[[email protected]Participant@boba-shtunnel.com.auJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 2]

May 31, 2004 - 1:31 am

Thank you for the comments.

Both real estate agents are at fault as is the conveyancer, there appears to be a habit of rubber stamping without providing necessary advice to the vendor or purchaser.

My defence does not rest purely on ‘effective cause of sale’, there is a bigger issue involved with this and I will bring this to the fore during my defence of the claim. If successful there will probably some reprocussions as this will affect all agreements.
This Thursday is the first round, and I’m sure the next two will be interesting.

As said earlier I will keep you informed.

Cheers
Bob

R I Allen

[[email protected]Participant@boba-shtunnel.com.auJoin Date: 2004Post Count: 2]

May 28, 2004 - 4:30 am

I may be able to give an answer to this problem.
I am being sued by a real estate agent for commission. He was the first agent, he found a buyer, the buyer backed out after one day. At the end of the contract I notified the agent his services were no longer required. Weeks later the ‘buyer’ contact the first agent to advise she could now buy, however the agent did not respond.
Buyer then saw house for sale through another agent and subsequently bought it.

In my opinion the effective cause of sale was the second advert and agent.

I am contesting the first agents claim in the courts, June 4 first hearing.

I am not a lawyer, anyone with a precedence who could give some information?

I will keep you oinformed of the result.

Cheers
Bob

R I Allen