NSW Overestimated Selling Price of Property - Sue Under Property Law?

Australia's #1 for Law
Join 150,000 Australians every month. Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!
FREE - Join Now

everlast

Active Member
15 November 2018
10
0
31
This is not a case of property law being complicated. It's a case of being very difficult to amass sufficient evidence to establish liability, especially in the face of the defence that the agent would likely bring.

If OP was to file a negligence suit based on the information she's told us, think about how she would need to react to any evidence that the agent is likely to file in defence which demonstrates that:
  1. the agent wasn't negligent in advising a sale price of $1.44m (e.g. the agent could produce evidence of comparative sales that the valuer didn't consider, he could exploit the lapse in time from the valuation report which could've affected market value, he could produce corroborative evidence from other agents that they would have provided the same valuation etc.);
  2. OP (likely) signed a contract with the agent agreeing on what the listing price would be - and the method by which the house would be sold (which she was free to disagree with); and
  3. OP was given the option of agreeing to the $1.2m bid but decided against it (because you can bet that the agent's evidence will be that he presented her with the option to "accept" or "refuse" the bid and OP chose to refuse the bid by her own free will, even though she knew from the valuation report that $1.2m was a good bid). In other words, it will be extremely difficult to prove that the agent advised OP to refuse the bid (and we're not even sure from OP's comments that this happened - he just "didn't advise her to accept").
The long and short of it is that there is far more evidence that would need to be produced / considered before any "blatant negligence" became apparent.

I'm not saying that this is impossible, I would love to see this play out, but time and expense would need to be invested to do it properly.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you @thelawbundle for your thread. I would like to discuss your point 3 in that you state that I was given the option of agreeing to the $1.2 million bid but decided against it.... I would like to correct you at this point since this is an assumption on your part.

The original price guide that we signed the Agency Agreement for was between $1.3 million to $1.430 million. The Real Estate Agent would have fully known that there was no way the property in a falling Sydney market would have attained anywhere close to the $1.3 million. He had knowledge of the area, and produced evidence of properties in our area and outside of our area similar in age, structure etc. Most of these properties had been totally renovated. Ours was in an original condition. The Real Estate Agent continually dissuaded me from making any improvements to the property as he said they are not interested in the house, just the land.

On Auction night of August 29 2018, I attended the Auction with my older sibling, both of us the Executors and Joint Tenants of the said property. There was no bidding, until the Real Estate Agent spoke to the Auctioneer and that is when a vendors bid was presented to those in attendance. The vendors bid was a bid of $1.2 million. Only one person bid that amount of $1.2 million. Thereafter no other bids were given at that point. The Auctioneer then went to the last and final call. The Real Estate Agent then came to both of us and told us, "I think you should pass the property in". The Real Estate Agent at no time, suggested that we take the vendors bid, ( the bid made on our behalf to start the bidding of the property), of $1.2 million. We took his advice and thus the property was officially passed in and went to Private Treaty sale.

Between the time of August 29 2018 and the beginning of November 2018, I had been researching various property websites, and including the Department of Fair Trading. I found evidence that assisted me in challenging the Real Estate Agent on certain issues.

One of these issues I challenged the REA on, referred to why he had not told us (advised us) to take the vendor's bid on the Auction night, as he would have known the Sydney Property market would continue to fall and that there had been no buyers who had offered anything close that the vendor's bid, even after 50 contracts were issued. Big number of contracts. Hardly any interest. Wouldn't you think that if you had a Real Estate Agent wanting to sell your property and the vendor's bid was offered at $1.2 million, that common sense would say that the Real Estate Agent would have a Duty of Care to tell his clients to "take that bid".

When I had challenged the REA on this issue, he did not give me a rationale reply, he shouted and did not reply at all, in fact it sounded as though he had been caught out and reacted in a very strong manner, because he had not thought I would ask such a question.

On November 15 a buyer that the Real Estate Agent had been working with put forth a bid for of $1.010 million. Private Treaty Sale (One million ten thousand).

So, the scenario in reality is quite different to your Point 3 @thelawbundle. We (plural), not she, ( feminine singular), were not given the opportunity to accept the vendors bid of $1.2 million, nor did the Real Estate Agent, suggest or advise at any time on the night that if a vendor's bid was put forward, and that someone bid at that price, that we should take it.

You would think, that the vendor's bid of $1.2 million dollars, the property sold at that price, would have gained the Real Estate Agent his sale commission, brought about a quick end to the sale of the property, and I could have been moving into my own home one month ago. It was after I read an article on "dummy bidders", that I began to think that the vendor's bidder was in actual fact a "dummy bid" which is no bid at all, (hence the Real Estate Agent not advising us to take that bid because he already knew that the bid was no bid at all), but was bid to cover the legality of having to pass the property in and thus begin the further drawn out process of Open Homes, when there was no interest in the property at all, until the buyer who finally secured the property.

Why do you think the Real Estate Agent advised that we pass in the property. The evidence is now glaringly so. I believe that the Real Estate Agent had in place a strategy that would finally bring about a better purchase for the buyer than the vendor(s).

In conclusion. The Real Estate Agent, I believe had been in the buyer's corner and not our corner during this period, only telling us that he was working "really hard" to get us the last dollar at the current market price. The fact that the Real Estate Agent ignored the evidence of my having engaged a certified valuer who valued the property at $1.1 million, tells me, that he never intended even considering to sell the property at that price, or anywhere close to that price, but would continue his drawn out time wasting strategy to be able to obtain the lowest price a buyer would offer.

Unless you have experienced what I (we) went through, then it is difficult to assess the evidence without having the facts of the property sale and having experienced the method of the Real Estate Agent's sales application.
 

@thelawbundle

Well-Known Member
27 October 2014
56
17
264
Brisbane, QLD
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you @thelawbundle for your thread. I would like to discuss your point 3 in that you state that I was given the option of agreeing to the $1.2 million bid but decided against it.... I would like to correct you at this point since this is an assumption on your part.

The original price guide that we signed the Agency Agreement for was between $1.3 million to $1.430 million. The Real Estate Agent would have fully known that there was no way the property in a falling Sydney market would have attained anywhere close to the $1.3 million. He had knowledge of the area, and produced evidence of properties in our area and outside of our area similar in age, structure etc. Most of these properties had been totally renovated. Ours was in an original condition. The Real Estate Agent continually dissuaded me from making any improvements to the property as he said they are not interested in the house, just the land.

On Auction night of August 29 2018, I attended the Auction with my older sibling, both of us the Executors and Joint Tenants of the said property. There was no bidding, until the Real Estate Agent spoke to the Auctioneer and that is when a vendors bid was presented to those in attendance. The vendors bid was a bid of $1.2 million. Only one person bid that amount of $1.2 million. Thereafter no other bids were given at that point. The Auctioneer then went to the last and final call. The Real Estate Agent then came to both of us and told us, "I think you should pass the property in". The Real Estate Agent at no time, suggested that we take the vendors bid, ( the bid made on our behalf to start the bidding of the property), of $1.2 million. We took his advice and thus the property was officially passed in and went to Private Treaty sale.

Between the time of August 29 2018 and the beginning of November 2018, I had been researching various property websites, and including the Department of Fair Trading. I found evidence that assisted me in challenging the Real Estate Agent on certain issues.

One of these issues I challenged the REA on, referred to why he had not told us (advised us) to take the vendor's bid on the Auction night, as he would have known the Sydney Property market would continue to fall and that there had been no buyers who had offered anything close that the vendor's bid, even after 50 contracts were issued. Big number of contracts. Hardly any interest. Wouldn't you think that if you had a Real Estate Agent wanting to sell your property and the vendor's bid was offered at $1.2 million, that common sense would say that the Real Estate Agent would have a Duty of Care to tell his clients to "take that bid".

When I had challenged the REA on this issue, he did not give me a rationale reply, he shouted and did not reply at all, in fact it sounded as though he had been caught out and reacted in a very strong manner, because he had not thought I would ask such a question.

On November 15 a buyer that the Real Estate Agent had been working with put forth a bid for of $1.010 million. Private Treaty Sale (One million ten thousand).

So, the scenario in reality is quite different to your Point 3 @thelawbundle. We (plural), not she, ( feminine singular), were not given the opportunity to accept the vendors bid of $1.2 million, nor did the Real Estate Agent, suggest or advise at any time on the night that if a vendor's bid was put forward, and that someone bid at that price, that we should take it.

You would think, that the vendor's bid of $1.2 million dollars, the property sold at that price, would have gained the Real Estate Agent his sale commission, brought about a quick end to the sale of the property, and I could have been moving into my own home one month ago. It was after I read an article on "dummy bidders", that I began to think that the vendor's bidder was in actual fact a "dummy bid" which is no bid at all, (hence the Real Estate Agent not advising us to take that bid because he already knew that the bid was no bid at all), but was bid to cover the legality of having to pass the property in and thus begin the further drawn out process of Open Homes, when there was no interest in the property at all, until the buyer who finally secured the property.

Why do you think the Real Estate Agent advised that we pass in the property. The evidence is now glaringly so. I believe that the Real Estate Agent had in place a strategy that would finally bring about a better purchase for the buyer than the vendor(s).

In conclusion. The Real Estate Agent, I believe had been in the buyer's corner and not our corner during this period, only telling us that he was working "really hard" to get us the last dollar at the current market price. The fact that the Real Estate Agent ignored the evidence of my having engaged a certified valuer who valued the property at $1.1 million, tells me, that he never intended even considering to sell the property at that price, or anywhere close to that price, but would continue his drawn out time wasting strategy to be able to obtain the lowest price a buyer would offer.

Unless you have experienced what I (we) went through, then it is difficult to assess the evidence without having the facts of the property sale and having experienced the method of the Real Estate Agent's sales application.

All good. Just note that my point 3 was not an assumption that I made. I was asking the previous poster how they would react to evidence of the kind referred to at point 3 (if that evidence could be adduced).

You're right, it is difficult for us to make any type of assessment without all of the facts. If you're not willing to explain all of those facts (which is what you appear to be inferring) then this is not a valuable use of our time. Good luck with whatever you decide to do.
 

Rod

Lawyer
LawConnect (LawTap) Verified
27 May 2014
7,726
1,056
2,894
www.hutchinsonlegal.com.au
I may be confused, but to me it appears @everlast does not understand the meaning of a 'vendor bid' which is central to the complaint.

I suspect the term 'vendor bid' has been explained to, but not understood by, @everlast. There is plenty of material around that explains the auction process and I suggest @everlast do more reading.

The issue I see is an attempt to blame others for a process they had part control over. If you lack legal capacity, and this is a possibility, then you need to get help asap.
 

everlast

Active Member
15 November 2018
10
0
31
I may be confused, but to me it appears @everlast does not understand the meaning of a 'vendor bid' which is central to the complaint.

I suspect the term 'vendor bid' has been explained to, but not understood by, @everlast. There is plenty of material around that explains the auction process and I suggest @everlast do more reading.

The issue I see is an attempt to blame others for a process they had part control over. If you lack legal capacity, and this is a possibility, then you need to get help asap.

Thank you Rod. Yes, you are most probably correct. A vendor bid is not actually a bid. So I have been informed. But I thank you anyway. I am attempting to understand what had transpired, and have since been in a depressed state of mind.