Opposition Queries Value Of Estate Agents Bill

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30269, 23 October 1963, Page 14

Opposition Queries Value Of Estate Agents Bill

(from Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, October 22. The buying or selling of their home was possibly the biggest single transaction in the lives of average people and the money passed in such transactions must be protected in every possible way, said the Minister of Justice (Mr Hanan) in Parliament tonight. He was speaking on the Real Estate Agents’ Bill which provides disciplinary powers within the Real Estate Agents’ Institute and the setting up of a fidelity fund. Mr M. Moohan (Opp., Petone) claimed the bill did nothing to protect the public, made no provision that full disclosure be made of liabilities that might be incurred by persons buying sections, and set up what was, in effect, a “closed shop.”

Mr Moohan said applicants for licences would have tn pass an examination set by persons already in the institute. The bill certainly changed the title of land agents to “reel estate agents,” but it did nothing to protect the public.

He knew of people, young couples in particular, who were sold sections without being told by those to whom the Minister would give the powers of a “closed shop” of the liabilities that would attach to them—culverting, access, and so on. . The bill dad nothing to compel agents to make fullest disclosures to buyers In such circumstances. It also conferred on the institute and members of its disciplinary committee, immunity for statements and actions arising from the exercise of disciplinary powers. “They could say anything they like about a fellow agent and get away with it” It was his belief that no person or body, whether it be a public servant or the State Services Commission, or land agents, or lawyers, or anyone else, should be given im-

munity from responsibility tor slander or the like. What special qualifications had land agents for this power and authority? Mr W. A. Fox (Opp., Miramar) said it seemed as if there was a lot of concern for those who would lose little and gain much. The bill was one of 85 clauses, in six parts. Only two of the clauses attempted to define the duties of a real estate agent.

“I am definitely in favour of an institute controlling real estate agents,” Mr Fox said. "I do believe that these duties should be incorporated in the bill. If there is a clear definition of land agents’ duties, you can say I shall support it” Mr S. A. Whitehead (Opp.. Nelson) asked why the bill provided for a form of compulsory unionism, and why an agent who opted out of membership of the Real Estate Agents' Insttiute should still pay fees, while other persons opting out of unions paid their subscriptions into the Social Security Fund. Mr Hanan replied that the bill did not set out to put into statute form the rules of agency. These were in

common law and it would be very difficult tor a lawyer or any layman to define their duties in a statute. Fraud and misrepresentation had a meaning in law. said Mr Hanan. But the question of whether an agenit was withholding or was unaware of a certain piece of information was a very difficult field. This was the question of sharp practice where certain practices fell short of legal responsibility. “But a competent land agent would know the right practice, the codes and traditions. So if we give to the land agents themselves the power to control their own members we take a long step in the direction the honourable member wants us to go.”

Mr Hanan said the basic reason for compulsory membership of the institute was that this legislation was for the protection of the public. For the protection of the public the fees should be paid anyway. Mr Hanan said Mr Moohan had made a most determined attack on all land agents. “I think I can conscientiously say he was wrong in every respect”