Do real estate agents have to tell the truth?

[Gerrard]

I often ask a question like "why did the previous offer fall over" or "why are the vendors selling" or "are there any known issues with the property" and can get very vague answers.


I imagine it would be pretty hard to prove an agent misled you and it sure would be bad for their reputation, but is everything buyer beware when it comes to real estate, or are real estate agents bound to give honest answers to direct questions?

Gerrard

[CJ]

Real estate agent cant lie. Is that different to telling the truth???

That applies to the property. Not sure if the same applies to things not realted to the property (ie. why the last offer fell over).

Getting what they say in writing is another issue. One option is to take your own notes of what they tell you verbally, then email/write this to them in summary and say that these are the facts they agent disclosed. Please let me now if any are incorrect.

[drelly]

I've been "misled" badly by agents twice. Once when they claimed the property was "subdivideable" when it wasn't and another time when they tried to sell me a house with a driveway that used land on someone else's section! Fortunately, I did my homework and walked away both times.

[CJ]

The agent is working as an agent for the vendor. Any misrepresentation by the agent, you bring an action against the vendor. It is then between the vendor and the agent to settle the matter between them but it is the vendor that will end up paying you out.

A contract is a contract and any misrepresentation by either party, they can be held liable for.

It is a different issue on whether you pursue it though!

[paulette]

No a real estate agent can not lie. As far as something wrong with a property if the agent knows about it (sometimes vendors don't tell them) they have a duty to inform you or advise you to get advice.

That wall looks a bit dodge, I would suggest you get a builder to inspect it. Where are the boundary pegs, it is in my oppinion they are there, but I advise you to get a surveyor to find them.

They can only go on what the vendor tells them, what if they are the liers. It has happened before the vendor tells the agent where the boundary is the agent tells the pruchaser, they buy and find out the boundary is not where it was said, the purchaser can sue the agent.
As far as why a previous deal fell over, they may tell you if they wish but I see no reason why they should have to.
The agent works for the vendor but has to be fair to the pruchaser. If you have a good agent they should be working to get top dollar for the vendor, they are the ones paying for the service. What do you expect when you sell a property?
Unfortunately, there are agents out there that lie, these are the ones that give the industry a bad name. You just have to look around to find a good one.

Paulette

[grotto]

They should, but...

It's along time since I was at school, but I seem to remember that all dealings to do with real estate had to be in writing, and verbal comments and statements could not be relied upon.

Generalising wildly, I've found some Real Estate Agents in Auckland to be poorly informed. Most will openly say the don't know in response to a lot of questions, but some of them just have a guess. I've dealt with a few real cowboys who make totally inaccurate statements, but they'll never put it in writing.

Remember, they are only used house salesmen.

[Julian]

Of course real estate agents have to tell the truth. So do car dealers ...and lawyers ...and all people that want to go to heaven. Do they? Some do, but others are little more inclined to embellish.
Julian

[drelly]

Oh I have a good one... I went to an open home once where the agent was the same one that tried to sell me the non-existant driveway. The house had a deck. I stood out there admiring the view and then went to look under the house... and outside... where the posts supporting the deck were propped up by a concrete block and a chunk of wood... no foundations!

[paulette]

But is that the agents fault it is like that, you could say that he should of pointed it out. The way I look at it is that open homes are for people to get first impressions of a property, if they are interested they talk to the agent and take it further, that is when he should point that out to you.

Paulette

[Holly]

I went to an open home in the weekend, asked the agent what sort of price the vendors may be looking for as it was a tender. I was told it properly wouldn't go for anything less than $80k. The next day I take my husband back to have alook. He asked the same question while other people are around and gets told it properly wouldn't go for anything less than $90k. 10k in less than 24hrs, not bad!

[drelly]

Hi Paulette,

It's not the agents fault that the deck was in bad repair but it is her fault that access to the deck was allowed at all. The ranchslider should have been locked. It was another cave creek disaster in the making!

[paulette]

Yes fair enough, I get your point. Or she should of said to the owners that it is very dangerous doing open homes with the deck in that state, I will be informing people before they walk on it. Giving the owner option to fix it.

[duvetray]

Why do you think banks insist upon independent valuations to secure finance, Real esate agents actions keep Valuers in Jobs

[Julian]

duvetray,
They also keep lawyers in business. Lawyers, in turn, drive cars - which keep car sales people in business. Thank goodness car sales people are honest, otherwise we could all be in deep doo-doo.
Julian

[grotto]

Total Untruths..

Have been looking at a property on a main road.
I knew their was a possibility the road would be widened at some stage, so asked the agent about it. He told me there was a possibility the road would be widened by 3 metres. He took me out to the road, and paced out 3 metres from the kerb, and said "this is where it would be". This still left a couple of meters of foot path, so I was not too concerned. He also told me that if the road was widened, the council would be putting in an access way, at the back of the property, "on the other side of the rear fence".
I've just got back from seeing the Council, and have found out...
a) If they widen the road, they will take 3 metres of the property (not of the ffot path).
b) The access way thaey may put in is 6 metres wide, and would be taken from the rear of the property, not "the other side of the fence".

As the building is a shop, and right on the footpath, if they widen the road, you'll lose 3 metres of the building (and have to re-build). You'd get compensated, but how much?

Although the agent toptally mis-repsented the facts, (I heard him telling several other people the same story), to his credit, he did say :"of course you should go to the council and check it out with them"

I never buy a property without going to the council, talking to planners, reading the file, etc., but I know a few people who.

Hope no-one is relying on what the agent told them.