Estate agents to be prosecuted?

TOMP

Saw a headline in Irish Mail on Sunday about Irish estate agents to be prosecuted by the property watchdog. Didnt manage to get a paper to read the full article, anyone got any details on this?

The_Morrigan

This story?

Watchdog to prosecute 30 ‘rogue’ estate agents
ZoomBookmarkSharePrintListenTranslate
Thirty illegal negotiators are facing prosecution under new licensing regime, and another 350 complaints are to be investigated by PSRA

‘We would welcome action very strongly’

THE new property services regulator is preparing criminal cases against some 30 estate agents for ‘improper conduct’.
UnliCenseD: Michael O’Flaherty, left, and David Scally of Castle Estates, pictured this week

The move follows an undercover investigation by the MoS which revealed property negotiators operating without a license as required by law. THE new regulator for estate agents is preparing to prosecute 30 property negotiators who have been operating illegally and has received extra resources to investigate 350 complaints received since last year.

An undercover investigation by the Irish Mail on Sunday has established that two agents – now also included in the regulator’s investigation – have been negotiating sales in Dublin despite having no license as required by law. A new licensing regime for estate agents was introduced by the Government in 2012 to crack down on the kind of irregular practices that contributed to Ireland’s property bubble.

The MoS has established that dozens of staff in various estate agents are operating illegally throughout the country, and a survey of the most high-profile estate agents revealed that more than half have adverts wrongly listing staff as negotiators. The revelation comes just as the property market begins to recover – meaning that there is once again increasing scope for practices such as gazumping and using nonexistent bidders to inflate prices. There is no suggestion that any of the firms or individuals mentioned have engaged in such practices.

In July 2012 a new licensing regime for estate agents was introduced to prevent such practices, which were forcing consumers to pay higher prices. Everyone licensed to provide property services is now listed in a publicly available register maintained by the Property Services Regulatory Authority (PSRA).

Those not registered are not permitted to provide property services or act as estate agents and face severe penalties for doing so.

The PSRA can suspend or revoke a licence for serious offences. It can levy fines of up to €250,000.

But the MoS has confirmed that more than 30 individuals working in estate agents – who either had their application refused or never applied to be on the register – continue to operate.

In addition, 350 complaints about estate agents – from the frivolous to the criminal – have been received by the PSRA.

Typically, applications to the PSRA are rejected if an estate agent is judged to have insufficient qualifications, a criminal conviction, insufficient insurance arrangements or unsatisfactory tax affairs.

But in the absence of a stringent inspection regime there is mounting evidence that many of those forbidden from practising as estate agents continue to trade.

Last night the chief executive of the PSRA, Tom Lynch, said: ‘Our main concern is to ensure that the consumer is protected, that money won’t be done away with or that they won’t be defrauded in any way.’

‘As of now there are about 30 cases that I’m aware of, that are trading without licences and we will investigate them and once we are satisfied that they are trading without a licence we will prosecute them.

‘Make no mistake about that. People better know very, very quickly that from here on the gloves are off.’

Mr Lynch said he had this week received six additional staff ‘for the sole purpose of investigations and prosecutions’. There were already a number of cases involving the improper conduct of licensed estate agents set aside for prosecution. There is no suggestion that any of the firms mentioned are among them.

‘Where they are in breach of the Act itself – operating without a licence – we can bring these case to court ourselves in a summary prosecution or in situations of a more grievous nature we can bring a case on indictment in which we prosecute through the DPP. We have one such case at present.’

‘We all know of a few firms I’m afraid that are operating without a licence,’ said Brendan Bowe from Bowe Property in Ballincollig, Co. Cork.

‘It’s particularly prevalent among lettings firms but certainly also among our own industry. I’m not surprised to hear of firms that haven’t gone through the process.’

Enda McGuane, managing director of Winters Property Management in Limerick, called for the regulator to get tough. ‘My problem is there are people who are not licensed and they’re doing nothing about it,’ he said.

‘We would welcome action very strongly because as far as we’re concerned, if you’re not licensed you should not be in the business.’

That sentiment was echoed by Shane

Desmond, a director of Mason Estates in Dundrum. ‘It does frustrate us from an agent’s point of view when we see certain firms getting business and we know there’s a doubt in terms of the licensing [of individual staff],’ he said.

In some cases, companies that have registered with the PSRA are flouting the law by using individual agents with no licence to negotiate and complete sales or lettings. In this way a firm can appear to be above board but still flout the law. One such company is Castle Estate Agents Ltd, a Dublin practice.

The vendors of three properties currently for sale claim that two of the company’s agents – David Scally and Michael O’Flaherty – acted as property negotiators throughout the purchase without being registered.

Mr Lynch of the PSRA said he had launched an investigation into Castle.

Castle Estate Agents said: ‘We believe that they have always acted within the guidelines given to us by the PSRA. A licensed member of staff has always been in charge of both Michael O’Flaherty and David Scally and has overlooked all their work.’

The authority has issued 6,091 licences since July 2012. These must be renewed on an annual basis.

http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/viewer.aspx

D3PO

How can an EA have to have a license to negotiate a property sale but any individual can legally sell their own property....

I don't like EA's but making them have a license has no relevance except as a money spinner for the government and this nonsense of them introducing it to prevent the kind of practices that saw the boom is a load of codswallop

Sleepy

I'd welcome any attempt to regulate the cowboys and tbh, I'd expect most good estate agents to do likewise.

Legislation that made the making up of phantom bids, refusals to put an offer to a client etc. could only help to create a more functional property market.

D3PO

Sleepy wrote: »

I'd welcome any attempt to regulate the cowboys and tbh, I'd expect most good estate agents to do likewise.

Legislation that made the making up of phantom bids, refusals to put an offer to a client etc. could only help to create a more functional property market.

I agree but that's not what the legislation was about. Id love a transparent system where every bid on a property including the bidders name, bid made and contact details would have to be shown online and publicly available.

Also in these days of data protection overdrive that will never happen.

Santa Cruz

D3PO wrote: »

I agree but that's not what the legislation was about. Id love a transparent system where every bid on a property including the bidders name, bid made and contact details would have to be shown online and publicly available.

Also in these days of data protection overdrive that will never happen.

I wouldn't agree that bids should be publicly available but I would be in favour of interested parties having access to a record of bids so that the phantom bidders can be eliminated

who_me

Santa Cruz wrote: »

I wouldn't agree that bids should be publicly available but I would be in favour of interested parties having access to a record of bids so that the phantom bidders can be eliminated

+loads. Fairly certain I was bidding against a phantom bidder when I bought my home.. annoying but I really wanted the place so I had to just lump it and pay up.

Also odd was another property I enquired about. Very attractive property at a surprisingly low price, I enquired at the EA's and he told me it was already sold. Several months later it was still being advertised online and at the property as for sale. Very suspicious..

Woodville56

who_me wrote: »

Also odd was another property I enquired about. Very attractive property at a surprisingly low price, I enquired at the EA's and he told me it was already sold. Several months later it was still being advertised online and at the property as for sale. Very suspicious..

We made an enquiry last March regarding a property on an EA website and was told property was sold , now 8 months later, property still on Daft , same EA ! Also called the same EA re another property only up on Daft one week and was told this property also sold !! Just so fed up with these crowd !! Pity sellers cannot advertise with multiple EA's , small town Ireland usually in the grip of one or two dominant EA's who treat prospective buyers like s**t !

Scortho

Woodville56 wrote: »

We made an enquiry last March regarding a property on an EA website and was told property was sold , now 8 months later, property still on Daft , same EA ! Also called the same EA re another property only up on Daft one week and was told this property also sold !! Just so fed up with these crowd !! Pity sellers cannot advertise with multiple EA's , small town Ireland usually in the grip of one or two dominant EA's who treat prospective buyers like s**t !

Could have gone sale agreed and then buyers pull out.
Happened to my parents back in 2009 when they went sale agreed, and the buyers pulled out the day the contracts were due to be signed.
They ended up turning down a bid while sale agreed as well.

D3PO

Santa Cruz wrote: »

I wouldn't agree that bids should be publicly available but I would be in favour of interested parties having access to a record of bids so that the phantom bidders can be eliminated

The problem is if its not publically available the component of those who have made bids that are not passed on by EA's s not fixed. Unless by interested parties you meant all those who have placed a bid.

In which case I agree

TOMP

who_me wrote: »

+loads. Fairly certain I was bidding against a phantom bidder when I bought my home.. annoying but I really wanted the place so I had to just lump it and pay up.

Also odd was another property I enquired about. Very attractive property at a surprisingly low price, I enquired at the EA's and he told me it was already sold. Several months later it was still being advertised online and at the property as for sale. Very suspicious..

Nobody should have to pay extra for their dream home because of deceipt by a third party

tony peters3

This Castle estate agent crowd are renowned for being cowboys.they seem to be the worst offenders in the article.
Anyone who has had dealings with them will know. ive heard of lots of people experiencing phantom bids and the like with them.

No matter what, they are breaking the law letting people who arent qualified and dont have a lisence sell houses. Its a dirty industry and these are by far the dirtiest.
here is another thread from a few years back
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056451973

begod

Woodville56 wrote: »

We made an enquiry last March regarding a property on an EA website and was told property was sold , now 8 months later, property still on Daft , same EA ! Also called the same EA re another property only up on Daft one week and was told this property also sold !! Just so fed up with these crowd !! Pity sellers cannot advertise with multiple EA's , small town Ireland usually in the grip of one or two dominant EA's who treat prospective buyers like s**t !

I have had the same issue as above, more so on myhome.ie than daft, obviously just way of gathering peoples details who are in the market for a particular house, " That house is sold but let me take your number and I'l contact you if a similar house comes on the market" is the usual response. They seem to be alot more of these on myhome.ie, I'd say its because you can report an ad on daft but not on myhome.ie and the houses in in question a still being advertised months after being sold.

The_Conductor

Woodville56 wrote: »

We made an enquiry last March regarding a property on an EA website and was told property was sold , now 8 months later, property still on Daft , same EA ! Also called the same EA re another property only up on Daft one week and was told this property also sold !! Just so fed up with these crowd !! Pity sellers cannot advertise with multiple EA's , small town Ireland usually in the grip of one or two dominant EA's who treat prospective buyers like s**t !

If you'd like a different take on this- I was looking on Myhome.ie and found my own townhouse, which I've owned for 15 years, for sale. The advertisement was complete with stock photos- perhaps from another unit that sold in here a while ago- with a few big differences (for example an open plan downstairs area, and a downstairs bathroom). I rang up enquiring- and was told it was sold (yes, 15 years ago). I then went up the road to the estate agents office on my way home- and told him he had 24 hours to remove all traces of my property from his website, from Myhome.ie and from any publications he may be involved with. By 5PM the following evening- it had gone from Myhome.ie and his website.

I think they're doing this to draw people to their websites- and 'shure if one property is sold already, you'll look at another one?'

Thank god 54 of them have now had their cards marked- though it may be only the tip of the iceberg.

tony peters3

I can understand why they dont take them down off the sites until an actual contract has been signed because up until then it can fall thru.

i dont know why they would keep it after its been sold though. trying to draw buyers when there is a shortage of houses makes no sense.

its like that article never happened. I kinda was hoping it would be the beginning of getting rid of cowboys like castle estate agent. if anyone else is being investigated they are closed during the investigation, like solicitors and the like.

are they really being investigated or is it just talk from this crowd that were set up to 'monitor' agents???

Woodville56

tony peters3 wrote: »

I can understand why they dont take them down off the sites until an actual contract has been signed because up until then it can fall thru.

i dont know why they would keep it after its been sold though. trying to draw buyers when there is a shortage of houses makes no sense.

its like that article never happened. I kinda was hoping it would be the beginning of getting rid of cowboys like castle estate agent. if anyone else is being investigated they are closed during the investigation, like solicitors and the like.

are they really being investigated or is it just talk from this crowd that were set up to 'monitor' agents???

If not taking the properties of the website where sale is agreed /contracts being exchanged etc , could they not flag these properties as "sale agreed " or "offer under consideration" ..would save a lot of time and hassle for all concerned , both house hunters and EA's having to deal with queries where property no longer available.

The_Morrigan

Ben Thompson, we do not allow companies to post here without a verified rep account. Please contact the office on hello@boards.ie if you wish to post on behalf of your company.
Your post has been deleted, please do not repost in connection with your company without a verified account

tony peters3

That must have been one of them on to defend themselves. they must of been expecting a backlash from the article.

seriously bogey lot,it would be interesting to see what nthey have to say for themselves after been caught redhanded

such a bad country for this industry.Will it ever be cleaned up properly??

ChRoMe

D3PO wrote: »

How can an EA have to have a license to negotiate a property sale but any individual can legally sell their own property....

The concept of duty of care basically, if its your own house you can only damage yourself. If it's someone else's that's obviously not the case.

Boom__Boom

Anyone else find it a massive enigma,why despite the continual posting of threads about poor service/ultra-low levels of professionalism from estate agents, the number of people using estate agents to sell their houses seems to remain as high as ever?

Muahahaha

Boom__Boom wrote: »

Anyone else find it a massive enigma,why despite the continual posting of threads about poor service/ultra-low levels of professionalism from estate agents, the number of people using estate agents to sell their houses seems to remain as high as ever?

It's not really an enigma tbh. Estate Agents fleecing buyers by inventing phantom bidders means that the seller ends up getting a higher price for their property, the seller doesn't care what method the agent uses to extract more money from the buyer, all he cares is that they are successful in doing so. Estate agents are paid by the seller at the end of the day so as long as their interests are represented well then I suspect they'll continue using them and buyers will continue complaining about them.

tony peters3

Well phantom bids are nothing new but to the best of my knowledge they have to keep records of bids in their office.
the problem is most people dont know this and i thought this psra crowd would be there to educate people.

most people probably dont even know that they should be asking for every agent they deal with to procduce a license. if they feel like they are getting fake bid they can ask the agent if he records bids. this should help with making the cowboys squirm and showing up propor agents from rogues

tony peters3

I think this was all hot air being blown.
this psra lad said "now the gloves are off".but they have been set up for years and never did anything.yet another waste of tax payers money paying for these figure heads to sit on their arses while cowboy agents break the law.
crazy but nothing new.
who are the other really dodgy agents in dublin??

caew

They do have to keep a book of bids but they can put down makey uppy names if they wish. Oh look 'Dave Smith' put in a bid to beat your bid. There is no way of checking by the PSR or anyone else if they have recorded genuine bids or not. So I think a book of bids is pretty worthless.

Maybe buyers should have to register on a national register with ID to show they they are genuine bidders. don't know if that is feasible as it just popped into my head now!

tony peters3

caew wrote: »

They do have to keep a book of bids but they can put down makey uppy names if they wish. Oh look 'Dave Smith' put in a bid to beat your bid. There is no way of checking by the PSR or anyone else if they have recorded genuine bids or not. So I think a book of bids is pretty worthless.

Maybe buyers should have to register on a national register with ID to show they they are genuine bidders. don't know if that is feasible as it just popped into my head now!

not a bad idea.transparency is not too much to ask for in this day and age!

also cowboys like castle estate agents and others like them would either shut down or be forced to act in the right way.we can dream :rolleyes: