PHOTO: Charlotte Wilson, a real estate agent based in Mangawhai, has achieved partial success in her appeal challenging a ruling of unsatisfactory conduct.
Real Estate Agent Appeals Fine for Misleading Advertising, Partially Successful
A real estate agent, Charlotte Carlyle Wilson, who was fined for misleadingly advertising a property as a “home and income,” has appealed the decision and achieved partial success. The Real Estate Agents Authority initially found Wilson guilty of unsatisfactory conduct and fined her $5000, which was later reduced to $3000 on appeal.
propertynoise.co.nz to launch real estate industry recruitment site
Challenges and Exhaustion in the Disciplinary Process
Wilson expressed her frustration with the authority’s system, claiming it to be sexist, and stated that she found the entire process exhausting. She devoted 240 hours to fighting the complaint and criticized the authority for the toll it took on her.
Wilson also argued that the buyer had access to a LIM report, which would have revealed whether the kitchen work was consented or not.
The Property Advertisement and Subsequent Issues
The property, a two-storey house in Kaipara, was marketed by Wilson as a “home and income” with a self-contained downstairs area, complete with its own kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, and dining space. Wilson provided a rental appraisal indicating a rent range for the “Downstairs self-contained flat” to the prospective buyer.
After the sale and purchase agreement was signed, the buyer requested a price reduction due to problems discovered during due diligence. However, the downstairs area was not listed as a point of concern.
In a transaction report provided to Sotheby’s, Wilson disclosed that the downstairs kitchen was unconsented, including the oven. The sale was finalized, and the buyer proceeded to rent out the property as two self-contained flats.
In late 2020, the council notified the purchaser that the downstairs kitchen was unconsented and would require removal. Four years after the settlement, the buyer contacted Wilson, expressing his belief that the unconsented work should have been disclosed and that the vendor or agent should cover the remediation costs.
The Complaint and Appeals Process
In February 2021, the buyer filed a complaint with the Real Estate Agents Authority. Two months later, he listed the property for sale, marketing it as “Beach, Sun and Income,” emphasizing the recently refurbished downstairs area as suitable for long-term rental or holiday accommodation.
The authority notified Wilson that the complaint would be referred to the Complaints Assessment Committee (CAC). Wilson, in response, asked the buyer to withdraw the false advertising complaint and requested payment of $3000 to cover her legal fees.
The committee decided to investigate the complaint. The authority ultimately found Wilson guilty of misleading advertising and sending the email, resulting in a censure, reprimand, and a $5000 fine.
Partial Success in the Appeal
Wilson appealed the decision to the Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal, asserting that the downstairs area remained consented and there was no abatement notice from the council to the buyer regarding the rental of the downstairs space.
SPONSORED: Looking for a real estate database from $99 plus gst? | SALE
The tribunal acknowledged that the LIM report indicated that the downstairs area was only consented for a rumpus room and laundry, contradicting Wilson’s claim that the kitchen was always consented. However, it agreed with her that the email to the buyer requesting the withdrawal of the complaint was not unsatisfactory conduct, as it fell outside the realm of real estate agency work.
The tribunal maintained the censure and reprimand but reduced the fine to $3000.
Challenges and Moving Forward
Wilson expressed her disappointment with the process, feeling beaten down and let down. She criticized the authority, suggesting bias against her as a woman. Although she still holds a real estate agent’s license, Wilson has taken a step back from her 10-year career due to the experience.
She emphasized the importance of clear-cut disclosure rules and stated that she now takes extra precautions. However, the outcome has left her out of pocket by $6500.
SOURCE: NZHERALD
Real Estate Agents: Who has the lowest and highest fees? WATCH
adsense