• If you are looking for a specific decision with a forward slash in the title (eg, 123/2014), you will need to replace the forward slash with a space (eg, 123 2014), as the website cannot pick up on forward slashes (/) or any other characters.
  • If you are doing a keyword search (eg, conduct), please note that this search will only produce decisions where the keyword appears in the title or decision description. If you want to search the entire decision document for certain keywords, you will need to use full website search located in the top right hand corner of this page.
  • If you want to search for a specific section of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 or rule in the Professional Rules 2012, you must search it as one word with no spaces or brackets. For example, if searching for section 110A(2)(a) of the Act, you should enter ‘s110A2a’ into the keyword search and if searching for rule 6.4 of the Professional Rules, you should enter ‘r6.4’.

If you want to search for a decision from a particular jurisdiction using the full website search, put both the jurisdiction name and the keyword in the search field (eg, Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal).

Search results

877 items matching your search terms

  1. [2022] NZREADT 4 - CX v REAA (5 April 2022) [PDF, 324 KB]

    Appeal / complaint licensees fraudulently advertised property / claim that destocking date in sale and purchase agreement did not reflect the lease, despite licensees advising it would / also, licensees failed to disclose that water tanks on property belonged to lessee and were not connected to district scheme, as set out in supplied property reports / Committee took no further action / Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s 111 / Professional Rules 2012, rr 6.4 / HELD / no breach of r 6.4 / appellant knew licensees did not have a copy of the lease / licensees made proper enquiries to check consistency / on the facts, destocking date in agreement consistent with lease / appellant raised no relevant query about water tanks, nothing to alert licensees about ownership issue / property reports warned information was supplied by vendors / obligation under r 6.4 is not a substitute for purchaser due diligence / Committee’s decision confirmed 
  2. [2022] NZREADT 3 - IE v REAA (15 March 2022) [PDF, 189 KB]

    Jurisdiction / Registrar’s determination / Registrar determined not to pursue a complaint as it only disclosed an inconsequential matter / applicant continued corresponding with the Authority over some months and the Authority continued to advise that the complaint remained closed / applicant then applied to review an email advising that the complaint remained closed / Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s 74(3), s 112 / Lawrence v Registrar of the Real Estate Authority [2021] NZREADT 44 / Leaders Real Estate (1987) Ltd v Real Estate Agents Authority [2015] NZREADT 41 / HELD / email advising the complaint remained closed is not a determination under s 112(1) / does not make findings or decisions concerning rights / merely confirms that an earlier decision had been made / review of substantive earlier determination is out of time / Tribunal has no power to extend time for review applications under s 112 / no jurisdiction / application dismissed
  3. [2022] NZREADT 2 - BX v REAA (28 February 2022) [PDF, 276 KB]

    Appeal / licensee incorrectly represented rental income from cottage and loft as legal / failed to recognise cottage not residentially consented; did advise loft not consented / did not draw warranties to vendors’ attention / showed property without agency agreement / Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s 111 / Professional Rules 2012, rr 5.1, 6.4, 9.6 / unsatisfactory conduct for breach of rr 5.1 (vendor warranties), 6.4 (cottage consent, cottage & loft income) / no penalty for minor breach of r 9.6 (agency agreement), no prejudice / instructed not to disclose suicide on property / licensee appropriately disclosed significant event occurred / no evidence appellant could cancel agreement after sale confirmed as unconditional / Committee has no power to order compensation when conduct occurred / $3,500 fine confirmed / censure confirmed / appeal dismissed
  4. [2022] NZREADT 1 - DU v Real Estate Agents Authority & DC (1 February 2022) [PDF, 333 KB]

    Appeal / vendor sold property to another purchaser / complaint licensee dealt unfairly with an unsuccessful offeror, leading to unfair sale process and wasted due diligence costs / did not advise of another higher offer, and did not engage in multi-offer process / also alleged licensee failed to disclose subsidence issue to successful purchaser / Committee took no further action / Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s 109A, s 111 / Professional Rules 2012, rr 5.1, 6.2, 6.4, 10.7, 10.8 / HELD / strike-out grounds not met / reasonable to recommend due diligence / licensee not aware of other bidder at times relevant to allegations / successful purchaser dealt directly with vendor / licensee raised multi-offer process but vendor declined / licensee disclosed subsidence issue to purchaser when sending draft sale and purchase agreement / no evidence purchasers not told of subsidence issue by vendor / purchasers declined to speak to investigator / Committee’s decision confirmed
  5. [2021] NZREADT 54 – Complaints Assessment Committee 2106 v Mathers (6 December 2021) [PDF, 257 KB]

    Costs application by licensee / Committee withdrew charges against licensee close to substantive hearing / Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s 110A / survey of applicable principles for costs in READT / tribunals have broader costs discretion than courts / no rule that costs follow the event, but may be appropriate in some cases / requires something more than success / relevant that Committee is exercising a public function / licensee’s defence was that it is normal practice for agents to take client lists when leaving an agency, despite contractual obligations / expert evidence supported this defence / Committee lacked diligence in investigating defence before tribunal processes invoked and charges laid / appropriate case for costs to follow the event / quantum is a contribution towards reasonable actual costs / parties accept High Court costs scale is useful to assess reasonable costs / costs of $14,340 awarded to licensee  DP
  6. [2021] NZREADT 55 – Lammas v Real Estate Agents Authority (6 December 2021) [PDF, 340 KB]

    Appeal and cross-appeal / licensees did not provide REAA guide before entering into agency agreement / also attended vendor’s property to serve demand for commission and photographed service / Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s 127 / Professional Rules 2012, rr 5.1, 5.2, 6.3, 9.11 / HELD / vendors’ appeal against no further action decision on complaints about privacy and inadequate supervision / not unprofessional to lawfully effect personal service or take photograph / privacy rights properly enforced in other jurisdictions / no failure to properly supervise / licensees’ appeal against breach findings for rr 5.1 and 9.11 / minor breach of s 127(1) and rr 5.1 and 5.2 by failing to provide REAA guide before entering into agreement / guide was supplied by consent later that evening / r 9.11 only applies on notice of cancellation, not when agency agreement expires / no breach of r 9.11 / $3,000 fine per licensee vacated, substituted with $500 fine per licensee  DP
  8. [2021] NZREADT 53 - D v REAA & X (15 October 2021) [PDF, 235 KB]

    Unprofessional behaviour / licensee wrote to vendor expressing concern about the junior agent they listed with / whether conduct likely to bring real estate industry into disrepute / Vosper v Real Estate Agents Authority [2017] NZHC 453 / Watson v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 1906) [2021] NZREADT 37 / Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s 72, s 111 / Professional Rules 2012, r 6.3 / no breach of r 6.3 / isolated communication using moderate language / no intention to offend / complaint made by principal of junior agent’s firm, not consumer / text message arguably below standard expected and might be unacceptable, but not sufficient to warrant disciplinary response / licensee apologised and donated to charity / Committee’s decisions reversed / no further action 
  9. [2021] NZREADT 52 - QH v KE, SE & Agency (14 October 2021) [PDF, 299 KB]

    False and misleading information / website listing categorised part rural zoned property as residential / whether complainant was misled at the time contract went unconditional / Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s 73, s 111 / Professional Rules 2012, r 6.4, r 8.3 / new evidence on appeal / partial extract of valuation report unable to be relied on / r 6.4 does not require an intention to mislead / advertisement contained false and misleading information, reader entitled to take information at face value / unlikely complainant did not know of true zoning /  information present on sale contract and certificate of title / advised to undertake due diligence / determination confirmed.
  23. [2021] NZREADT 35 - Brady (7 July 2021) [PDF, 287 KB]

    A charge laid under s 91 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008. Penalty decision. Found guilty of misconduct under s 73(b) (seriously incompetent or seriously negligent real estate agency work). Censured and ordered to pay a fine of $4,000. Ordered to undertake further training by completing Unit Standards 23136 (“Demonstrate knowledge of consumer protection law related to real estate practice”) and 23149 (“Demonstrate knowledge of licensing and code of professional conduct under the Real Estate Agents Act 2008”) within six months of the date of this decision. Ordered to pay $10,000 to the Authority as contribution towards the Committee’s costs.