Three real estate agents found to have breached their organisation's code of ethics or rules of practice have been fined after internal disciplinary procedures.
The Real Estate Institute said complaints were laid against the agents, whose activities were then investigated and were found to have broken the rules.
Regional district
sub-committees of the institute handled each of the cases but none of the three agents was named.
A Barfoot & Thompson agent from the Auckland region was fined $400 and costs of $450 for failing to get consent of the principal officer to be involved in the purchase of a property.
The matter related to rule 13.3 of the institute's code of ethics which states: "Members shall be fully conversant with the act, other legislation relating to real estate, and these rules, all of which must be adhered to at all times."
A Bay of Plenty agent working for First National Realty was fined $250 and costs of $2306.25 for failing to be fair to all parties in negotiations, and particularly failing to follow a buyer's instructions in the preparation and execution of all forms and agreements.
An Otago agent working for LJ Hooker was fined $750 plus costsof $2189.58 for failing to renderskilled and professional service by not adequately advising the vendor about GST on the sale of a property.
The matter related to rule 13.11 of the code of ethics.
In separate proceedings, the Real Estate Agents' Licensing Board rejected an application from Miles Fletcher Maitland, of Wellington, to become principal officer and sole director of Carpe Diem Realty, a member of Go Gecko Group.
He was found not to have had the requisite practical experience, although the board said he had a "long and distinguished career" in the industry.
The board also rejected anapplication from William Roderick Sinclair, of Waikato, to becomeprincipal officer and sole directorof Sonell Realty trading as Re/MAX Country in Cambridge.
He was already principal officer and sole director of Papatoetoe Real Estate and told the board he could have effective control of both offices, which were 136km apart, by evenly splitting his time each week between them.
But the board did not find this would fulfil his obligations and said it was not prepared to grant the application.
