{"id":42692,"date":"2023-03-30T08:17:11","date_gmt":"2023-03-29T19:17:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/propertynoise.co.nz\/au\/?p=42692"},"modified":"2023-03-30T08:17:11","modified_gmt":"2023-03-29T19:17:11","slug":"real-estate-agency-slugged-6000-for-deceiving-buyer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/propertynoise.co.nz\/au\/real-estate-agency-slugged-6000-for-deceiving-buyer\/","title":{"rendered":"Real estate agency slugged $6000 for deceiving buyer"},"content":{"rendered":"

PHOTO: O’Brien Real Estate\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

An Australian\u00a0real estate agency\u00a0has been forced to pay $6000-plus compensation for deceiving a property buyer in its\u00a0advertising.<\/p>\n

Homeowner Sanjay Tanwar took O’Brien Real Estate to the\u00a0Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal\u00a0over the purchase of a\u00a0house\u00a0in 2020 that was promoted as having air-conditioning but did not.<\/p>\n

VCAT Member Ian Lulham ruled in favour of Sanjay at a hearing in January, finding the agency was involved in misleading and deceptive conduct by publishing ads that said the house had “refrigerated\u00a0cooling”.<\/p>\n

\"Exposing<\/a><\/div>\n
\n
\n

Exposing the dark side of Australian real estate: The deceptive tactics you need to know! | WATCH<\/a><\/h2>\n<\/header>\n<\/div>\n

Sanjay was pursuing the cost of installing cooling throughout the property. He was awarded 50 per cent of the quoted cost of a Samsung system, which the tribunal heard was currently valued upwards of $12,000.<\/p>\n

\"VCAT
The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal found in favour of homeowner Sanjay Tanwar. (Nine)<\/strong><\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

O’Brien was ordered to pay Sanjay $6,347, deducing that the Samsung system would have cost that much when the house was built in 2015.<\/p>\n

It was the second time the dispute had gone to VCAT – on the first occasion, in March last year, O’Brien Real Estate did not show up and the member awarded Sanjay $12,694 to cover the cost of air-conditioning installation. It landed back at the tribunal after O’Brien asked for a review of the decision.<\/p>\n

In the published finding in January, the tribunal found Sanjay bought the address from vendor Ismail El Azzouri based on a “representation” made by O’Brien in the ad that it had “ducted heating and refrigerated cooling”.<\/p>\n

\"house<\/a><\/div>\n
\n
\n

Is the Australian property market going to crash? \u2013 Forbes<\/a><\/h2>\n<\/header>\n<\/div>\n

Sanjay said this was conveyed to him again by O’Brien agent Lin Zhang on the final inspection and again in an SMS sent to him by the agent, although he intimated he did not turn on the electric control panel which was marked “cool”, “fan” and “heat”. The issue was unable to be resolved in talks around the time of settlement.<\/p>\n

\"Air
It was argued that the homeowner has failed to see that he house did not have air conditioning was the cause his loss. (Getty Images\/iStockphoto)<\/strong><\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

“When Mr Tanwar took possession of the property after the settlement, he found that there was no refrigerated cooling, or indeed any cooling, in the house,” the VCAT decision paper said. “Initially, Mr Tanwar assumed that the refrigerated cooling system needed repair, and he engaged Aspen Air to investigate. Aspen Air reported that there was no refrigerated cooling system in the property, but only a ducted heater, which had the heating unit in the ceiling space.”<\/p>\n

\"David<\/a><\/div>\n
\n
\n

David Bowie\u2019s \u2018bizarre\u2019 Sydney home sold<\/a><\/h2>\n<\/header>\n<\/div>\n

VCAT emphasised that the claim did not involve the vendor Ismail but the member found his evidence to be “sophistry” and that he also misled Lin.<\/p>\n

“Largely, he sought to deny that he had instructed O’Brien that his house had refrigerated cooling, saying that Mr Zhang had misunderstood the words which Mr El Azzouzi had said and written to him, and that Mr Zhang had failed to exercise his own care and diligence in including the representation about refrigerated cooling in the advertisement,” the tribunal found.<\/p>\n

“However, in the course of making these points, Mr El Azzouzi said that anyone looking at the house would have seen that there was no refrigerated cooling unit either on the roof or against any external wall of the house.<\/p>\n

\"New<\/a><\/div>\n
\n
\n

New Zealand\u2019s Housing Market Crash Could Spell Disaster for Australia | WATCH<\/a><\/h2>\n<\/header>\n<\/div>\n

“In effect, then, he argued that Mr Tanwar’s own failure to properly observe the house on the inspection was the real cause of his loss.”<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

READ MORE VIA 9 NEWS\/DOMAIN<\/a><\/p>\n

MOST POPULAR IN NEW ZEALAND<\/span><\/h3>\n