Hi
I recently got caught up in a sticky situation in WA. I was looking to buy a house advertised on Australia’s big real estate websites. I contacted a local rental mgt person and asked them to assess the rent return and demand. They offered to inspect the property.
After the inspection the rental mgt person informed me that the house could NOT be rented out because the large raised deck running across the back of the house was too dangerous.
I asked, “WHAT back deck ?”, as I was sure there was no such deck in the photos advertised on the internet. The internet photo showed that the back of the house was at ground level with a pergola.
Photos were kindly sent to me to confirm we were talking about the same house.
Sure enough, these “more accruate” photos revealed the most sorry excuse for deck I have ever seen. Both the back door and loungeroom sliding door exited onto the deck.
I then checked with the local council and found out that, you guessed it, the deck was an unapproved structure.
Conclusion : the photo of the back of the house on the website was from a different but almost-identical-looking house.
What a series of coincidences !
JS
Are you saying you bought a property based SOLELY on photos on the Internet.
I hear they are selling London Bridge – are you interested?
Yack, I believe he was almost about to buy it from what he wrote
Byronent
Adelaide SAI know a that a piece of land was sold recently, and the photo they had of it was not the photo of the actual land, rather it was the land next door, which basically surrounded this piece of land and there was basically no access (though the next door piece of land, which was the one the photographed, showed a road running next to the property.
Also recently someone here mentioned that they had bought a property and around 6 months latter were checking out the selling RE agents and found their house in their window!
Rgds.
Lucifer_auHow do the the agents get away with this? surely there must be someting in place to prevent this type of thing happening…..isn’t there??
You would think so but at the end of the day buyer beware.
A quick look at local real estate liftouts will always show a listing with a beautiful beach photograph but then the price seems too low and you find that the property is in fact 500 metres from the beach.SMTM
I am sure the REIWA would be very interested to hear about that. http://www.reiwa.com.au.
(Of course, I am assuming the agent is a member, which would give the REIWA power to punish if they have done something wrong)
James
I have heard from a friend of mine who was a loans manager for a credit union that some less than reputable real estate agents use digital photo software to not only change the appeance of a property but also edit out nasty things like the towers used for high voltage cables and stuff like that
Philip10,
Photographic misrepresentation is a practice that has definitely occurred, however with both the ACCC & REIA involved to address this and other issues, any breach is now potentially subject to breaches under the Trade Practices Act
for misleading & deceptive conduct as well as code of conduct breaches under the state RE bodies.http://www.reia.com.au/documents/Guidelines_Photographic_representations.pdf
Yes, although you would have to have already suffered some loss in order to sue using those sections of the TPA. i.e. you bought, and then discovered the house was different in a way that made it of less value than you bought at, so you sue for the difference.
Such activity would also be a breach of misleading and deceptive prohibitions under the Fair Trading Act. Directors of Fair Trading in each State have the power to take action themselves, so if anyone does see these kinds of things happening it would be really helpful to everyone if they could make a written complaint to their Minister or Director for Fair Trading. Otherwise, the scoundrels get away with it.Cruiser
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
