Perth’s new apartment market recorded its strongest quarter of sales since Q4 2021, with 412 apartments sold in Q1 2026 and a record quarterly sold value of $537 million, according to Urbis’ latest Apartment Essentials results.

Urbis said the March quarter result reflects strong, highly product‑specific demand across both ends of the market, from more attainable projects delivering at scale, through to premium stock being absorbed by equity‑rich downsizers.&nbsp;

David Cresp, Partner at Urbis, said the key story in Perth is not demand, it is the market’s ability to convert demand into delivered housing.&nbsp;

“This is the strongest sales quarter since Q4 2021, and it reinforces that demand in Perth is real and it’s local,” David Cresp said. “But the task now is delivery, turning that demand into projects that can actually be built and completed.”&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=110291 project_image_fid=302785]

<h2>Affordable product leads, premium demand remains resilient</h2>

Sales in Q1 were led by more affordable projects, with The Boulevard (SKS Group) recording 115 sales in the quarter, the presentation noting this is only the second time a single project has surpassed 100 quarterly sales. The project was able to offer more affordable housing product right next to a train station.&nbsp;

Palmyra West (Finbar) also delivered strong results with 28 sales in Q1, following 84 sales in Q4, with an average price of under $800,000, underscoring depth of demand for well‑located, attainable new stock.&nbsp;

At the premium end, Urbis said downsizer demand is continuing, with the results highlighting Romeo (Applecross, Finbar) recording 75 sales and reaching almost 50% sold in one quarter.

Jual (Shenton Park, Celsius Property) also posted a strong quarter with 28 sales, reaching 39% sold in one quarter.

Urbis noted that Perth apartment demand is not speculative, not investor‑led, and not uniform, describing it as localised, often equity‑driven and highly product‑specific, a pattern reflected in the polarisation between strong “attainable” performers and premium downsizer product.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=148957 project_image_fid=364102]

<h2>Prices underpinned by costs, and the delivery risk is growing</h2>

Urbis said pricing pressure is cost not demand‑driven: construction costs and delivery risk are now a central constraint, with the results noting build costs remain elevated and volatile, and that energy, fuel and labour uncertainty weigh on feasibility.

David Cresp said a growing challenge for private Build‑to‑Sell developers is simply securing a builder in the current environment.

“Developers are really feeling the pressure from a building market that was operating at capacity and securing a builder is challenging,” David Cresp said, adding that even where a builder can be secured, “trying to get to the price that makes the development financially viable is incredibly challenging in the current market.”&nbsp;

Urbis’ broader WA commentary also notes that industry remains at or above capacity with lot and housing creation, and that many builders are limiting new sales to manage stretched workforces and fixed‑price contract pressures, conditions that flow directly into apartment feasibility and delivery timing.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=108869 project_image_fid=317905]

<h2>Supply: improving later, but still constrained, and Perth lags eastern benchmarks</h2>

While near‑term supply remains constrained, Urbis’ forecast shows completions lifting “Supply is forecast to be back above 1,500 apartments per annum for the first time since 2019”, with 1,775 completions forecast for 2026, and volumes remaining above that level over the following years.&nbsp;

Looking further ahead, completions are forecast to reach 2,500 in 2028, with the report noting 32% of that total is social/affordable, reflecting the role of government‑supported delivery in rebuilding the pipeline.&nbsp;

However, Urbis said Perth remains behind comparable markets on pipeline scale. In a national comparison of projects under construction, the report shows under construction Perth Build‑to‑Sell (BTS) at 3,446 apartments versus the Gold Coast at 7,922. Mr Cresp said “The challenge for Perth is how to we grow the delivery pipeline”.

Urbis’ conclusion is that Perth’s market is increasingly defined by product discipline and delivery certainty, with the research identifying “delivery certainty is key” and calling out builder risk and procurement models as core success factors, alongside “timing and staging”.&nbsp;

Joel Robinson

Perth apartment sales hit strongest pace since late 2021 as builder capacity tightens

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/sammut-developments">Sammut Group</a> has secured development approval for its latest Brisbane apartment project, marking the Sydney developer’s next step in expanding its Queensland pipeline following the success of its debut Gold Coast development, Coast.

The approved project at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/44-glen-road-toowong-qld-4066">44 Glen Road, </a><a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/toowong-qld-4066">Toowong</a> will deliver a 15-storey riverfront apartment building with 42 residences, significantly increasing the scale of the site’s previous approval for a smaller luxury scheme. Designed by Bureau^proberts, the development will comprise a mix of predominantly four-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments positioned to maximise Brisbane River and city views.

Sammut Director Julian Sammut said the group had been actively searching Brisbane for several years before identifying Toowong as the right fit.

“Brisbane was the right step for Sammut,” Sammut said.

“With the success of Coast we thought we should definitely look to do more in Queensland alone. We then pushed up to look at Brisbane. We've been looking for I'd say two to three years actually and it was hard to find the right location.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/f_auto,c_limit,w_1440,q_75/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/field/image/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.14%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=dYAVIL7qdcGA8ojvkslSrLjczXFejSSx" />

Sammut said suburbs including New Farm and Teneriffe were considered before the group ultimately focused on Toowong due to its strong downsizer demographic and limited supply of developable riverfront land.

The site was acquired off-market after what Sammut described as a lengthy negotiation and planning process, with the developer pursuing an uplift to the original approval.

“We are DA approved now which is very exciting,” Sammut said.

“We've had our change approval come through and we've obviously doubled the height, 15 storeys plus rooftop. We've got 42 amazing apartments that are going to be coming to market soon.”

<img alt="Sammut makes Brisbane apartment play" data-entity-type="" data-entity-uuid="" src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,dpr_2.0,q_auto:good/https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202025-12-23%20at%203.27.26%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=ohkRkY0dIZlqdfME2EZePsCQavRiBadE" />

Bureau^proberts said the design responds to Toowong’s evolving urban character, balancing contemporary apartment living with the area’s established residential identity.

“A place where traditional Queensland living has taken place for centuries; Toowong is seeing a shift of contemporary influence, commercial and retail hubs mixed with well-considered residential offerings – all the while maintaining its character and charm,” the architect noted in planning documents submitted to Brisbane City Council.

The architecture practice said the project’s form was shaped by its riverfront setting, flood considerations, neighbouring building scales, and view corridors.

“They said the mix of four and two-bedroom apartments capture the ‘fundamental qualities of Queenslander living,’ translated into the context of a contemporary subtropical building.”

The development sits just off Coronation Drive within walking distance of Toowong’s retail precinct and the upgraded Regatta ferry terminal, while also benefiting from proximity to the incoming green bridge connection to West End. Sammut said the accessibility and amenity offering were central to the site’s appeal.

The approval adds to growing residential activity along the Toowong riverfront, joining nearby projects including Consolidated Properties’ Monarch Residences and Spyre Group’s ARC Residences.

Sammut secures approval for debut Brisbane apartment development in Toowong

Developer Lanevick is heading back into Sydney’s apartment market after focusing more heavily on the luxury townhouse and terrace sector in recent years.

Lanevick, founded and directed by Steve Maroun, is expecting to receive approval in the coming months for a new apartment development in Gladesville, with the aim to launch it to the market later this year.

The 51-apartment project, designed by Studio Johnston, will comprise a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom apartments positioned toward the Hunters Hill downsizer market.

“Traditionally it’s been difficult for people in that market to downsize because there just hasn’t been the right product available,” Maroun said.

“We’re targeting buyers who might have 30 to 40 per cent of their house value sitting in the bank after downsizing.

“They still want good spacious entertaining areas, they still want quality design, but they also want flexibility and the ability to enjoy life a bit more after working hard for a long time.”

The project sits near Boronia Park and within close proximity to the Parramatta River foreshore, an area Maroun says offers more of a Hunters Hill lifestyle than a traditional apartment precinct.

“From a lifestyle perspective, it’s really more Hunters Hill than Gladesville,” Maroun said. “You’re close to the foreshore, close to parklands, and still connected back into the village precinct.”

From level four and above, apartments will capture water views&nbsp;toward Sydney Harbour. Communal amenity will include rooftop entertaining areas, wellness spaces, and a gym tailored toward owner-occupier buyers.

“We’ve really designed these apartments around that buyer coming from the Hunters Hill LGA and what they’re actually looking for in their next chapter.”

The proposed development has also been designed to respond to the changing character of the broader Gladesville town centre, where a growing number of mixed-use and residential proposals are expected to emerge over the coming years.

“Gladesville presented a rare opportunity to deliver a genuinely design-led residential project within an evolving lifestyle precinct, just moments from the growing Gladesville town centre, and we’ve approached the project with a strong focus on architecture, liveability and long-term community value,” Maroun said.

Maroun said Lanevick saw a first-mover advantage within the precinct as planning controls continue to evolve to accommodate greater housing density.

“We think there’s a real opportunity there that hasn’t really been serviced properly yet,” he said.

“There’s going to be a broader evolution of the whole Gladesville village precinct over time, particularly with more activation and mixed-use outcomes.”

The Venus Street proposal will include a commercial and retail component at ground level designed to contribute to that evolving streetscape activation.

“A big part of the thinking was how do you activate that area properly and create more vibrancy and amenity, which is what Hunters Hill has been looking for,” Maroun said.

Lanevick’s focus since 2020 has largely been on smaller-scale luxury townhouse and terrace developments. The developer recently completed Royale Randwick, also designed by Studio Johnston, where prices reached $3.65 million. The project was featured in the UDIA NSW 2026 Professional Development Prospectus and was also named a finalist for Development of the Year.

&nbsp;

Lanevick to cater for Hunters Hill downsizers with new Gladesville apartment development

Property developer One Living, backed by former Macquarie banker turned investment manager Chris Green’s investment firm, has unveiled plans to bring more institutional capital into housing to help address the national supply crisis.

The New York-based investor has focused his firm, GreenPoint Partners, on addressing the supply shortage hitting middle market housing in Australia.

It is backing the new One Living business to develop more than 1000 units along the eastern seaboard. The new firm is starting with a development on Mona Vale Road, on the border of Mona Vale and Pymble, in Sydney’s Northern Beaches, with around 140 apartments planned. They are eyeing off more sites across the city.

With cost pressures rising in the industry, One Living’s model is to be a vertically integrated developer-builder, so it can respond directly to the housing gap by removing the cost inefficiencies embedded in traditional residential delivery.

“We are building a platform designed to operate at scale and starting in a market where there’s a clear need for quality, attainable housing,” One Living joint managing director Joseph Scuderi said.

“It’s that missing middle – it’s that attainable end of housing… that’s what most Australians invest into and what Australians can actually afford.”

<img alt="Mona Vale" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="798dfa93-4941-4db6-a696-31e9dc18e81c" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%202.31.50%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=mKBqi5C_DmeiXS.AtJkcR8LQIxqCqmFi" />

GreenPoint Partners brings years of experience assembling and scaling real estate operating businesses across major markets. And Green sees a big opportunity in Australia.

“For its size, sophistication and importance to the community, Australia’s living sector has remained largely under-institutionalised, which represents significant opportunity,” Green said. “GreenPoint identified that gap, assembled the right team, and is backing One Living to build a platform that is aligned to market needs.”

Green said being a builder-developer would give the company the capacity and flexibility it required to deliver reasonably-priced homes.

“We want it to be at that attainable level; not super high end luxury but at that attainable level,” he said.

<img alt="Mona Vale" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="74a5344a-4b26-4d4a-ada3-056b1220be77" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-05-28%20at%202.32.15%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=vY8hXHO4reBMdO8ZXMWCNtGZJofUPQ3j" />

&nbsp;

One Living will undertake a component of affordable housing in its schemes, which it will own and operate, and it could also run build-to-rent on some sites.

Green praised local policy settings.

“The NSW government is being very supportive, strategic and pragmatic in terms of how do we generate more supply of housing,” he said. “We think it’s actually positive for development and the bit that’s been lacking at that attainable level is that it’s lots of relatively small private developers, whereas we want to create an institutional platform.”

One Living is also&nbsp;looking at high-density projects and could take on more institutional funding in the future.

“The way we will be able to achieve economies of scale is through size,” Green added.

One Living enters Sydney's new apartment market with Northern Beaches site acquisition

It's been several years since there's been an opportunity to buy a brand new townhome in Melbourne's coastal suburb of Mordialloc. Even apartment developments in recent times have been few and far between in the area.

Local developer LDS Property identified the gap in new housing, securing a site on White Street, directly opposite&nbsp;Woodlands Golf Club Mordialloc. They've recently launched&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-townhouses/wm-residences-mordialloc-102-white-street-mordialloc-vic-3195">WM Residences</a>, just 13 townhouses which they have already started building.

Projects by Buxton Director Heath Thompson, who is selling WM Residences, says the townhouses x that perfect middle ground be

"Mordialloc residents have had limited options to downsize within the suburb, often forcing them to look elsewhere despite long-standing ties to the area," Thompson says.

"With very little comparable new supply coming to market, projects like WM Residences are well placed, particularly as buyers look to capitalise on current conditions amid constrained supply."

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134646 project_image_fid=6109]

The development, designed by regarded architecture firm&nbsp;<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/ewert-leaf">Ewert Leaf</a>,&nbsp;adopts a deliberately restrained architectural approach, focusing on simplicity, durability and liveability rather than overt design gestures.

The boutique scale is central to the offering. With only 13 three-bedroom residences, each home is configured to prioritise functional layouts and everyday use, supported by private terraces and secure two-car garages.

Ewert Leaf’s design response leans into a calm, neutral material palette. Interiors are defined by oak flooring, white walls and soft finishes, creating a consistent and understated backdrop. The approach avoids trend-driven detailing in favour of longevity, with an emphasis on natural light and spatial clarity.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134646 project_image_fid=6110]

Beyond aesthetics, the homes are designed to meet contemporary performance expectations. Each residence targets a minimum 6-star energy rating, incorporating double glazing, comprehensive insulation and all-electric Bosch appliances.

The project’s location supports a walkable coastal lifestyle, sitting within close proximity to Mordialloc’s foreshore, Main Street retail strip and the train station. Local cafés and dining venues, including Suburbia Deli and Hendriks Café, are within a short walk, reinforcing the area’s established neighbourhood character.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=134646 project_image_fid=6116]

While <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/mordialloc-vic-3195">Mordialloc</a> is often defined by its beach and pier, the project taps into other areas of day to day living, offering easy access to local food, casual dining and transport, rather than positioning itself purely as a lifestyle retreat.

WM Residences reflects a continued trend across Melbourne’s coastal suburbs towards smaller-scale, design-led townhouse developments, particularly on infill sites where proximity to amenity is already established.

With construction commenced prior to its market entry, the project aligns with a growing preference among buyers for developments with visible progress and defined delivery timeframes.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=134646]

WM Residences fills gap in Mordialloc townhouse market

Underquoting

<html><body>
The hockingstuart head office is currently working through allegations made by Consumer Affairs Victoria concerning its Richmond franchised office conduct in regard to auction price guidance.
"We are not in a position to discuss the specific details until further progress has been made," the estate agency has advised.
Hockingstuart in Richmond has been taken to court over its auction practices, accused of underquoting on 11 properties in 2014 and 2015, the Channel 7 News reporter Laurel Irving reported.
The properties were in Richmond and one in Kew. According to court documents, a detached Victorian in Mary Street, Richmond; a two-bedroom apartment in Coppin Street, Richmond; a two-bedroom apartment in Docker Street, Richmond were pinpointed.There was also an Edwardian home in Barkers Road, Kew.
The agency said under the current law, while vendors may seek the advice of agents, they are not required to disclose their reserve to agents until the day of auction.
"It can be higher than the advertised price if the interest is strong." the agency noted.
hockingstuart advised it was "a global issue" for the real estate industry.
"hockingstuart head office is willing to work with Consumer Affairs Victoria on a solution that will ensure accurate pricing across the industry as a whole.
"Our head office takes its responsibility to prospective buyers seriously.
"We have a range of measures in place to ensure accurate pricing of our portfolio of properties across the group, including undertaking annual audits at each office and providing regular, rigorous training to new and existing offices.
"Furthermore, we actively encourage vendors to advertise their properties with a price guide to ensure transparency for buyers and sellers alike."
The agency lawyers told the hearing that there had been a "dynamic market."
The agency recently, in unrelated matters, lost its chief executive, Nigel O'Neil, described as a passionate leader with over 25 years experience in growing and developing businesses.
The hockingstuart CEO, Nigel O'Neil was at the helm for eight years.
hockingstuart was the first Victorian real estate agency to present its properties for sale in a magazine format. hockingstuart's red magazine currently has a weekly distribution of 15,000 copies. 
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Underquoting claims sees hockingstuart Richmond office in Consumers Affairs Victoria court proceedings

<html><body>
The New South Wales Department of Fair Trading has published a list of changes to underquoting laws for residential property that came into effect this year.
The reforms were made to the Property Stock and Business Agents Act 2002 in order to provide greater clarity for buyers, sellers and agents. 
Changes include clearer rules for agents, more effective enforcement and the possibility of fines and lost commissions for breaches of the law by real estate agents.
According to the department, an agent is committing an underquoting offence if they state or publish a price for a property that is less than their reasonable estimate of the property’s likely selling price contained in the agency agreement with the seller. 
"This practice of underquoting can cause interested buyers to waste time and money on inspecting properties, getting reports and attending auctions based on misleading estimates of the selling price," it noted.
The department states the reforms that were made to the Property Stock and Business Agents Act 2002 provide clarity for buyers, sellers and agents and address underquoting with:
<ul>
<li>
clearer rules for agents. A key requirement is that agents must not give consumers understated or vague property prices (eg. promoting a property price as ‘offers above $450,000’)</li>
<li>
more effective enforcement. During an inspection by a Fair Trading officer, agents must be able to provide appropriate documentation to show that they have complied with the new laws.</li>
</ul>
Prospective buyers, property owners and agents are encouraged to understand the guidelines, according to the department.
"The reforms require agents to draw on their skills to make a reasonable estimate of the likely selling price and have honest and fair dealings with all buyers and sellers. The role of the seller's appointed agent to achieve the highest possible price on the property owner's behalf does not mean they should manipulate buyer interest with false price information.
Be aware that, simply because a property sells for more than expected, this does not mean underquoting has occurred. Sometimes competitive buyer behaviour can result in a much higher sale price than what an agent could have reasonably estimated. However, the law now requires an agent to be able to show that their estimate was reasonable, up-to-date and evidence-based.
{mijopolls 125}
For the full list of reforms, visit the Fair Trading website <a href="https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/sites/ftw/About_us/Legislation/Changes_to_legislation/Underquoting_reforms.page" target="_blank" style="line-height: 1.3em;">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

po-LsXgBTHBmX

Property 101: Understanding NSW estate agent underquoting reforms

<html><body>
Consumers have been told they will receive greater protection when purchasing a property, after a bill aimed at strengthening the law against underquoting passed the NSW Parliament this week.
Minister for Innovation and Better Regulation Victor Dominello said the reform fulfilled a NSW Government election commitment.
NSW Fair Trading and REINSW are working in partnership to prepare real estate agents for the new laws, which take effect on 1 January 2016, with information sessions already underway.
“The NSW Government committed to overhauling the current laws to crackdown on the practice of real estate underquoting – and we have delivered,” he said.
“Underquoting is illegal and misleads potential buyers looking for their dream home.”
The amendments to the Property Stock and Business Agents Act 2002 include:
·         Agents will be required to provide evidence of their estimated selling price to the vendor and this estimate must be stated in the agency agreement;
·         When marketing a property an agent must only use the estimated selling price provided in the agency agreement;
·         Estimated selling price can be a single figure or a price range. If a price range is used, the highest price must not be more than 10% higher than the lowest price;
·         Advertisements and representations that say “offers over” or “offers above” or any similar statement will be prohibited;
·         Agents will be required to keep a register of prices quoted on a property whether these are provided to the vendor or prospective purchasers.
In addition to the existing penalty of $22,000, agents found guilty of underquoting will now be liable to forfeiture of any commission or fees from the sale.
“There have been no successful prosecutions related to underquoting made under this Act in 13 years, so this reform is long overdue,” Mr Dominello said.
</body></html>

Property underquoting bill passes NSW Parliament

<html><body>
Soon we will be hearing more and more about the big sister of underquoting and this will be overquoting, and it bites.
Be warned, unlike the roar that politicians and our Real Estate Industry (REI) make about underquoting, this one will bite deep and hard into the pockets of REA’s and their offices.
Now that I have your attention, pour yourself a cup of coffee and read on. I will explain what overquoting entails. I will also explain the dangers it poses to both vendors and agents.
Overquoting
<ul>
<li>For most agents working in our industry, the term overquoting is mainly referred to as: buying the listing.</li>
<li>Buying the listing in turn refers to: informing the vendor that their property will sell for a lot more than what the market is demanding or dictating at the time.</li>
<li>The purpose of overquoting is: to obtain a listing under false pretense of a high sales price. Higher than the estimated values placed by other agents in the area.</li>
<li>The REA’s intention is: to eventually “condition” the vendor to accept less, as the buyers inspecting the property, offer what the market is truly dictating.</li>
</ul>
Underquoting serves the function to condition the buyers to believe they will buy the property for less, as low price guides are given by REA's. The agents on the other hand, hope that the auction frenzy will motivate them to pay more as they add competition to realistic buyers.
Underquoting, as a form of bait advertising, is a marketing process readily used in a heated property market.
The use of overquoting by the agent, is to win the listing and to have the chance of selling the property. The sales process which precedes winning the listing conditions the vendor to accept less than what the agents originally quote in their Comparative Market Analysis (CMA).
Overquoting is a form of deception used by agents, to convince vendors to sell through them and their office.
What will vendors do?
Now please pay very close attention as this is what I mean when I say overquoting will bite and bite hard.
Vendors will not sit back and take it on the chin, unlike buyers when they are deceived by bait advertising.
When vendors believe that their properties have dropped in value, as they compare the agent’s CMA to what is being offered, vendors will act and take action against the agent.
Real estate agents (REA) will soon find themselves in hot water and face litigation.
In the case of underquoting, the accumulated losses of individual’s time and money as a buyer, may total around $1000 on average. A loss, that may not necessarily warrant time and effort, to report the REA that is believed to be underquoting.
On the other hand, a perceived loss of $10's of thousands of dollars, to a vendor, will warrant a claim against the agent.
I have written about this in the past and have said; until losses justify time and effort spent by consumers, to lodge claims with the authorities, REA’s will do as they please.
However, be warned for what is to eventuate and is just around the corner.
Some REA’s will take it in their stride and heed this advice but some will also believe they are above the law and the authorities. It won’t surprise me to see the same REA’s that underquote lead the way to overquoting practices. Sadly most will again be members of the REI's.
The difference this time folks, it won’t be a toothless tiger on their case, it will be a vendor determined to be compensated.
 
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

Overquoting set to bite: Edwin Almeida

<html><body><div class="page" title="Page 1">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
Development of the real estate and property division within the New South Wales Department of Fair Trading will help increase industry standards, according to the Real Estate Institute of NSW.
REINSW President Malcolm Gunning said issues plaguing the industry such as underquoting, entry levels to the industry, ongoing training and property spruikers need practical solutions.
“We are impressed by the level of cooperation from Estate Agents Co-Operative Ltd (EAC) and Australian Livestock &amp; Property Agents Association (ALPA) as well as the Minister’s Office and Andrew Gavrielatos, Fair Trading Assistant Commissioner, who is the head of the new division," he said.
“Mr Gavrielatos will also hold the responsibility of the establishment of a Real Estate Qualifications Review Committee."
</div>
</div>
</div></body></html>

mick.cee-iDmgDDAmu8

REINSW gives Fair Trading's property division thumbs up

<html><body>
What if the property sold at the reserve? How much could this have cost the vendor? Applying the what if? test.
If I was to say I was taken-back by the response provided by the auctioneer to a tweet I commented on it would be an understatement. Allow me to share with you the event; so quickly pour yourself a coffee and read on. 
Reports were floating, or should I say flying, around on social media over the weekend about the great achievements and results of an onsite auction in Granville. In the main, it was all to do with praise of the selling agent and the creative selling techniques I refer to as “sleight of hand illusion” to sell property, to be candid.
The fundamental questions asked by me on twitter, of the auctioneers tweeting, were simple and basic. Was it a case of “underquoting” or was it “ignorance” by the agency to not know the true value of the land? 
I didn’t believe the questions noted above, were out of line. Particularly when I looked at the facts of the auction campaign and paralleled these with results achieved. 
One thing is for sure: we can rule out “market forces” for the out of line result, as the tolerance on such a notion would be as I have previously mentioned in other articles, a mere 11% variable from the “price-guide”. A tolerance that is within the prescribed tolerance guides set in the State Agents Act VIC and FT NSW. 
The facts:
<ul>
<li>The property is advertised as having a lot of development potential </li>
<li>Agent seemingly appears to be targeting developers and the neighboring club</li>
<li>Property called on the market at $1,250,000 and sold for $2,781,000 </li>
<li>The achieved sale percentage above reserve is equal to 123% approximately</li>
</ul>
Now, somebody, I believe got it totally wrong. On face value it appeared like a classic case of “underquoting” but unless the documents signed by the vendor with the agent, which determines the price-guide are made public, we may never know. 
However, in this case I am leaning more to the belief that some agents simply don’t know the value of land. The value of the land with development potential in the current market, is what I am referring to. In the alternative, value of property that is not common to the local agent, such as the initial Millers Point auction fiasco.  Where the property owned by the State Government was gifted away. 
Reports of auction results
As we read through the different stories being published about the sale, there are conflicting accounts and statements that make one wonder if the correct price-guide and reserve was set. You may form your own opinion as you read on.
Working on land-banking and any other form of land acquisition by developers, to determine values may be as simple as: understanding “gross realization” of the project to be built on the land being acquired, determining “construction costs” and with all this, taking into account possible lot yields due to “State Planning” and “Council Planning” changes to zoning. 
In basic terms; what will be the “Return On Investment”. No developer likes to work on anything less than to double their money on what the land cost them. 
In essence, I am leaning to the belief that the property was misrepresented to be worth anything less than $2.5 million, particularly when we apply the Regulation’s tolerance factors on the face value of the end result. 
The question remains, what did the developers attending the auction know that the agent didn’t know, to turn up in droves? Now this is why a professional is used, to know and be in control and not allow the sale to be reliant on, a whim and a prayer or hope of a sunny day. 
My first question
But the question will remain however; was the agent aware and well versed in what was going on, as I received the tweet reply from the auctioneer? See below. 
My second question
The second question is: why was this tweet deleted from the auctioneer’s twitter-handle soon after it was sent to me as a response? Don’t you just love conspiracy theories? 
The What-If Test
However, the seriousness of the present situation stands. A problem that is amplified at the auction under scrutiny, highlighted by the results achieved. 
Agreeable, and although the results are beneficial to the vendor, this is a problem in the Real Estate Industry and one that demands closer attention. 
The concern once again is best explained and highlighted when we apply the What-If Test. 
<ul>
<li>What-If, the property was sold for $1,250,000 because it was presented with such a low price-guide in the first place, and</li>
<li>What-If, as the auctioneer replied: the agent got it right. As I understand, in pricing it low to attract the interest it got? </li>
</ul>
Now, What-If you are reliant on an agent or agency that is not aware of: council changes, market forces and true land values? What-If, the result is no more than the price the agent advised you, when they presented you with a market appraisal and set the price guide? 
In this instance, we may never know if it was a case of under-quoting or sheer ignorance, unless FT NSW investigates the reasons behind the 123% discrepancy in price-guide to end-sale. Like me, I’m sure you too are left with the thought: under-quoting or the agent got it wrong? 
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>

Underquoting or industry ignorance? Edwin Almeida

<html><body>
NSW Fair Trading was more interested in grabbing headlines than seriously address the issue of underquoting, Malcolm Gunning, the president of the Real Estate Institute of NSW said.
"The state has had legislation prohibiting underquoting since 2002, however, Fair Trading have failed to comprehend or address the issue," he said saying Fair Trading did not understand the issues. 
"Fair Trading has been completely and totally ineffective in its approach and policing of underquoting for the last 13 years.
The industry has been tarnished by Fair Trading’s failure to properly understand and address the problem.
"Fair Trading have preferred to grab headlines rather than seriously address the issues.
Fair Trading’s persistence with the same old tired strategies do not serve the consumer or the property industry, he said.
"The greatest challenge is for the Fair Trading to admit its failings to date and commence a constructive and cooperative dialogue with industry.
"REINSW is ready for this change in direction and we would welcome the opportunity to work together to develop strategies to address underquoting which is a blemish on our industry and damages consumer confidence." 
Malcolm is president of the Real Estate Institute of NSW and Principal of Gunning Commercial, which has offices in Hurstville and Surry Hills in Sydney.
</body></html>

REINSW says NSW Fair Trading ineffective on agent underquoting

<html><body><div class="cq-article-content-paras section">
The NSW government's new laws on property underquoting announced during the election campaign will toughen the penalties for agents found to be underquoting. The changes are billed as making it easier for prosecutions to be brought against those agents found to be engaging in underquoting and will allow for forfeiture of fees and commissions in addition to the existing financial penalty of up to $22,000. 
For example, the average property price in Sydney is $900,000. Based on that, a commission would be $18,000. Therefore, in addition to a fine of up to $22,000 a real estate agent could lose fees of $18,000. 
"In many cases, these reforms would see a doubling of the financial sanction that could be imposed on agents doing the wrong thing," Minister for Innovation and Better Regulation, Victor Dominello​ told the NSW Parliament this week ahead of introducing the bill.
The Government will establish a strict liability offence, which is in line with the laws that have been introduced in South Australia. 
The legislation will include stronger requirements for record-keeping and price representations, which will increase transparency for buyers. 
"As an additional measure, I have asked the Department of Fair Trading to appoint an assistant commissioner for real estate and property who will work with the industry to build confidence amongst buyers and sellers and increase professional standards among real estate agents."
</div></body></html>

Underquoting laws in NSW will step up required record keeping 

<html><body>
NSW Fair Trading has reinforced its underquoting guidelines to estate agents as to what defines underquoting. <a href="https://eac.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Underquoting-Property-Prices-Guideline-.pdf">The guidelines</a> say that agents are liable for a $22,000 penalty if they give a false oral or written estimate to a buyer or seller.
Agents must satisfy three tests with their estimates: 1) they must believe the quoted price is realistic; 2) they must be able to substantiate it; and 3) it must reflect the expectations of the vendor.
Agents have the following general responsibilities under NSW’s real estate laws when selling or marketing a property: 
<ul>
<li>to make honest and reasonable estimates of selling prices </li>
<li>to keep records to demonstrate what information they relied on to make those estimates</li>
<li>to keep records of any discussions where those estimates are revised.</li>
</ul>
NSW Fair Trading department says purchasing a property is the biggest financial investment most people will ever make.
"While the majority of real estate agents act ethically and in accordance with the laws, it is important that potential risks of consumer harm be appropriately managed.
"NSW Fair Trading is concerned with what appears to be a marketing technique where real estate agents and their employees underquote property prices to increase the  pool of prospective purchasers. "This document gives further guidance on the applicable laws, and highlights specific conduct in the sale of residential properties that is not considered to be best practice. 
It also includes general guidance on what type of conduct may be considered best practice.
"NSW Fair Trading has made these suggestions to help agents develop their own procedures. They should not be considered ‘minimum standards’."
NSW Fair Trading considers the estimated selling price recorded in the agency agreement is the agent’s true estimated selling price, at least initially. This view is supported  by section 73(4) of the Act which states: A statement in the agency agreement of the agent’s estimate of the selling price of residential property is evidence for the purposes  of this section of the agent’s true estimate of that selling price. 
If an agent represents an estimated selling price in the agency agreement that is not consistent with their own opinion or estimate of the likely selling price for the property,  this may be considered a false or misleading representation which is an offence under sections 51 or 52 of the Act. If an agent or their employee makes a statement in the  course of advertising a residential property for sale that is less that the agent’s true estimated selling price as recorded on the agency agreement, an offence may have been  committed.
When determining or updating their estimate of the selling price of a property, Fair Trading says an agent should have regard to the following matters: 
<ul><ul>
<li>the factors the agent may have specifically considered in arriving at the estimate in the agency agreement </li>
<li>any sales of comparable properties </li>
<li>any representations made to the vendor by the agent, including representations about the price (or range) to be used when advertising the property for sale </li>
<li>the vendor’s expectations (any reserve bid and/or the price or range at which the vendor is willing to consider offers) </li>
<li>feedback from potential purchasers </li>
<li>any current or relevant valuations provided in respect of the property </li>
<li>the characteristics and features of the property, such as its size and location, including the existence of any ‘material facts’ </li>
<li>They must exercise reasonable skill and care in providing their estimate, considering all information that is likely to be relevant. </li>
</ul></ul>
NSW Fair Trading may consider enforcement action, including penalty infringement notices and prosecution, against any agent who markets a property at an estimated selling price less than the agency agreement estimated selling price. Agents should keep the vendor informed in writing of any changes in their opinion of the likely selling price of the property.
</body></html>

Underquoting guidelines tell NSW estate agents to advise likely sale price adjustments in writing

<html><body>
It’s no secret that the topic of underquoting gets under my skin and it should get under yours as well - many property buyers have fallen victim to this trap.
But let's set aside the practice of underquoting for a short moment and discuss other sleight of hand illusions of achieving high prices at auctions.
There are three schools of thought when it comes to achieving above the reserve for properties sold by auction.
Firstly, there is the thought that market forces are at work and have an uncontrollable bearing on the day of the auctions. Secondly, there is the marketing and methods of underquoting. Finally, last but by no means least, is the sheer ignorance by the industry experts when it comes to understanding property values. These points can be summarised as follows:
<ul>
<li>Market forces</li>
<li>Underquoting</li>
<li>Industry ignorance</li>
</ul>
Number 1: Market Forces 
A competent agent can and will gauge these external forces. This is one of the main reasons why vendors hire the “professional real estate agent” in the first place, isn’t it? The vendor wants to make sure they get the most value for their property. After all, we are on the field; we eat and breathe real estate for a living.
When <a href="/expert-insights/buying/buyers-needed-to-add-11-to-weekend-sydney-pre-auction-price-guidance">Jonathan Chancellor wrote, to expect to pay 11% above</a> what was being quoted as a price guide, we could say market forces were at play. Beyond the 10% tolerance prescribed by <a href="https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/pdfs/Property_agents_and_managers/estimatedpriceguideline.pdf" target="_blank">Fair Trade NSW</a> or <a href="https://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/eaa1980145/s47a" target="_blank">the Victorian Estate Agents Act</a> however, it all becomes questionable. An example of how the 10% tolerance works, is shown below.
<img src="/images/2015/03/26/edwin%20mar%2026%20one.jpg" alt="">
Number 2: Underquoting
Without going into too much detail, please read my last article which references <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/lies-real-estate-property-auction-campaigns-day-1-part-almeida" target="_blank">underquoting</a> and focused on the cost to the real estate industry (REI), real estate agents (REAs) and most importantly, the unnecessary cost to the public.
I have been vocal about the <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/lie-lies-real-estate-property-auction-campaigns-edwin-almeida" target="_blank">Valentines Day $1 Auction</a> from the very first day. Now, another novel auction graces the media, the <a href="/news/vic/brighton-bathing-box-listed-with-150-000-guide">Brighton Bathing Box sale with a price-guide of $150,000</a>. That’s all it’s worth you say? Truth be told, late last year one sold at $215,000. A price-guide of 30% lower? Is this a deliberate ploy to draw a crowd and to entice buyers? <a href="https://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/eaa1980145/s47a" target="_blank">Where are the Victorian regulators on this?</a>
It’s now sold, as you may know, for $276,000 - 84% above price guide.
Now, you may not be <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/lies-real-estate-property-auction-campaigns-day-1-part-almeida" target="_blank">“personally offended”</a> by campaigns with notions of underquoting, as in the case of the CEO of the REINSW. You, may also blame the <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/agents-lured-into-under-quoting-tricks-real-estate-institute-of-nsw-president-says/story-fnpn118l-1227272725834" target="_blank">“greed of the market” and the vendor</a> as in the case of the President of the REINSW Malcolm Gunning.
It is however, <a href="https://news.domain.com.au/domain/real-estate-news/underquoting-real-estate-agents-have-nowhere-to-hide-if-they-break-the-law-20150316-1m0amu" target="_blank">simply illegal to underquote and no REA that values their licence and reputation</a> should be encouraged nor coerced into this illegal practice. More to the point, even if the vendors tell the REAs to break the law, must we?
Most of the industry would like the public to believe we have no choice, when deciding whether to break the law or not. The REI bodies seem fit to shift the blame away from the agents or the industry and instead want to blame the public and vendors.
Blaming the vendor seems to be the common thread among the RE Institutes around Australia; see article posted below. Blaming the vendor however, will not rid the industry of the practice of underquoting. It just seems to be a case of blame shifting – blame the vendor and greedy market, at will.
<img src="/images/2015/04/02/edwin-april-2-opne.png" alt="">
Source: Australian Financial Review, 9 October, 2012
Education, be it Gunning’s instinctive solution, is not the immediate short-term answer either. I would like to put forward a message to our valiant leaders in the Institutes: this practice of underquoting is well entrenched in the ranks of the Institute's membership.
It isn’t the vendors, nor the newly licensed REAs that came up with the novel idea of <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/price-low-watch-go-edwin-almeida" target="_blank">“price it low and watch it go”</a>. Underquoting, is an entrenched culture in the industry and has been for decades.
If it’s a short, sharp and quick solution that the Institute’s are looking for to bring credibility to our industry, here are some novel ideas:
<ul>
<li>Rid the root of the problem from the REINSW and REIV membership. Surprisingly or perhaps not, some may have even obtained their licences from the same Institutes.</li>
<li>Name and shame RE Institute members that do get caught out.</li>
<li>Ask the governing body, Fair Trade NSW to suspend licences and to do so immediately. Lets not protect the REI members that are creating the issues just because they appeared on national TV. Take a bold stand and clean our house before we try and sweep the streets.</li>
</ul>
You want partial self-regulation? This is a great start to show both, the public and NSW Fair Trade that we mean business. <a href="https://www.reinsw.com.au/imis15_prod/web/Posts/Latest_News/201404/REINSW_President_Malcolm_Gunning_calls_for_greater_professionalism.aspx" target="_blank"> </a>
"REINSW is advocating that we partner with the NSW Fair Trading to share responsibility for regulating the real estate profession,"<a href="https://www.reinsw.com.au/imis15_prod/web/Posts/Latest_News/201404/REINSW_President_Malcolm_Gunning_calls_for_greater_professionalism.aspx" target="_blank"> said Gunning.</a>
Number 3: Industry Ignorance 
Other than market forces, can we excuse most out of line sales and blame it on “ignorance”? Ignorance may be used as an excuse, but it is not a defence when there are legal ramifications. 
Within the current property climate, it appears agents hide behind “market forces” to cover up for their ignorance of the council’s changes to local land rezoning proposals, for the out of line sales. <a href="/expert-insights/nearly-100-above-the-initial-price-guide-underquoting-rears-its-ugly-head">Market forces and no comparable sales</a> is also used as an excuse when not being able to properly determine land and home values. Or is this just another tact to draw the crowd, be it a mix of sophisticated and novice buyers.
On the other hand, when it comes to boasting about achieving high sales figures and well above reserves, they are the first in line to publicly report their achievements.
What I would surmise is that most agents don’t fathom the possible monitory loss they can cause their vendors, if the property is sold at the price-guide given or even the reserve price on the day.
In the case of a Gladesville property sale, an agent boasted about the <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/realestate/news/cottage-fetches-11-million-over-the-reserve-as-auctions-across-sydney-remain-hot/story-fni0cly6-1227262369554" target="_blank">$1,100,000 over reserve that was achieved</a>. Further West of Sydney’s CBD, in Guildford, we had another “stellar campaign” boasting a 25% above reserve accomplishment.
It’s clear; the REAs simply and frankly, did not know the true value of the land. I am surprised the vendors allowed them to go near the property and take such a risk. Or is there really more to the story?
Perhaps, Gunning president has greater insight that explains this phenomenon? He claims vendors have more to do with this issue than not as timid and innocent agents are <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/agents-lured-into-under-quoting-tricks-real-estate-institute-of-nsw-president-says/story-fnpn118l-1227272725834" target="_blank">“lured by unrealistic expectations… and the greedy market”</a> to underquote.
One thing is for sure, agents can run around beating their chest, declaring what stellar campaigns were run as 20%-30% sales above reserve were achieved (which can only mean the agents didn't know the values of the property in the first place). Or, the alternative is the property was deliberately underquoted in the first instance.
It has to be one or the other my friends.
Nonetheless, blaming the vendor, whether or not it comes from high up the ranks of the REINSW or the REIV, is not going to cut the mustard in the court rooms. The "greedy market lured me" and "the vendor made me do it" just won’t fly.
Ignorance versus underquoting
Ignorance from agents, of what is going on in the proposed changes to the local council environment plans will cost vendors dearly. But why don’t we hear many vendors raise their voices and complain? Simply because these sales being published and boasted about, netted the vendor a sale above so-called expectations. Vendors truly believe the agents did a wonderful job.
Now, take a moment and think about the “what if” scenario. What if, the Gladesville and Guildford sales only achieved a figure to equal what the agents set as a price guide or the reserve?
For this very reason, I am of the opinion that agents need to go back to basics if they are going to play with the future of their vendor's assets and take risks by not knowing the true value of the property. Better yet, they should consider going back to selling used cars if this is how they intend to perform in this industry.
Its a risk that may have even cost the State of NSW dearly, as noted in the first sale of the <a href="https://news.domain.com.au/domain/real-estate-news/sydney-property-highlights-of-2014-20141219-12a1qv" target="_blank">Millers Point property sales</a>.
Not researching changes to local council planning, and not keeping up to date with property development rezoning is unprofessional, ignorant, and sheer laziness. Why exactly are you paying the agent a fee of 2.5% average? Do the math.
Therefore, either the agents are ignorant and one has to wonder why they have a licence in the first instance, or they are blatantly underquoting to draw a crowd – even if the crowd is purely made up of “sophisticated buyers”. There is no two ways about this fact.
We cannot excuse and blame market forces any longer for flirting with the law and peoples well-being. Vendors entrust our industry to uphold the regulations and guide them to the best possible outcome. An outcome that should be far removed from any notion that the REA broke the law, or was lured into breaking the law to achieve the best possible result.
Most off all, REAs cannot blame 'market forces' or 'no comparable sales' for being ignorant and gambling with the real possibility that they will undersell a property, for the person that placed full confidence in their professional expertise.
Next time you see headlines of great achievement in a sale by auction, ask yourself the question: underquoting or ignorance?
Here are the real figures achieved in the stellar campaigns run by the agents:
<table style="width: 460px;" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="123">
Property
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
Reserve
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
Sale price
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$ above reserve
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
% Difference
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="123">
Brighton
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$150,000
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$276,000
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$136,000
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
84%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="123">
Guildford
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$900,000
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$1,130,000
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$230,000
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
26%
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="123">
Gladesville
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$$1,750,000
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$2,850,000
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
$1,100,000
</td>
<td valign="top" width="123">
63%
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
A few things that I would like to clarify, and that is; I am not forming a campaign against auctioneers. Nor am I opposing the sale of land/property by means of auction. I am also in favor of high industry standards and ongoing education.
I’m against the misrepresentation and the deceptive conduct allowed to become a free for all.
Underquoting is an entrenched practice that both bodies – the REI and the RE Institutes – seem to quickly dismiss and in turn blame the vendor.
Isn’t it about time we took full responsibility and acted like the professionals the public trust us to be? Now is the time to make the difference and stop blame-shifting, even if our REI leaders have apparently found it so easy to do.
EDWIN ALMEIDA is licensee in charge of <a href="https://www.just-thin.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>

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