the ‘range method’ above). For example: one bedroom units available - the lowest priced unit is $550K, the highest priced unit is $700K; two bedroom units available - the lowest priced unit is $700K, the highest priced unit is $900K.</li>
</ul>
Note that the range advertising method described above is for properties being marketed collectively. Therefore, it does not breach the requirement related to estimated selling prices expressed as a range, which is for single properties.
Multi-lot subdivisions would need to include the lowest priced lot and the highest priced lot.
Any collective marketing of residential units/lots that includes a price indication should also advise prospective buyers that there are multiple properties within each category, of varying prices within that range.
To avoid underquoting, all advertising and marketing must be updated to reflect the value of the new lowest price unit/lot available when:
<ul>
<li>the lowest priced unit/lot is sold  or</li>
<li>the last of the lowest priced units in the price range for a particular category is sold.</li>
</ul>
Be aware that some previous practices are now illegal, such as a billboard promoting off-the-plan residential property that states: 'From $400,000'.
Also, it would be against the law to promote a range such as 'property available from $400K-$2.2M'. This does not give a meaningful indication of the price ranges for each category of residential units/lots being collectively marketed.     
<a class="aname" name="Can_I_choose_not_to_reveal_a_price_when_collectively_marketing_multi-unit_residential_property_or_multi-lot_subdivisions?_" href=""></a>
<h2>Can I choose not to reveal a price when collectively marketing multi-unit residential property or multi-lot subdivisions?  </h2>
Yes. Potential buyers can simply be advised to contact the agent for further information. Remember that agents cannot give any price indication (verbal, written or advertised) for a property that is LESS than that specific property’s evidence-based estimated selling price.
<a class="aname" name="How_should_I_record_estimated_selling_prices_for_multi-unit_property_and_multi-lot_subdivisions?_" href=""></a>
<h2>How should I record estimated selling prices for multi-unit property and multi-lot subdivisions?  </h2>
Attached to the agency agreement, the agent may include a schedule of the lots with their individual prices, or properties available with their features (primarily bedroom numbers) and a price for each. Any prices included in the schedule cannot be less than the estimated selling price for each unit/lot.
<a class="aname" name="What_if_I_am_unfairly_accused_of_underquoting?" href=""></a>
<h2>What if I am unfairly accused of underquoting? </h2>
To help consumers understand what underquoting is, you can direct them to the <a href="https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/ftw/About_us/Legislation/Changes_to_legislation/Underquoting_reforms.page" target="_blank">Underquoting reforms</a> web page on the Fair Trading website. This will give them an overview of the new laws and point them to the information relevant to them.
Consumers can also speak to a Fair Trading officer on 13 32 20.
If you have complied with all the requirements expected of agents under the Act, then you will not be at risk of breaching the underquoting laws.
<a class="aname" name="What_will_happen_if_Fair_Trading_determines_that_I_have_underquoted?_" href=""></a>
<h2>What will happen if Fair Trading determines that I have underquoted?  </h2>
Fair Trading can issue you with a penalty infringement notice of $2,200. Depending on the circumstances it could also be grounds for Fair Trading to take further disciplinary action on your licence. If the matter is prosecuted and you are found guilty of underquoting, you will pay a fine of up to $22,000. You may also lose the full commission and any fees for the property or properties you have underquoted.  
<a class="aname" name="What_about_when_I_talk_to_a_potential_purchaser_on_the_phone_or_at_an_open_house?" href=""></a>
<h2>What about when I talk to a potential purchaser on the phone or at an open house? </h2>
If you make a statement about a residential property’s likely selling price in marketing that property to a buyer, potential buyer, seller or potential seller, you must make a written record of the statement.
The record of the statement must contain:
<ul>
<li>the address of the property concerned</li>
<li>the price or price range</li>
<li>the date and time of the statement.
</li>
</ul>
For more information, <a href="https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/ftw/About_us/Legislation/Changes_to_legislation/Underquoting_reforms.page" target="_blank">click here</a>.
</body></html>

Underquoting

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Underquoting

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News