Ex-real estate agent Nick Hoogwerf who forged valuation is barred from sector, fined $14,000

Nick Hoogwerf was found guilty of disgraceful conduct at a hearing of the Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal. Photo / LinkedIn

No real estate agency can employ a man who once worked for Ray White and was convicted of providing a false property valuation, according to a ruling just out in the case.

The Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal this month issued its decision in the matter, in which it said he cannot be employed in the sector again, and also fined the agent $14,400, for what happened when he worked for City Realty, trading as Ray White Parnell.

In forging a valuation, Nick Hoogwerf — also known as Nicholas Pieter Miers-Hoogwerf — went as far as to use the letterhead of a real company to legitimise his purchase of a house at auction, the tribunal noted.

On September 25, it found he had forged the valuation report for a property he contracted to buy and was therefore guilty of misconduct (disgraceful conduct) under the law.

Last Thursday, the tribunal determined the penalty imposed on him: “Ordered to pay the sum of $14,496.44. The tribunal further orders that any current employment or engagement of Mr Hoogwerf by a licensee be terminated and that no agent employ or engage him in connection with real estate agency work.”

The tribunal found him guilty of the charges relating to a house in Mt Eden he wanted to buy in late 2021.

The Herald reported in September that he visited the property on October 24 after making an inquiry by text, the charging documents said.

Two days later the vendors signed a consent form allowing him as an agent related to their listing agent, either through work or personal circumstances, to “acquire an interest in the property”.

That meant he could bid on the property; however, for the consent form to be valid, Hoogwerf needed to supply the vendors with a registered valuation of the property.

That same day, he won the house at auction.

The next month he sent the vendors an email with the valuation report in it. But it contained multiple errors and the vendors sent it back to him.

In total, he sent four emails with incorrect information including photos that were not of the property, the wrong vendor and agency details, missing information in relation to the certificate of title, and an incorrect reference number.

He prepared the valuation document himself and used the letterhead of a legitimate property valuation company.

That company said Hoogwerf never contacted it for a valuation and it never provided one for the property in question.

The listing agent for the property raised the issue with his manager, but it was the valuation company that made a complaint to the Real Estate Authority.

When contacted by NZME for comment in September, Hoogwerf said: “I was young with not much experience at the time. I sincerely apologise for any harm that my actions have caused. I realise the gravity of my actions and I am committed to learning from my mistakes.”

This month’s tribunal’s penalty decision said the law aimed to promote and protect the interests of consumers on real estate transactions and to promote public confidence in the performance of real estate agency work.

Hoogwerf is not licensed at present, the complaints assessment committee noted.

“Had he been, the committee would have sought an order for cancellation. In the alternative, it seeks an order that no agent engage him, for a period of five years. It is warranted in light of the gravity of the offending and the risk he poses to the public and the integrity of the profession.

“It is submitted it would be appropriate for the tribunal to record that the term of five years is not an indication he would be a fit and proper person to be licensed at the expiry of that term,” the committee said.

An aggravating factor was his limited engagement with the Real Estate Authority and the tribunal. His communication with the tribunal was merely to seek an adjournment at the last minute. It was refused, the decision said.

In the end, the tribunal said no agency could employ him and it made no suppression orders, noting publication of its decision served “the interests of the public ... [and] transparency”.

Anne Gibson has been the Herald’s property editor for 23 years, has won many awards, written books and covered property extensively here and overseas.