Family who bought P-contaminated house sought $146,000 in compensation

The family who was sold a P-contaminated house without it being disclosed by Bayleys Pahiatua agent Andrew sought hundreds of thousands of dollars in compensation from him. Photo / Supplied

A family who was sold a contaminated P house after an agent failed to tell them it had tested positive for the drug sought $146,429 in compensation from the agent.

Bayleys agent Andrew Rankin sold the Brogden family the Pahiatua house in March 2015 without disclosing it had earlier tested positive for methamphetamine.

He was found guilty of misconduct, has lost his licence for three months and the family say they are now suing Rankin and his firm for damages.

In a penalty decision just published online, the Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal found Rankin's action of selling the property to a Glenn Brogden and his wife, whose daughter Zoe and her two young grandchildren lived there for months without advising them of the initial contamination report should be "regarded seriously".

"Once there is any report of contamination, prospective purchasers must have the opportunity to make their own assessment of any risk," the decision said.

"The Brogdens did not have that opportunity. Zoe and her two young children lived in the property for several months before they learned of the methamphetamine contamination. The fact that Mr Rankin did not advise them of the initial report, and provide them with the opportunity to make their own assessment of the risk, must be regarded seriously."

The Herald can also reveal this is not the first time Rankin has been in trouble with the Real Estate Agents Authority (REAA).

In 2015, Rankin was working for Patrick & Scott, trading as Professionals Pahiatua, when he was fined $1000 and ordered to carry out training after engaging in unsatisfactory conduct.

REAA documents show he ignored sole agency agreements and on two occasions contacted the clients of those properties and submitted a buyer's offer when he had no right. The REAA's Complaints Assessment Committee viewed this as "unacceptable" behaviour.

In the latest case against Rankin, the Brogdens sought compensation totalling $146,429.01 to cover remediation costs, compensation for loss of income, compensation for loss of wages for remediation work, devaluation of the property because of stigma and legal costs, the penalty decision reveals.

However, the tribunal ruled it did not have sufficient information to award compensation. For instance, there was no explanation for the rental deprivation claim or evidence to support how it had devalued the property.

"We have concluded that we do not have sufficient information on which we could with confidence make any order for Mr Rankin to pay compensation...

"We observe that the Tribunal's finding is not to be taken as in any way an indication as to what might be able to be claimed in civil proceedings."

Rankin was censured and had his licence suspended for three months for seriously incompetent or seriously negligent misconduct. He was also fined $3000.

The Brogdens' lawyer John Key told the Herald in December his clients would be taking legal action after lawyers acting for Rankin and his firm Coast to Coast Limited refused to make a payment requested by the family.

Bayleys previously told the Herald it accepted the tribunal's decision in regards to compensation.

Rankin was stood down from Bayleys last month. A Bayleys spokesman said in December the company was carefully reviewing the tribunal findings and background to the incident. A review into Rankin's position with the company will begin this week.

Rankin has not responded to requests for comment.

Real estate agent found guilty of misconduct after not disclosing house contaminated with P