Wednesday, 9 May 2012

Property agents out of control: They vandalise freshly-painted HDB block

Property agents out of control: They vandalise freshly-painted HDB block
STOMPer Lindsy is annoyed with inconsiderate property agents who paste their flyers everywhere, including the walls of this freshly-painted HDB block.

The STOMPer said:

“These flyers were put up in less than 1 week of the completion of painting.

“These agents just don't care.

“Flyers are every where...at the lift landing, bus stop, traffic lights....

“Look at the photographs.

“These are inconsiderate Singaporeans.

“The location is at Block 219 Pasir Ris street 21”
  Click on thumbnails for larger image

Is property agent qualified to give advice on divorce and bankruptcy?

Is property agent qualified to give advice on divorce and bankruptcy?
STOMPer Jurisprudent was puzzled by the services offered by a property agent which included legal advice on divorce and bankruptcy matters.

The STOMPer saw this flyer and wondered if a property agent was qualified to provide legal advice on these matters. He says:

"This morning I was surprised to find a flyer from a property agent inside my mailbox.

"On reading the flyer, I saw that the property agent was providing free consultations on divorce, bankruptcy and PR transactions.

"I am wondering if a real estate agent is qualified to provide consultation, albeit free, to buyers on matters such as divorce and bankruptcy.

"If a person is contemplating a divorce from his spouse or filing for bankruptcy then the best person to see is a lawyer.

"Is the information provided by the property agent accurate and reliable?

"It is time for the government to regulate the real estate industry to stamp out unethical conduct of property agents.

"Property agents should also not stray into the legal sector."

learn how a singapore Property agent lies

Property buyer singapore got to learn how an agent lies

Published by RealEstate Professional on August 18th, 2011
Tricks agents play on  Option to purchase in Singapore
Option to purchase OTP   in Singapore. An option to purchase is usually the first step in property buying in Singapore.   An option to purchase gives the purchaser   the right to buy a property within a given time window at an agreed price, but not the obligation to do.

Typical bad and unsafe practices in Singapore Property market

We treat   any act that puts the property buyer and seller at risks as  unethical and bad practices.

Many   dishonest   Singapore Property agents want the seller to sign an Option to Purchase document leaving out the date and the price unfilled.  This puts the seller at risks of selling accidentally below cost   and gives a potential dishonest property agent a chance of a quick sale which could costs the Owner hundreds of thousands of dollars.

On property buying , the unethical property agents pressure  the property buyers into making an offer, property is in the bag.

Case 1 , he/she tells the buyer that seller agrees to  $1.23m, this price is acceptable by the seller.
Thinking this is a done deal, the property buyer writes a cheque for 1% of $1.23m  .  The Dishonest property agent then deposit   this cheque into the seller’s bank account  . He/she forces or sweet talk the Seller into agreeing to the deal.

During this time, you will be chasing the property agent. At this time, they may have asked the seller to return the money, but as cash to them. You may have a hard time to see this money again.
This causes the property buyer much anxiety . When emotions are running high, you cannot think straight , the dishonest property agent will offer a way  to help negotiate with the seller.

Be careful , during this time, the Dishonest Property agent may ask for a commission  for “doing you a favour”.

In case this crooked agent cannot get a cut from trying to recover your money, they may instead really try to sell the property at the true asking prices of  $1.31m instead of $1.23m. And since your 1% deposit is stuck and the Dishonest property agent has no intention of returning you the money easily (even if it is not them who kept the money), some buyers may   be coerced into paying more. BINGO, the deal is done! The deal is closed!!!

Dishonest Singapore property agents looks really honest   
The common man or woman on the street is usually no match for the dishonest property agents as even very senior executives get cheated. Nothing to be ashamed of, because these people have an innocent face and are genuinely cunning. But of course, there are a small fraction of honest singapore agents out here, you just have to look very hard.

A new bad development  in our opinion.   This practice stems from a botched deals where smart buyers discovered last minute that something is not quite right and cancelled the cheque.

Since these buyers actually do outsmart the property agents and agencies , something needs to be done to protect the interests of the Property agencies and property agents.

We see cases where some agencies and agents use an Offer to Purchase acknowledgement slip or an agreement.  An offer to purchase may hold legal weight or it may simply function more like an acknowledgement slip. But the terms of the offer needs to be carefully evaluated.

Do look out for terms such as “Irrevocable” and words to that effect. Let’s say a Property Buyer offered to buy at a certain price, they then sign the Offer to Purchase and then give a cheque. If the Seller agrees to sell. Does that mean that the Property Buyer has offered to purchase without reserve? Or offered to purchase conditionally? We have seen a few, we do not recall that.
What if a Buyer offers to purchase and it is accepted and the subsequent Option to purchase comes, but with terms that are UNFAIR and not acceptable? Does that mean that the Property Buyer has also accepted the terms and conditions of the Option to Purchase?
Most agents will not want to show you any contract for review, we can bet with you
Try  asking them to provide you a copy of the Option to purchase, 9 out of 10 will be most reluctant to show you. Most will tell you, there is no worry at all, it’s standard practice. But there is nothing standard about it, it can be modified along the wishes of the property seller. Of the 1 out of 10 who may be willing to show you, he/she may be new to the property agent trade, therefore may tend to be more upfront.
So if a Singapore Property agent asks you to offer a cheque and sign an OFFER to purchase, you can ask them to first show you the Option to purchase. If there is a need, do not be shy to counter suggest the wordings and modify the terms and conditions to your wishes, although many agents will tell you this is not possible. Well, if it is not right, don’t sign. Property agency business is an unregulated and sometimes dirty business, so just take your own precautions.
If doubtful , you can sms Property Buyer Singapore Mortgage Consultants at +65 – 9782-8606 in Singapore or email them at loans@propertybuyer.com.sg to guide you through the jungle   of Dishonest Singapore Property agents. They are used to the tricks that property agents play.


Should the Property Buyer sign the Option to Purchase?
Only the rightful owner(s) needs to sign the option to purchase. The property buyer(s) do not need to sign the option to purchase. The property buyer only needs to have the original signed copy of the option to purchase in their possession. Do not leave the original copy with the Property agent!!!
Beware of letting your agent handle your original option to purchase document. They can easily sub-sale your property without you knowing about it, simply by filling in the name of the buyers if it is not filled in.

During property hype  , we have heard that some agents who held copies of the original option to purchase managed to flip the properties for higher price making the difference. When the original buyers wanted to exercise option, they did not want to HAND OVER the ORIGINAL option to purchase. The buyers then lose their dream homes.

This leads to the Original buyers being unable to exercise option even if they have paid and book the property. Under normal circumstances, the buyer would have the right to buy the property at the agreed price. In this case, the Property Buyer loses out on his/her property and any potential gains.

Some dishonest Singapore Property agents may take your original OTP  , make copies and then submit it to many banks to try and secure property loans from their favourite bankers  and lawyers from which they have an under-table deal. These rogued lawyers then over-charge you and pay the dishonest agent a commission , which is illegal.

Is your Singapore Property   agent too keen  to introduce to you   a bank, a banker to you? RUN for your life.
Is your property agent too eager to recommend a lawyer or law firm? RUN for your life.
Is your property agent too keen to recommend you a contractor? RUN for your life.

Singapore property agents  don’t do things for free, just try asking them to give you some comparisons and some paperwork, they will try all ways to turn it away. Many are lazy and yet want to make money. If they are too keen, something’s fishy. Just tell them firmly, NO thank you. We will find our own contractors, our own bankers, our own mortgage consultants and our own lawyers. Check with your close friends who are not agents to find out.

Singaporeans do not buy properties too often in their lives  , so naturally, you may need a Singapore Mortgage Consultant at loans@propertyBuyer.com.sg who has no stake and no commission in property buying. Propertybuyer.com.sg offers free mortgage advice and property buying guidance for free. They offer their services for free to property buyers in selecting home loans as they are like outsourced bankers. Banks would need to incur staffing cost if not for mortgage consultants, therefore this service is offered to you free of charge at sms (text) +65 9782 8606.

Unethical Property Agents

Unethical Property Agents

Probably the most unethical group of people in Singapore would be property agents. Especially when the property market is booming like nobody's business. So the agents really become like piranhas biting poor tenants to death.
Hence this blog!
This blog aims to blacklist all unethical property agents for a start. After that, we will sort out the insurance, contractors, bankers, lawyers, doctors etc. This blog shall be the nemesis of unethnical people in Singapore!
Ok, back to property agents, just to list a few unethnical practices here
1) Promise this but deliver something else: this one we all now, promise 5min to MRT become 15min.
2) Not negotiating for tenants: Since their commission is half mth rent, they will never negotiate to lower their own commission right? But this is unethnical, hence if any agent to this, report here and get them blacklisted.
3) Purposely dont help tenant search until time is up: when the time is up, ie tenant needs to move tomorrow, they get into action so that they can take advantage of tenants who are desperate.
4) Forget about tenant after receiving commission: tenant running into issues with owner, other problems etc but they just heck care!
5) Bully tenants after they rejected prospective viewing: they thought they could close the deal but somehow the tenant decided to back out and they stop helping the tenants, scold them etc.
This list is not exhaustive and the blogger welcome all comments to make it more comprehensive! So pls contribute!Next post, the list of blacklisted property agents!

Unethical HSR agent K***en L**

Recently I had bought a resale hdb with the help of a PropNet agent. We actually meet one HSR Kar** L** agent who is the seller for that resales HDB asking for extra 1% and telling all kind of stories. My PropNet Agent tried to neg. with that HSR but she refused to give way. She mention it belong to another agent thread and helping him/her to sell which we suspect is conspiracy.

My PropNet agent call and say that she never do any proper documentation only keep pestering me to pay that extra 1% and sign the HSR agreement

HSR Agent, insisted that we must give the 1% as she say she got other buyer, and might sell to other buyer. Now I have to pay 2% commission for both agent.

Can this issue be log/file this to CASE? In the first place, is this correct? Need advised from experts in this property line?


18-01-2008, 03:47 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

If not sure, you think I dare to post here. I am not the person that is not reasonable, if you want the extra 1%. Tell me the story, do not keep changing story mode.

This is what my PropNet agent mention,
At my second view in the flat, she told my agent that someone have offer her 1.5% on top of the COV cash. Later part, she say again that is not her advertisement. She is helping on behind of someone by the name of Chuah from HSR also (cannot remember the name).

I called my PropNet agent to ask whether can reduced the prices 1% let say round off to $3K, she say No and say the seller give her only red packets. I am hearing so many story which is so unconvincing.

I am not a reasonable man, if you tell me honestly the whole story, I sure give you. I am not against HSR agent, but this is my present encountered.




http://www.sg-house.com/classifieds/experience-sharing/1051200-unethical-hsr-agent-k-en-l.html

An unethical and dishonest AGENT (Cheong HF, 92382328)

An unethical and dishonest AGENT (Cheong HF, 92382328)

Attention all,

Do not rent unit BLK 431 Clementi from an unethical and dishonest AGENT.

Agent name: Cheong HF
Contact number: 92382328
Agency: Linkvest Property Pte Ltd

His profile listed in propertyGuru:
http://www.propertyguru.com.sg/agent/34032/hf-cheong

Blacklisted unit:
Blk 431 Clementi Ave 3
#04-316
S(120431)

Just to share a bad experience with all and hope that no more victim to be cheated by this agent:

Problem 1)
I got to know about this unit through the agent (certified by SAEA as shown in his name card) and never seen or spoken with landlord. Once you make your payment to this agent he will not entertain you and provide after sale service. He do not keep his promise to repair faulty aircon, water heater, washing machine, etc in first month. He even shout at you for asking you do not call him... Note: we bear the own cost to change the washing machine and water heater in bathroom.

Problem 2)
The agent aware this unit has been harassed by loanshark since 2007 till now, but he purposely do not highlight this problem and just want to earn the commission from you. The unit was peacefully till the 5th month when my housemates and I found pain splashed on the main door and gate, the wording “O$P$” and a hp number were scribbled on the wall. Out of curiosity, I called the number to find out what’s happening. A man claimed himself loanshark, he told me that the landlord owe him money and he could not find him. I called police immediately and also lodge a compliant to CASE. A letter was sent to Linkvest Property Pte Ltd to request the agent clean up the mesh. However, we did not hear any response from this company.

Problem 3)
Agent did not refund full deposit to us, he finds many excuses to deduct this and that e.g. floor dirty minus $80, the door lock not in good condition minus $90, and etc. The worst part was that he did not keep his promise to return me money after I got door locksmith to change the door lock. I sent him a few sms to check when he could return me the money but he totally ignored my message.

Overall, he will not keep his promise and will give you 100 and 1 excuse. He is the most unethical and dishonest agent I ever seen in my life.

You may also find the below complaints made by other to this agent:

MND Head of Property Agent need to focus on ethics, not exams

MND Head of Property Agent need to focus on ethics, not exams  

Article by Property Buyer Singapore Mortgage Consultant







Head of Property agent need to focus on ethics, not examsWe applaud the creation of a regulatory body to regulate the Singapore Property agents.The below is an excerpt from a news published by the Asiaone.com.sg on 13th Dec 2009.”MND in October shared some details of the new regulatory framework that it is proposing for the real estate industry, which includes the creation of a new government agency to take on enhanced regulatory powers.We are a Research-focused Singapore Mortgage Consultant which helps you compare Singapore Home loans either for new home loans or refinance home loans, we balance risks versus rewards for each home loan to match your risk profile and financing needs.Tel: 6100 – 0608SMS: 9782 – 8606http://www.propertybuyer.com.sg>…The move came as property agents here have come under increasing fire over the last few years for not having the right qualifications and for unethical practices. Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan commented in March this year that the status quo was ‘not tenable’ and that the whole system was ‘not satisfactory’.Legislative enactment is expected by the second half of next year once the key elements are unveiled.With the planned changes, agents’ activities will be monitored more closely and rules enforced more keenly. For example, real estate agents will no longer be allowed to be freelancers (agents who are not contracted with any accredited agencies). They will also be prevented from representing more than one agency.Agents must also pass an industry examination and be accredited by a new accreditation body (to be set up next year) before they can practise.”http://business.asiaone.com/Business/News/My%2BMoney/Story/A1Story20091211-185327.htmlThere seems to be an overly keen focus on ExaminationsThere is a lot of talk about agents will be monitored more closely and they cannot represent more than one agency. These protect the rights of the Agencies.The only thing that is mentioned that perhaps have a slight influence on protecting the consumer is Examination and improving professionalism.What is the real challenge?Many agents are already very knowledgeable. It is not a matter of full-time or part-time. Did MND know that many of the Singapore property agent cheaters are very professional and have many years of experience?It’s just that some of these people are simply unethical.Now, examinations will NOT solve the problem. By enforcing more and more examinations which we are afraid MND will impose, would have missed the point completely.By having examinations, you would remove some agents from the field, this would make long time agents stronger and give them more business. This is a rather stupid and potentially dangerous way of regulating, if it really comes to that. We are hopeful it will not end up this way.Just like there are wolfs out there. We don’t throw sheeps to the wolfs so that these wolfs will become less hungry and tame.
So by feeding a Dishonest Singapore property agent who can also be very senior and very professional (knowledge wise), this is like throwing sheep to wolves.How can we ever satisfy their greed?So we urge MND and the new Head of Property agent regulator to focus on creating a framework that monitors ethics and removing conflicts of interests.Some of these agents even work with rogue mortgage consultants which are tied up with lawyers to charge property buyers more for law fees so as to get a commission.Some of the unethical Singapore Property agents’ behaviours: - * Cheating on valuation, working with roger valuers who stick their heads out for higher valuation so as to cheat the banks. * Lying about the property transaction and staging a show to squeeze more commission * Illegal kick backs from rogue loan consultants which are tied to lawyers. * Illegal kick backs from lawyers. * Running away with cheques, giving fake identidy. * Recommending loans where they are not expert in. * Cornering property launches and buying them up for sub-sale. * Cheating the selling into letting go their property cheaply. Buys the Option of purchase and then immediately transfer of nominees (names) for Option to purchase. o This involves cheating an owner into disposing a property at below the fair value. Then the agent goes into the market to re-sell the option to purchase for easily 50k to 100k more as there will be takers. * The list goes on.Buying property is a serious affair, we do NOT advocate a Greed or fear based buying approach, we emphasize that you need to check your property home loan affordability with property buyer.


About the Author

Complaints against unethical housing agents on the rise

Complaints against unethical housing agents on the rise
AN OFFER of $438,000 for his HDB maisonette looked like a pretty good deal to Mr Simon Huin - until he found out his property agent had pulled a fast one.

The agent had kept a higher offer from Mr Huin - one that would have given him $7,000 more for his Geylang East home.
That offer had come from another agent but doing this deal - it is called co-broking - would have required Mr Huin's agent to share the 3 per cent commission.
Mr Huin, a 55-year-old project coordinator, was furious and reported the agent to the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case).
It is becoming a familiar story with the number of complaints against errant agents shooting up amid a hot property market. Case received 57 complaints from January to July this year, compared with 32 in the same period last year.
The Singapore Accredited Estate Agencies (SAEA), received 46 complaints against agents in the same period this year, up from 31 cases last year.
Most gripes are about agents offering poor service or misrepresenting facts.
'These unethical agents who work for their own interests shouldn't be tolerated,' said Mr Huin, whose case is being investigated by Case and the Institute of Estate Agents (IEA).
If the IEA finds that the agent had behaved unethically, it will strengthen Mr Huin's case should he decide to sue for damages.
Agents who want to pocket both the seller's commission and the buyer's fee may refuse to co-broke but that usually greatly reduces the number of buyers viewing a home.
It also goes against industry guidelines, which state that agents should always co-broke to safeguard a client's interest.
But when The Sunday Times - posing as a buyer - called 10 agents listed in the Classifieds, four flatly refused to co-broke.
There are 18,500 agents in Singapore registered with the IEA. Between April and June this year, 12,897 transactions were made in the private residential market - more than double the 5,767 in the same period last year.
Experts believe some agents are rushing to seal deals and cutting corners.
Tenants face the same problems. Expatriate Laura Thornton-Olivry, in her 30s, has thrice failed to get a rental home because agents upped the price even after she had signed letters of intent and handed over cheques.
The housewife is one of 13 frustrated people who have written to The Straits Times' Forum page in the past eight months, calling for agents to be licensed, to curb unethical practices.
Property agencies agree. Although anyone can become an agent now by completing an agency's in-house training, the SAEA aims to have all agents accredited by 2009. Those found to be unethical can then be expelled or suspended.
But there is no regulatory body to enforce accreditation. As PropNex's chief executive Mohamed Ismail pointed out: 'As long as there's no central regulatory body, there will be unethical agents who simply move on to another agency when fired.' Like most estate agencies, he wants the Government to step in.
The SAEA advises people to use only the 6,000 accredited agents listed on its website. At least they can be held accountable.

Concern in Singapore after leaked emails show real estate agents using unethical pressure tactics

Concern in Singapore after leaked emails show real estate agents using unethical pressure tactics

Tuesday, 08 June 2010

Singapore estate agent row

A row has broken out in Singapore over the regulation of real estate agents after a series of leaked emails apparently suggest some have been putting pressure on sellers.
 
With the property sector showing signs of a slowdown concerns have been raised over scare tactics revealed in the emails. They suggest real estate agents have been trying to badger clients into selling at a lower price.
 
The emails appear to be correspondence between agents of real estate firm ERA.
In one email, a senior division director drew attention to a news report on land released for private homes. He called on agents to use the news as ‘a bargaining point to lower down your private residential seller’s high expectations’.
 
In another a real estate agent claimed that a deal was closed after telling the client that the ‘market is going to crash’, cashing in on fears that the government is selling too much land and the economic crisis in Europe could impact on Asia.
 
Industry observers said the gap in expectations between buyers and sellers is widening due to mixed sentiments in the market but the economy in Singapore is strong and interest rates low. Also the number of domestic buyers is increasing, suggesting more confidence in the market.
 
ERA said it did not have specific guidelines on how agents should communicate with clients but stipulated that information must be factually correct. ‘It’s a matter of perspective. One person’s impression may be that if the market drops by 10%, the market is crashing. Another person might think a drop of 10% is nothing,’ said Eugene Lim, associate director of ERA Asia Pacific.
 
‘Most sellers are very well informed and because of the availability of information from the media and the government, I think most people would have sufficient information to form an opinion,’ he added.
But some said such language is not condoned.
 
But the Singapore Accredited Estate Agencies said there is concern about the language used. ‘By telling the seller that the market is going to crash, it will make the seller worry, and ultimately they will sell at a price below their expectation. This conduct is not condoned by the industry. Instead, the agent should provide more comprehensive analysis of the market condition,’ said Steven Tan, advisory committee member of the SAEA.
 
The Ministry of National Development (MND) is currently looking into setting up a new statutory board, the Council for Estate Agencies, to implement a new regulatory framework for the real estate agency industry, so as to better safeguard consumer interest and to raise the professionalism of the industry.
 
The new framework will include a Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, which estate agencies and agents must adhere to. Unethical pressure sale tactics or using unsubstantiated information about the property market will constitute as misconduct under the Code. And consumers who feel they have been disadvantaged or misled by estate agencies or agents can report to the CEA.

unethical agent ordered to return $257,000

A HIGH Court judge yesterday criticised the unethical behaviour of two ERA Realty Network agents and ordered the return of $257,000 to a couple who used the agency to sell their apartment.

Mr Yuen Chow Hin, an IT company vice-president, and his wife, Madam Wong Wai Fan, a housewife, had let go of their two-bedroom downtown flat at $688,000. They took their ERA agent's word that this was the best price they could get.

What they did not know was that the buyer of their Riverside Piazza unit was the wife of their agent's boss, and that she re-sold it almost immediately for $945,000, making a hefty profit.

Yesterday, Justice Choo Han Teck ruled in favour of the Yuens, who had sued ERA for the 'secret profit' made in the second deal.

Justice Choo found that the conduct of agent Jeremy Ang and his boss, Mr Mike Parikh, senior group division director at ERA, amounted to breach of duty and fraud.

He also had a stern reminder for the industry of its ethical responsibilities, as it had emerged in court that such practices were common.

The judge concluded that it was Mr Parikh who wanted to buy the flat in order to make a quick profit during the property boom.

To distance himself from the deal, he used his wife, Madam Natassha Sadiq, as the buyer and Mr Ang as the seller's agent, the judge found.

Mr Ang was the link but Mr Parikh was the person behind the scheme, and his position made his subordinate's breach of contract even more reprehensible.

The misconduct was of such magnitude that the judge said he felt bound to make the reasons clear in his judgment so that no property agent could now claim ignorance.
When a property agent is engaged to sell or buy property, he has a responsibility to act in the interests of the person who appointed him - not his own, or his friends', or his relatives' or his boss', said the judge.

'This responsibility that the agent bears is the foundation of the ethical rules and contractual principles that prohibit an agent from acting in conflict of interests and reaping secret profits for himself or his friends.'

Madam Sadiq was a party to the plan carried out by her husband and Mr Ang.

'The result of the concerted efforts of Jeremy, Mike and Natassha resulted in the plaintiffs selling their flat for less than what they might have had they been properly and honestly advised,' said the judge.

Justice Choo rejected the testimony of ERA's top brass - president Jack Chua and senior vice-president Marcus Chu - that the two men had done nothing wrong.

The judge said it was clear why they thought so - Mr Chu admitted in court that he and others in the company, as well as agents in other companies, had done the same thing.

Dennis' comments:  this is really shocking!!! No wonder the Public have such Bad impression of Property Agents in general.... if you earn commission from clients, you Ought to take care of clients' interest, it is Unethical, Unbelieveable and Unacceptable to do anything against Clients' interest....
Real estate transactions involved billions of dollars each year. It is a "joke" that Property Agents are NOT regulated in Singapore and not required to be properly licenced when even Taxi Drivers need to pass through standard tests and be properly licenced.
It is time for the Singapore government to take a good look at the Property sector and implement proper licencing and regulations on Property Agents operating in Singapore

Justice Choo also rejected arguments by ERA that it was not liable for the actions of its agents, who are 'independent contractors'.

The option form had ERA's logo printed on it; the commission agreement was between Madam Wong and ERA; and the newspaper advertisements sought to persuade the public that they would have the backing of the company and its network by engaging an ERA agent.
It was also ERA - not Mr Ang - which took the couple to the Small Claims Tribunal when they refused to pay the commission on the sale.

Yesterday, a relieved Madam Wong said: 'Naturally, I'm very happy. I respect the decision of the court.'

In a statement, ERA president Jack Chua said: 'ERA intends to appeal the court decision that finds our company liable as we did not benefit from the transaction.'

How to Complain against Dishonest Singapore property agents

How to Complain against Dishonest Singapore property agents

April 2011
With the recent set up of Council of Estate Agencies (http://www.cea.gov.sg/cea/content/index.html) it may be easier to complain against any errant singapore property agents. In the current regulation, agents can no longer represent buyer and seller in a single deal, but we believe that this does not go far enough.
Agents are still happily making referrals to lawyers and banks. This is a serious problem and we should highlight here so that in case you are a victim, you could raise this issue with Council of Estate Agencies.
Many agents make referral to a bank or a mortgage consultant with the lawyer of the agent’s choice. This lawyer then over-charges the person for legal conveyancing fees so as to pay a commission to the property agent. In other words, the agents receive a kick-back. However, as legal kick-backs is illegal under Singapore law, what these property agents have done is, they have committed a crime and is liable to being punished. Similarly many property agents receive a legal kick-back from intermediary companies which we cannot name, with the property buyer ending up with expensive legal conveyancing fees. These intermediary companies are not apparent to the person taking a home loan as it is done at the back end, but these companies will pay the illegal legal fee kick back to the property agent.
It is always useful to note down the time, date of communication with the property agent. And try to communicate more with Emails and get them to confirm their facts via email. Do not rely too much on verbal conversation.
Attached here is a property agent complaint form which we downloaded from the CEA website. (Please note, you should always check the CEA website to ensure that the form is up to date, we only provide a convenience and are not liable to any losses whatsoever from using the form)
CEA Property Agent Complaint Form

Still lots of fake property ads going round

Still lots of fake property ads going round

Despite regulations by the Council for Estate Agents (CEA), there are still lots of dummy ads going round. And by “dummy ads,” we mean those that don’t have important info such as the agent’s registration and contact numbers.
The CEA has been rather rigorous when it comes to checking on ads by agents via various media such as online property portals, classifieds and flyers. Members of the public have also come forth to complain about these fake ads that are misleading. But the CEA is quite happy that more agencies are putting in place systems that vet and verify these ad materials before they are disseminated.

Of course there are still some black sheep within the industry and one way to tell a fake ad from the real one is that fake ads usually do not even have pictures of the property. Info about the property is very little.

Although it might be easy to tell that these ads are fake, the CEA admits that it would be difficult to vet every single ad, but they are doing whatever they can to reduce the number of fake ads by rogue agents.

CEA to investigate rogue agents

CEA to investigate rogue agents
Black sheep in the real estate industry who think that they can get away with bad customer service, errant advertising and other misconduct will be taken to task sooner or later by the Council for Estate Agents (CEA).
Apparently, they have formed an Inspection and Compliance Section, that will deal with recreant agents. As of end-September, the CEA has already received more than 1,200 complaints. They said that these complaints should be taken as feedback, so that the agencies and agents can learn from this.

Also, the CEA will also carry out a consumer survey, which will be used as a gauge for the public’s sentiment toward the real estate industry. They are targeting around 3,500 consumers and industry experts for the interview survey.

That sounds like a good plan CEA! Let's hope these rogue agents will be weeded out once and for all!
http://singapore.asiaxpat.com/forums/singapore-property/threads/136001/complaint-real-estate-agents-singapore/

Posted by pacificexpat
I want to relate a very unhappy, and I would say almost unethical home buying experience of ours in Singapore which just happened today. We as buyers in Singapore and I am sure we are not alone here feeling this way; are frustrated that there is no real regulatory body in Singapore to change legislature or effectively regulate the real estate industry here to protect buyers.

Basically, I want all home buyers in Singapore especially expatriates to beware, Singapore is not a buyer friendly country under the current real estate law here. I came from Hong Kong and my husband came from USA, in both countries, general real estate practice is such that buyers pay their agents a commission for getting them a property and sellers pay their agents a commission for selling their property.

Under this arrangement, it's a healthy transaction and competition between buyer and seller's agents. Of course buyer's agent will work very hard to get you the listings to view and negotiate for you the property you want to purchase, while the seller's agent would do the same for their seller to earn the commission.

However in Singapore, Buyer's agent actually gets the commission from the seller's agent's own commission. So the sellers give their agent a lum sum commission and that agent will have to share it with buyer's agent if the property was sold to the buyer through his or her agent. They call it co-brokering here. But anyone can tell you how flawed this practice is and how it puts the buyer in a very disadvantage position.

The seller's agent may not be so forthcoming about a listing, he or she would rather deal with a buyer who approaches them directly to save the commission. For potential buyer, unless you are willing to pour through lots of property websites and drive around looking for a developer's unit that you can deal with directly, you will be vulnerable to selfish and unscrupulous seller's agents, or missed out a lot of good listings and a potential dream home by being at the mercy of seller’s agent.

This is exactly what happened to me and my husband today, not to mention a very unscrupulous developer operating in a very unprofessional manner. I want to share this story with everyone here, and please pass the message around especially among expats communities, beware when you want to purchase property developed by VicLand Pte Ltd and if developer's agent is ECG property.

Doesn't matter what the developer and ECG may want to sugar coat this whole property deal that fell apart, the real truth is this:
I was shown by our agent at the time Serennia on 16 Pulasan Road in Katong district 2 weeks ago. It's a VicLand property, boutique development with only five floors.
There was only one unit left for sale by developer, 03-09, a 3 bedroom flat. At the time my husband was out of town, and initially I liked what I saw so I told the developer's agent and my agent we will have to come back with my husband in two weeks to view it again and make a decision after ward.

Yesterday, my agent still told me it was available for viewing and we went to view it again. The developer's agent from ECG let us view it and gave us the impression it was still available and co-broking would be okay. There were a couple other people viewing that same unit but nothing seems to indicate it would have been sold right there.

So we were prepared to arrange for loan approval today and if that goes through, we will hand in our check for the initial point of purchase procedure.

However, last night my own agent called me and informed me suddenly that ECG told them a buyer is going to hand them a check in the morning, so we better act fast or we could lose the property.

We really like it so our agent suggested perhaps we should try hand in a check last night and she would deliver to ECG. We were just debating if we should do that or not, our agent suddenly called back and now informed us, she got some inside source within ECG that even if we had hand in the check last night, they would not honor it, because they prefer to let their own in house agent make the sale and some buyer was about to hand in a check next day to the in house ECG agent directly. Even if we beat them that night, it wouldn’t matter, ECG didn’t want to take our check. In short, ECG did not want to split the commission from developer with my agent!

My agent told me at the time this is a hopeless deal, we will never get the condo because we went through her and ECG agent basically wants to cut her out of the deal! What kind of professional practice is this? This would never have happened in HK or NY because there is no loss of profit for the agent from each side. We buyer now are being caught in the middle of a very stupid and unhealthy practice in real estate industry here.

This story gets better: as a buyer, I had to take matter in my own hand. Maybe I shouldn't have contacted the developer's agent directly without going through my own agent but at this point, if they want to be unethical about it, we buyer have to protect our interest and do whatever as long as it's legal to get the condo too. And I need to find out if my agent was lying or if ECG agent was playing games with us by presenting a fake offer to hike up the price or speed up the sale.

So I contacted the manager of ECG, the IC of the ECG agent that showed us and our agent the unit in Serennia, I asked her point blank if it's true you would prefer to sell that unit to your own in house agent. She implied that's the case and then I offered her a scenario what if I now approached ECG directly as a buyer for that unit and give her a check for it, would she accept our offer? She told me she would think about it and call me back. Half an hour later, she called me back and said yes, if we hand her a check by noon today, she would take our offer. So now the unit is available again!?

As we explained we need to go to our bank to get a quick loan approval assessment and valuation of the unit in the morning, so by noon we could produce a check for her. So at this point, it clearly indicated already how screw up the whole real estate transaction process is in Singapore. Basically everyone has to be unethical to get the deal done! If the buyer wants to do the right thing and let his or her own agent to go through the purchase offer, the buyer would have lost that condo from day one, a waste of buyer’s time right from the beginning.

I was also told by this one ECG agent, it was our own agent just walk into check out Serennia and the unit and asked about it so he let her see it but at the time, he didn’t realize she was an agent. Otherwise, he would have not been keen to show her the unit as they are in house agent for Serennia and would prefer direct sale to buyer.

By the way, there is also no real regulatory body to screen out inexperienced agents here. For instance, when I asked my own agent what documents I would need to apply for loan, she couldn't tell me, she could only recommend a banker I could consult with. But that's like basic knowledge real estate agents should know and be able to advise their clients. That's when we sort of lost confidence in property agents in Singapore overall and their ability to get us a good condo in a good price too. And we have encounter quite a few incompetent agents in recent past months.

In HK, my own agent there would be able to recommend banker but also tell me what I need to prepare for loan application, and could even get me a lawyer to process paper and inform me every procedure required to close the deal. They are more proactive too because we pay them a commission, not from the seller's agent.

To continue my nightmarish experience of property purchase in Singapore. This morning at 10am I still received a message from this ECG manager agent that please call her when we are ready to produce a check and she will meet us somewhere to get it.

But then later in an hour, while we were at the bank informing the banker we want to get a loan for the Serennia, she text me and just told me sorry, that unit is no longer available. I suspect later it was perhaps our agent phoned them to insist she would bring us to the condo with the check at noon, and they have to accept our offer because she was so concerned to get her commission from the seller's agent. That probably annoyed the ECG agent and wanted to call off our deal.

So all this time we as buyer are the real victims in this unscrupulous scam and unregulated practice among real estate agents in Singapore. We have to resort to desperate measures to get our property because we can’t always rely on our own agent to get the property if the seller’s agent shut co-broking out.

And why co-broking is not welcomed by agents in Singapore? Simply because of that stupid rule allowing buyer’s agent to share commission with seller’s agent!

To make matter worse, I confronted ECG later, they tried to cover up their mistake by saying it was the developer's fault. The developer has neglected to inform their own in house agent, that last unit was sold internally already. ECG claimed they don't know when exactly it was sold, but only this morning the developed told them and apologized to ECG for that oversight!
What about an apology to us buyers, especially if we might have given them a check already! The ECG manager I dealt with, told me her IC ( superior ) would call me to explain what happened. But that IC gave me an even more convoluted story, claiming he also got a check from another buyer from that unit at 9am and he had to return the check to him later too. If he was already accepting a check from another buyer at 9am, why did the ECG manager would still text me at 10a to remind me to let her know when we' re ready to give her the check???!!!!

And this is how real estate business is conducted in Singapore, a so called metropolitan city in par with other urban metropolitan cities like Hong Kong.

I know a lot of people complained about HK property market is just as cut throat and there are a lot of greedy agents too and unscrupulous practice, but at least they are efficient, they are knowledgeable and they will work very hard to get your dream home because they get a commission from you, not sharing with seller's agent. And at least through my own dealings with property agents in HK and in my job as a journalist reporting about property biz there, I have never encountered such a blatant display of incompetence, stupidity and unethical dealings with buyers. We buyers are basically held hostage in some hostile take over situation and caught in squabbles between agents.

In the end, whose fault is it really? I believe it is ultimately the government's fault, for not coming up with better legislature to regulate the industry, the people who work in the industry and the developers. They should change the law so that buyers pay their own agents and sellers pay their own agents to create a healthy and fair business environment. Of course VicLand is also responsible for being so callous about not informing their own in house agents that unit was no longer available. Probably was not available even when we went to view it yesterday. And ECG also has to take blame for being so unprofessional and almost unethical by resorting to what equivalent to a black mail tactics to make a sale.

As my husband and I are also Singapore PR, we plan to take our complaint to our MP as well, hopefully the government will become aware of this problem or perhaps they knew about it already, but it's time to take some action to correct this long standing complaint among buyers, and even among agents who got shunned out from deals like my poor agent. She lost a sale for sure and unbeknownst to her, she probably never had a chance with that property right from the beginning! I feel sorry for her, and appreciated her effort in alerting us about this unit and trying to get us the property; yet I am a little annoyed or perhaps a bit resentful that we lost that condo basically because we were attached to her or any co-broke agent?

As I could tell from complaint left in other forums and expat forums as well about unethical standard practiced by estate agents in Singapore, this is not the first time and we are not the only buyers or even renters being screwed by the flawed system here. If Singapore really values foreign investment and wants to entice expatriates to call this place home and settle down here long term, it should really do something about its real estate practice here so we buyers will be protected.
Right now, we have lost all confidence in obtaining our dream home and at a good deal through agents here unless we want to go through this very frustrating and stressful home buying process in Singapore again. WE would probably just buy in Hong Kong or back home in New York where real estate agents were more professionally trained and operated.

Of course dealing with unscrupulous landlord as a renter is whole other frustrating experience but at least we pay our agent a commission for rentals so he or she will work hard for us to get a good rental. Hopefully that login will also apply to home purchases soon.

Posted by orchardarea
pacificexpat - sorry this happened to you. the maturity of the singapore property market is nowhere near Hong Kong, UK, Canada or US in many respects, particularly in the quality of its real estate agents. They are apparently coming up with a regulatory body next year but clearly you now fall out of this range.
a few months ago i spoke with CASE regarding our problem (unprofessional real estate agents). the lady told me that agents are a problem but unfortunately it is out of their remit. however, she told me of a semi-government real estate body (i forgot the name now, sorry) that you can file a complain. they apparently keep a log of all the agents. or if the situation allows it they will reprimand the real estate company that they work for (if indeed they belong to a company). don't expect a miracle, however.
because the property market is hot and is clearly unsustainable, real estate agents can be out of hand. we had friends with lots of properties and introduced their agents to us and we still find them disappointing.
on a side note, if you intend to take this to an MP, beware of how you approach the complaint. this is afterall singapore and certain comments (or ways it is presented) is not encouraged. you might find yourself suddenly without any allies.
good luck.
http://forum.singaporeexpats.com/ftopic66365.html&sid=b1a8a8e6d6fd59a4fae257a71b71757c

Does anyone know where and how to complain about Agent/House owner, and can take "real" action against him?

One of my friends was supposed to shift to a HDB house and gave 1.5 month of advance to Agent (who is the owner also). And that bugger keeps on shifting the moving in date for some or other reason- and not at all telling the clear date. Finally he said ok to return back the money, however that too he keeps on telling this time that time, I have to arrange money etc.

I want to really screw such agents, and their nonsense behavior.

We have the signed receipt from him for 1.5 month of advance and a contract document (however no stamping from HDB).

pls let me know what and how strong action we can take, and how to get the money back from him. Considering the fact that my friend lease at current place is finishing up this Sunday, and this bugger didn tell till y'day evening about this when we landed to see the house readiness, so its really pissing me off because due to long weekend offices are closed to renew the lease or complain.. Mad


thanks
-ck


some sharing

Thursday, 3 May 2012

CEA clamps down on errant housing agents

SINGAPORE: Nine individuals have been barred from registering as housing agents after they were convicted of illegal moneylending activities.

Releasing this figure for the first time to Channel NewsAsia, the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) stressed that housing agents are also not allowed to work with moneylenders - legally or otherwise.

It used to be a common industry practice for moneylenders to work closely with housing agents.

A person in debt will be offered a quick loan and then persuaded to sell his house to pay back the money owed.

In some cases, the moneylender and the housing agent executing the deal was the same person.

PropNex CEO Mohd Ismail said: "The motive of many of these moneylenders then was not the primary real estate business, but more of to get as many clients to take their loan because it is relatively lucrative. And in a way, they were quite secured, because for all the moneylending businesses they carried out, they used the HDB property in a way as a form of collateral."

When the estate agency watchdog was set up in October 2010, all housing agents were required to register with the council before they could continue practising.

A background check revealed that nine property agents were previously convicted of illegal moneylending activities which immediately disqualified them as fit and proper agents.

Under new rules, an agent cannot hold a moneylender licence, or work for one, to prevent a conflict of interest.

Yeap Soon Teck, Deputy Director of Licensing at CEA, said: "A salesperson who works for sellers must act in the best interest of the seller. That is why he should not work with another party or collaborate with another party. Because by doing that, he may not get the best price for the seller, or may lengthen the resale process to get more interest for the moneylender."

The industry watchdog said it will not hesitate to take errant agents to task.

Mr Yeap said: "Salespersons working with moneylenders is a very serious issue, and cannot be tolerated. We will spare no effect in investigating such cases, and we will not hesitate to prosecute such salespersons who are involved in such cases in court."

Since the Estate Agents Act was introduced in 2010, the law is now harsher on housing agents who get involved with moneylenders.

Introducing or recommending a client to a moneylender can be considered an offence. If found guilty, a housing agent can be fined up to S$25,000 or jailed up to a year.

Agents found to have acted against the interest of the sellers may also be fined up to S$75,000, or have his registration suspended or revoked.

www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1185193/1/.html

Bogus property agent jailed, fined By Alvina Soh | Posted: 12 January 2012 2005 hrs

Bogus property agent jailed, fined
By Alvina Soh | Posted: 12 January 2012 2005 hrs

 SINGAPORE: A 45-year-old man has become the first person to be sentenced for representing himself as a property agent without being registered with the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA).

Tan Cher Peng was given four months' jail and fined S$32,000.

He pleaded guilty to five charges of contravening the Estate Agents Act and another count of forgery.

Tan had made a false statement when he applied to the CEA to register as a salesperson in December 2010.

The CEA rejected his application as he was wanted by police and had a history of past convictions, including cheating and criminal breach of trust.

However, Tan still advertised properties in an online property portal under his name, describing himself as a marketing director of a licensed estate agent, even though he didn't have written authorisation from a licensed real estate agent to practise.

Since January 2011, all property agents must register with the CEA and have written agreements with their companies.

The CEA said that failing to do so would be a serious offence.

However, Tan still represented himself as a salesperson for real estate firm, Wallingtons International, in online advertisements.

He conducted showroom visits and negotiated with clients over property leases on two occasions between January and February last year.

He also gave his name cards to two clients and informed one of them that a property at Club Street was available for rent.

Court documents revealed that Tan was guilty of forgery in 2004, after fraudulently signing on credit application forms.

Tan, who was a co-partner of an F&B outlet then, forged his partner's signature on the forms to obtain goods, causing the company to lose nearly S$5,000.

Tan's lawyer, Mr S S Dhillon, called for a fine to be imposed for the charges under the Estates Agent Act, adding that Tan's offences were "technical".

He also said that Tan was under the impression that it was not necessary to be a registered sales person as the online advertisements were accessible to all.

He added that Tan, who married recently, did not cause financial losses to any parties by his actions.

Mr Dillion also told the court that Tan had made full restitution to the F&B company, which was a "significant mitigating factor".

District Judge Mr Toh Yung Cheong noted that Tan's false declaration in his application did not stem from attempts to benefit financially or to gain illegal entry into the country.

But he stressed that the "public still needs to be protected", even though no loss was reported.

In a statement, the CEA said there are two more prosecutions involving unregistered salespersons pending before the Courts.

It'll be prosecuting several more people over the next few months.

- CNA/cc


















Second individual charged with being unregistered property agent

Second individual charged with being unregistered property agent 

A second property agent was charged in court yesterday for allegedly working as a property salesman without being registered with the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA).

Raymond Sim Soon Leong, 30, was also accused of not obtaining a written agreement with Savills Singapore for him to practise.

Despite being unauthorised and unregistered, Sim advertised two HDB flats for rental under his name while claiming to be a Savills sales director.

According to the CEA, Sim also conducted flat viewings, represented clients and negotiated property transactions directly.

“We wish to reiterate that we will not hesitate to take strong enforcement action against any person who performs estate agency work without registering with CEA,” said Purnima Shantilal, Director for Licensing and Investigations at CEA.

Sim faces four charges for not being registered with the CEA and another four charges for misrepresenting himself as a Savills agent.

For each offence, Sim could be fined up to S$25,000 or imprisoned for not more than 12 months, or both.

Yesterday, Sim appeared in court to hear the charges against him. He requested for an adjournment of four weeks. Court proceedings will resume on 17 November.

To contact the journalist, you may send your message to editor@propertyguru.com.sg

will be charged in Court under the Estate Agents Act (EAA) 2010 for the following 8 charges:
(a) 4 charges for holding himself out as a salesperson without first being a registered salesperson of a licensed estate agent, under Section 29(1)(a) of the EAA 2010; and
(b) 4 charges for holding himself out as a salesperson of a licensed estate agent without first getting an authorisation by written agreement from the licensed estate agent, under Section 41(2) of the EAA 2010.
2. The punishment for each offence under Section 29(1)(a) and Section 41(2) of the EAA 2010 is a fine not exceeding $25,000/- or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or both.

 

Unlicensed estate agent jailed and fined $32,000 | Singapore Property Market Highlights

A MAN declared that he had no prior convictions when he applied to the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) to be a licensed property agent in 2010.
But checks by the CEA showed that Tan Cher Peng, 45, had been convicted and sentenced in 1995 and 2000 for criminal breach of trust and cheating.
The police were also looking for him regarding a forgery case in 2004.
Further checks on Feb 8 last year revealed that Tan had placed advertisements offering estate agency services on online portal PropertyGuru under the guise of a registered salesman. He had placed the ads a day earlier.
Investigations by the CEA also showed that between Jan 20 and Feb 8 last year, he had acted as a salesman in renting out a property in Club Street.
Yesterday, Tan, who faced five charges, was sentenced to one month in jail and fined $32,000.
He is the first person to be charged and sentenced for breaking CEA rules. As of Jan 1 last year, anyone performing estate-agency work has to be registered with the council and must obtain a written agreement from an estate agency.
In a mitigation plea, lawyer S.S. Dhillon said Tan had no intention to cheat, and despite running afoul of the law, there had been no complaints of him behaving unscrupulously with clients and no financial loss to any party.
He added that Tan had advertised on the portal because he was unaware that he needed to be a registered salesman, and it was an honest mistake.
Mr Dhillon also said his client had cooperated fully with the authorities during investigations, and his plea of guilt was indicative of his remorse.
However, the prosecution noted it was difficult to enforce CEA rules or catch offenders. Urging the court to impose a heavier sentence, it said there was a need for a deterrent sentence aimed at potential offenders.
The prosecution also stressed that Tan had a string of prior convictions that were similarly related to dishonesty.
In the 2004 case, he forged the signature of a business associate on a credit application form in order to buy wines. He incurred a bill of almost $5,000.
Tan was jailed another four months for this charge of forgery.
The sentences are to run concurrently.
A CEA spokesman said there are two more cases involving unregistered salesmen pending in the courts.
In one of them, Raymond Sim Soon Leong, 30, is facing eight charges. He had allegedly listed two HDB flats for rent in an online portal, and claimed to have represented clients in making offers, negotiating property transactions and conducting flat viewings.
Several more such alleged offenders will be prosecuted in the coming months, said the CEA.
For many Singaporeans, their home is the largest single investment they will ever make; If there are problems with the transaction or with the property, they may suffer losses and other consequences,’ the spokesman said, adding that registration with the CEA was introduced to ensure that salesmen fulfil criteria such as possessing the necessary knowledge and adhering to ethical practices.
Consumers are advised not to respond to real estate agency fliers or advertisements that do not provide sales staff details or registration numbers.
The public register of agents at www.cea.gov.sg enables consumers to search for the particulars of sales agents using their names, registration numbers or mobile phone numbers.

fionalow@sph.com.sg
Source: The Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd.

Watchdog getting tough on errant estate agents

Watchdog getting tough on errant estate agents

CEA plans firmer disciplinary action, better client outreach

The Straits Times - September 13, 2011
By: Cheryl Ong
| More
Watchdog getting tough on errant estate agents
THE Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) plans to beef up investigations into errant agents and reach out to consumers, as it moves into its second year of operation.
The regulatory body for property agents and companies held a media event yesterday, where it summed up its first year in operation and highlighted its plans for the next year.
Executive director Chionh Chye Khye said the CEA's initial light-touch policy will give way to more investigations, and agents found guilty of breaking the rules will be prosecuted.
'Going forward, we will be taking firmer disciplinary action against errant estate agents and sales staff through our disciplinary committees. Penalties would include warnings, fines, revocation or suspension. Court prosecution may also be undertaken for serious cases,' he said.
People buying or selling property will also receive more information on the role of agents and consumers' responsibilities with a new consumer guide that the CEA will launch later this year.
There will also be regular newsletters uploaded on the CEA website, as well as mobile-phone applications to educate the public on the new regulations.
On Oct18, an inaugural seminar will be held for estate agencies to 'learn and network', said Mr Chionh.
The council was set up to raise the standards and professionalism of property agents in an industry that went largely unregulated for decades, and to help consumers seek redress from errant agents.
It has registered more than 33,000 property agents and licensed 1,535 agencies, and has made their registration information available on an online database for the public to access.
In June, the first person was charged in court for working as an unregistered property agent.
About 100 so-called letters of advice, which do not show up on the public register, have been sent out to agents whose clients lodged complaints of poor service against them.
Last month, the CEA put in place rules aimed at stopping misleading advertising claims, in an effort to put an end to exaggerated claims in fliers that property agents frequently distribute.
House-hunter Vijay Tatineni, 31, said the guide books will be helpful for consumers like him who are in the market but are wary of property agents.
'It's good that we have some information about the regulations to protect us,' said the IT consultant, who has been looking for a home for two weeks.

New unit to sniff out bad estate agents

New unit to sniff out bad estate agents

Watchdog's inspection and compliance section to ensure property firms follow rules

The Straits Times - October 19, 2011
By: Daryl Chin
| More
New unit to sniff out bad estate agents
THE Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) has formed a new section to sniff out wrongdoers and enforce compliance with its rules.
It will also release more practice guidelines and prosecute errant property agents as part of its efforts to toughen up the regulatory regime introduced last year.
Executive director Chionh Chye Khye revealed the plans for the year ahead at the inaugural seminar for key executive officers, which was held yesterday at the HDB Hub in Toa Payoh.
The CEA, which started work in October last year, is part of the Government's bid to raise the professionalism of the real-estate industry through regulation and disciplinary powers.
The new inspection and compliance section will carry out checks to ensure firms adhere to the CEA's rules on advertisements, handling complaints and the maintenance of proper records, for example.
A guide called the Professional Service Manual is also in the works. This will lay down guidelines for the work that estate agents do.
So far, the CEA has already issued three sets of guidelines dealing with agreement forms as well as advertising.
'Although the CEA has formulated the Code of Ethics in its regulations, there is a need to further define clearly what is a professional and ethical practice,' Mr Chionh said.
By the end of last month, the CEA had received a total of 1,239 complaints and issued 130 warning letters.
It has taken one person to court for acting as a property agent without being registered, and plans to prosecute several more in the coming months for breaching the Estate Agents Act.
Speaking at yesterday's event, Minister of State for National Development Lee Yi Shyan revealed a nationwide survey to gauge the public perception of estate agents. It will involve more than 4,000 respondents and be conducted by the year end.
'These findings will form a baseline and guide the CEA in industry development and consumer education,' said Mr Lee, who is also Minister of State for Trade and Industry.
He also emphasised the importance of professionalising the sizeable real-estate industry, as its effects are far reaching.
Last year alone, commissions earned from property transactions amounted to more than $1.25 billion.
There are currently about 33,000 property agents registered with some 1,500 firms here.
'Many Singaporeans turn to real-estate agents for professional help when buying and selling their properties,' said Mr Lee. 'However, prior to the formation of the CEA, agents and salespersons operated in an unregulated environment. Incidents of malpractices have marred consumers' experiences.'
Comparing it to other sectors, he said the real-estate industry could take a leaf out of the book of the medical profession, which has strong ethical and professional standards, as well as the banking sector, which is customer-centric and has robust consumer feedback systems.
Mr David Huan, key executive officer of Rainbow Cottage, which employs 60 agents, said he has waited more than 15 years for the industry to be regulated. He added that overall, he thinks the CEA is moving in the right direction.
'There is some unhappiness on the ground because some firms believe the CEA protects consumers' interests more, but we were assured that it will remain objective. At the end of the day, I believe the council exists for the good of the overall market,' he said.
He added that consumer education also plays a vital role, as he believes some complaints are made maliciously and without grounds.
'Buyers and sellers must remember that there is no fixed price tag in real estate, everything is negotiable. They need to understand that one cannot always get the best price, and should not complain needlessly if the property is in line with market value.'
To give a helping hand to smaller agencies, the CEA has met the Infocomm Development Authority, as well as industry associations such as the Institute of Estate Agents, to discuss infocomm solutions at affordable costs.
As talks are in the preliminary stages, there are no further details now

http://www.stproperty.sg/articles-property/singapore-property-news/new-unit-to-sniff-out-bad-estate-agents/a/28353
Adnic 


to bcc:

Dear Fellow Agents,
Please kindly beware of this agent:
Lyn
Please kindy be care as I was almost undercutted by this agent in a commerical warehouse deal.
Excercise more care and save the agent no to take note lest your deal is being CUTTED!

Many thanks
Adnic

Residential Dept