by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
REIQ Journal : August 2008
18 Industry Practice Ruling by REIQ Appeal Tribunal: Appointment to Act date considerations By Barry Cotterell, Chairman, REIQ Professional Standards Tribunal An appeal of a decision by the REIQ Professional Standards Tribunal has been dismissed after it was found that the respondent agency was the effective cause of a sale prior to the commencement of the claimant’s Appointment to Act. The original Tribunal ruling was based on the date the claimant’s appointment had commenced. Background The facts in the matter revolved around the sale of a property. Both parties to the dispute had held a Form 22a Appointment to Act for the property at different times and there was no suggestion that either agent’s Form 22a was not valid. The claimant’s original claim was for 70 per cent of the commission of the sale of a property and a refund of costs of $550. This was based on the respondent’s alleged breach of a number of Articles of the Standards of Business Practice. The respondent requested that the matter be dismissed as a frivolous claim and by way of a counter-claim alleged that the claimant also breached a number of Articles of the Standards of Business Practice. REIQ Journal August 2008 The facts The respondent was appointed to sell the property on 21 August 2007, pursuant to a PAMD Act Form 22a and was given an exclusive agency. The term would end on 19 October 2007. On 17 October 2007, the seller and the respondent executed a PAMD Act Form 23, extending the term of the respondent’s exclusive agency to 18 November. On 13 November 2007, the sellers contacted the claimants and advised they wanted to list the property with them, as their exclusive listing with the respondent was about to expire and the property had not sold. On and from 19 November 2007, the exclusive agency held by the respondent became an open listing. On 23 November 2007, a PAMD Act Form 22a was executed between the claimants and the sellers. It provided that the claimants’ exclusive agency would commence on 28 November 2007 and end on 25 January 2008. Also on 23 November 2007, an employee of the claimant sent a facsimile to the respondent and stated that the claimant had been employed by the sellers to market their home exclusively as of midnight 28 November 2007. It also said that the claimants would be happy to conjunct if the respondent had any buyers as of 28 November 2007. Continued page 20