Is your buyer's agent qualified and licensed?
The challenges of finding a property in WA's highly competitive market have seen more people look to using a buyer's agent and the growing demand for this service has led to a rise in poorly trained and unlicensed operators, often based interstate and overseas, who promote themselves as buyer's agents in WA.
Last month, Real Estate Buyers Agent Association of Australia (REBAA) launched a campaign to warn consumers about the risks of working with underqualified buyer's agents. REBAA President Melinda Jennison said: 'many new buyer's agents enter the industry with only a superficial understanding of its complexities, putting themselves and the clients they are representing at risk of making uneducated and costly decisions.'
REIWA supports these concerns. We are also concerned about the risk to buyers of working with unlicensed buyer's agents and have raised this issue with Consumer Protection.
I have previously written in this column about the importance of using a WA buyer's agent if you are buying in WA. Aside from their knowledge of the local market and local legislation, when you engage a WA buyer's agent, you also have the advantage of dealing with someone who is licensed under the Real Estate and Business Agents Act 1978. This gives you peace of mind, as well as protections under WA consumer law.
Buyer's agents provide a valuable service. They act solely for the buyer, working to find the right property at the right price, saving time and reducing stress. To reduce risk when engaging a buyer's agent there are some important things to consider:
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
13 hours ago
- ABC News
Mildura real estate agency avoids fine after rental advertised without fixed price
A Mildura real estate company accused by Victoria's consumer protection watchdog of rental bidding has escaped without a conviction or hefty fine. On Tuesday, the real estate agency pleaded guilty in the Mildura Magistrates' Court to advertising a property for rent without a fixed price. Consumer Affairs Victoria fined PRD Mildura $11,855, but the company chose to contest it in court and the fine was dropped. The maximum penalty for a corporation in Victoria is $61,053. The Victorian government brought the law into effect in 2021 to stop real estate agents from creating a bidding war between prospective tenants amid the state's housing crisis. The court heard PRD Nationwide Mildura director and company secretary, Simone Fleshig, had organised for a Red Cliffs property to be listed online through a third-party tenancy management software tool. But a tenancy plan with the tenant renting the property meant the lease would begin at the initial price of $550 before being increased to $580 after the tenancy began. The court heard the software listed no fixed price for the rental listing and instead prompted the prospective tenant to contact the agency. The court heard it also listed the increased price in the body. Consumer Affairs Victoria investigated the listing. The court heard Ms Fleshig became aware on a Friday afternoon when someone contacted her about renting the property and told her about the "price on application" listing. The court was told Ms Fleshig apologised to the potential renter and sent her the correct listing price of $550. PRD Mildura's lawyer Tyler Wolff told the court there were two boxes to tick while uploading a rental listing, and the price on application function overrode Ms Fleshig's selection. "It's a huge fine," Magistrate Patrick Southey said of the fine imposed by Consumer Affairs Victoria. "It is," Mr Wolff replied. Mr Wolff told the court Ms Fleshig corrected the mistake two days later when she returned to the office, had lodged a support ticket with the software tool's developer, and implemented a two-step procedure at PRD Mildura to prevent it from happening again. Since Victoria's rental taskforce began investigating rental bidding in 2021, its officers have fined more than 40 agencies for not using fixed prices in their listings. Information from Consumer Affairs Victoria showed PRD Mildura was one of five real estate agencies to be taken to court this month by the state watchdog over contravening rental bidding laws. It said the agencies were issued with infringements but chose not to pay their fines and instead have their matters heard at court. Consumer Affairs Victoria lawyer Temple Saville told the court it wanted the court to hand down a fine to the real estate company for the breach. The court was told the fine was issued by Consumer Affairs Victoria two days after Ms Fleshig corrected the listing. The court heard Ms Fleshig chose to contest the fine in court after seeking a review of the investigation and fine by Consumer Affairs Victoria, but the state watchdog chose to bring the matter to court. Magistrate Southey said PRD Mildura's offending was the result of an "honest" mistake that was fixed quickly. "The behaviour the government is trying to fix is not evident here," he Southey said. PRD Mildura received a 12-month good behaviour bond without conviction.
West Australian
11-08-2025
- West Australian
Local government minister watching ToPH ‘closely' as council looks to pass budget before August deadline
Local Government Minister Hannah Beazley says she will be watching the Town of Port Hedland council closely as it looks to squeeze in budget discussions just four days before the State-mandated deadline for the vital financial document. The local authority's August 27 ordinary council meeting could be a make-or-break affair because if councillors can't reach a consensus, they risk not making the August 31 deadline. 'As the minister for local government, I continue to monitor the issues at the Town of Port Hedland very closely,' Ms Beazley told the Telegraph this week. It strongly echos comments she made earlier this year when the controversial council was reduced to just five elected members after a string of resignations, when she said she had prepared the 'groundwork' to put the council into administration. After the resignation of Ambika Rebello in May, mayor Peter Carter had warned that the next meeting in June would be the 'turning point'. 'If the budget doesn't get passed — that's the trigger. That's when it'll be over,' he said then. 'It'll end up like it did in 2019, when I resigned as a councillor and one more pulled the pin and the whole lot was dissolved.' However, the budget item has since been pushed to later and later dates. A special meeting planned for this week was the latest in abandoned attempts to get the budget passed. While the council could apply to the minister for a deadline extension according to the Department of Local Government, Industry Regulation and Safety, the Town of Port Hedland was yet to make an application as of August 7. 'Local governments which fail to apply for an extension prior to the deadline are non-compliant but not in breach of the Local Government Act 1995,' a DLGIRS spokesperson said. 'However, any delays may impact on requirements to submit financial management statements to the Auditor General by 30 September 2025.' Mr Carter this week said he hoped councillors could still come together to pass the budget. 'We are all passionate about getting great outcomes for Hedland,' he said. 'Passing the budget will allow us to continue to build on our goals of increasing livability in Hedland and supporting our community to thrive.' It comes after continual controversy at the troubled council, with two councillors in the past two months having to apologise for breaching the Local Government Act, the council being appointed a commissioner in 2019, a defamation suit between Cr Camilo Blanco and Mr Carter ongoing, members passing controversial vaccine motions and Cr Adrian McRae praising Vladimir Putin on Russian TV.
The Advertiser
08-08-2025
- The Advertiser
Government-funded fuel economy and EV range tests cause confusion, says automaker body
The peak body for car brands in Australia has criticised a government-funded program that tests the fuel economy, emissions and range claims of automakers, arguing it causes "unnecessary confusion". The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) recently expanded its Commonwealth-funded Real-World Testing Program, which commenced in 2023, to include testing of the range and efficiency of electric vehicles (EVs). However, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) has questioned the merit of the AAA's testing. CarExpert can save you thousands on a new car. Click here to get a great deal. "All vehicles, including EVs, sold in Australia are tested under strict laboratory conditions set out in Australian Design Rule 81/02," said FCAI chief executive Tony Weber in a statement. "This consistent methodology ensures vehicles can be reliably compared, regardless of brand or model. "Tests conducted outside the ADR process are influenced by many variables, including traffic, terrain, weather and driving style. No two drivers or journeys are the same. "We support transparent, evidence-based information for consumers, but it must be consistent. When conflicting figures are published, it undermines confidence and causes unnecessary confusion." The FCAI argues ADR 81/02 laboratory testing is already mandated by the federal government, so the funding of a real-world test program results in inconsistencies. The peak auto industry body and the Electric Vehicle Council (EVC) appear to have found some common ground. "All cars, including petrol and diesel cars, often present different results in the lab compared to real-world conditions. Laboratory testing occurs in controlled conditions while real-world driving throws in all sorts of variables such as traffic flows, hills, rough roads, weather, extra passenger or luggage weight, and the unique driving styles of motorists," said the EVC's head of legal, policy and advocacy, Aman Gaur, in a statement. "Given the unpredictable nature of driving needs, it's inherently challenging for manufacturers to provide real-world estimates. That's why electric vehicle manufacturers are following the rules and advertising the test results that are required by law." The EVC also noted hat most EV manufacturers use more realistic WLTP electric range figures, instead of the NEDC standard that was phased out in Europe several years ago but still underpins the local ADR 81/02 figures. In AAA testing, various models were found to return results well adrift of their lab-tested claims. In its inaugural testing of EVs, the results of which were released this week, the BYD Atto 3 electric SUV was found to have 23 per cent less range than claimed and 21 per cent higher energy consumption. In previous testing, a raft of petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles were also found to exceed their advertised fuel economy and CO2 emissions claims. The previous-generation BMW X3, for example, was found to use 20 per cent more fuel and produce 23 per cent more CO2 than claimed, while the Chery Omoda 5 used 32 per cent more fuel and produced 26.8 per cent more CO2. Other disappointing results included previous generations of the MG 3 (+19 and +13 per cent, respectively) and Suzuki Swift (+31 and +31). The latter was also found to produce more than double the mandated lab limit for carbon monoxide. Some hybrids have also fallen short in the AAA testing program, with the GWM Haval Jolion Hybrid found to use 32 per cent more fuel and produce 31.5 per cent more CO2 than its claims. The AAA has said the need for real-world testing was first demonstrated by the Volkswagen emissions scandal (commonly referred to as Dieselgate), in which Volkswagen vehicles were found to use software to trick lab tests, and it claims real-world data is important during the cost-of-living crisis for households and fleets alike. It subsequently received $14 million in government funding for the Real-World Testing Program, which is conducted from a facility in Geelong and on public roads in and around the city. The aim remains to examine up to 200 cars, utes and vans over a four-year period. "Australian car buyers have for too long been misled regarding their vehicle's fuel consumption and environmental performance," said AAA managing director Michael Bradley in 2023. "This Program will deliver Australians truth-in-advertising and drive down demand for cars that over-promise and under-deliver. Better information will enable families and fleet buyers to buy vehicles that will meet their budget and environmental requirements. While the FCAI represents most auto brands (notable exceptions include EVC members Tesla and Polestar), the AAA is the peak organisation for Australia's motoring clubs and their 9.5 million members, representing the likes of the NRMA, RACV, RACQ and others. MORE: EV range claims from BYD, Tesla, others scrutinised in new real-world testing MORE: Real-world testing shows Ford Ranger among emissions-breaching models MORE: Real-world testing shows not all hybrids are created equal at saving fuel MORE: Popular Australian models found to use up to 35 per cent more fuel than claimed MORE: New data shows even more new cars are thirstier and dirtier than claimed MORE: Real-world tests reveal the cars that are thirstier than they claim MORE: The popular cars, SUVs and utes that can't match their fuel economy claims MORE: Real-world fuel use shows popular Australian new cars drastically exceed claims MORE: Which SUVs don't match their fuel economy stickers in the real world? Content originally sourced from: The peak body for car brands in Australia has criticised a government-funded program that tests the fuel economy, emissions and range claims of automakers, arguing it causes "unnecessary confusion". The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) recently expanded its Commonwealth-funded Real-World Testing Program, which commenced in 2023, to include testing of the range and efficiency of electric vehicles (EVs). However, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) has questioned the merit of the AAA's testing. CarExpert can save you thousands on a new car. Click here to get a great deal. "All vehicles, including EVs, sold in Australia are tested under strict laboratory conditions set out in Australian Design Rule 81/02," said FCAI chief executive Tony Weber in a statement. "This consistent methodology ensures vehicles can be reliably compared, regardless of brand or model. "Tests conducted outside the ADR process are influenced by many variables, including traffic, terrain, weather and driving style. No two drivers or journeys are the same. "We support transparent, evidence-based information for consumers, but it must be consistent. When conflicting figures are published, it undermines confidence and causes unnecessary confusion." The FCAI argues ADR 81/02 laboratory testing is already mandated by the federal government, so the funding of a real-world test program results in inconsistencies. The peak auto industry body and the Electric Vehicle Council (EVC) appear to have found some common ground. "All cars, including petrol and diesel cars, often present different results in the lab compared to real-world conditions. Laboratory testing occurs in controlled conditions while real-world driving throws in all sorts of variables such as traffic flows, hills, rough roads, weather, extra passenger or luggage weight, and the unique driving styles of motorists," said the EVC's head of legal, policy and advocacy, Aman Gaur, in a statement. "Given the unpredictable nature of driving needs, it's inherently challenging for manufacturers to provide real-world estimates. That's why electric vehicle manufacturers are following the rules and advertising the test results that are required by law." The EVC also noted hat most EV manufacturers use more realistic WLTP electric range figures, instead of the NEDC standard that was phased out in Europe several years ago but still underpins the local ADR 81/02 figures. In AAA testing, various models were found to return results well adrift of their lab-tested claims. In its inaugural testing of EVs, the results of which were released this week, the BYD Atto 3 electric SUV was found to have 23 per cent less range than claimed and 21 per cent higher energy consumption. In previous testing, a raft of petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles were also found to exceed their advertised fuel economy and CO2 emissions claims. The previous-generation BMW X3, for example, was found to use 20 per cent more fuel and produce 23 per cent more CO2 than claimed, while the Chery Omoda 5 used 32 per cent more fuel and produced 26.8 per cent more CO2. Other disappointing results included previous generations of the MG 3 (+19 and +13 per cent, respectively) and Suzuki Swift (+31 and +31). The latter was also found to produce more than double the mandated lab limit for carbon monoxide. Some hybrids have also fallen short in the AAA testing program, with the GWM Haval Jolion Hybrid found to use 32 per cent more fuel and produce 31.5 per cent more CO2 than its claims. The AAA has said the need for real-world testing was first demonstrated by the Volkswagen emissions scandal (commonly referred to as Dieselgate), in which Volkswagen vehicles were found to use software to trick lab tests, and it claims real-world data is important during the cost-of-living crisis for households and fleets alike. It subsequently received $14 million in government funding for the Real-World Testing Program, which is conducted from a facility in Geelong and on public roads in and around the city. The aim remains to examine up to 200 cars, utes and vans over a four-year period. "Australian car buyers have for too long been misled regarding their vehicle's fuel consumption and environmental performance," said AAA managing director Michael Bradley in 2023. "This Program will deliver Australians truth-in-advertising and drive down demand for cars that over-promise and under-deliver. Better information will enable families and fleet buyers to buy vehicles that will meet their budget and environmental requirements. While the FCAI represents most auto brands (notable exceptions include EVC members Tesla and Polestar), the AAA is the peak organisation for Australia's motoring clubs and their 9.5 million members, representing the likes of the NRMA, RACV, RACQ and others. MORE: EV range claims from BYD, Tesla, others scrutinised in new real-world testing MORE: Real-world testing shows Ford Ranger among emissions-breaching models MORE: Real-world testing shows not all hybrids are created equal at saving fuel MORE: Popular Australian models found to use up to 35 per cent more fuel than claimed MORE: New data shows even more new cars are thirstier and dirtier than claimed MORE: Real-world tests reveal the cars that are thirstier than they claim MORE: The popular cars, SUVs and utes that can't match their fuel economy claims MORE: Real-world fuel use shows popular Australian new cars drastically exceed claims MORE: Which SUVs don't match their fuel economy stickers in the real world? Content originally sourced from: The peak body for car brands in Australia has criticised a government-funded program that tests the fuel economy, emissions and range claims of automakers, arguing it causes "unnecessary confusion". The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) recently expanded its Commonwealth-funded Real-World Testing Program, which commenced in 2023, to include testing of the range and efficiency of electric vehicles (EVs). However, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) has questioned the merit of the AAA's testing. CarExpert can save you thousands on a new car. Click here to get a great deal. "All vehicles, including EVs, sold in Australia are tested under strict laboratory conditions set out in Australian Design Rule 81/02," said FCAI chief executive Tony Weber in a statement. "This consistent methodology ensures vehicles can be reliably compared, regardless of brand or model. "Tests conducted outside the ADR process are influenced by many variables, including traffic, terrain, weather and driving style. No two drivers or journeys are the same. "We support transparent, evidence-based information for consumers, but it must be consistent. When conflicting figures are published, it undermines confidence and causes unnecessary confusion." The FCAI argues ADR 81/02 laboratory testing is already mandated by the federal government, so the funding of a real-world test program results in inconsistencies. The peak auto industry body and the Electric Vehicle Council (EVC) appear to have found some common ground. "All cars, including petrol and diesel cars, often present different results in the lab compared to real-world conditions. Laboratory testing occurs in controlled conditions while real-world driving throws in all sorts of variables such as traffic flows, hills, rough roads, weather, extra passenger or luggage weight, and the unique driving styles of motorists," said the EVC's head of legal, policy and advocacy, Aman Gaur, in a statement. "Given the unpredictable nature of driving needs, it's inherently challenging for manufacturers to provide real-world estimates. That's why electric vehicle manufacturers are following the rules and advertising the test results that are required by law." The EVC also noted hat most EV manufacturers use more realistic WLTP electric range figures, instead of the NEDC standard that was phased out in Europe several years ago but still underpins the local ADR 81/02 figures. In AAA testing, various models were found to return results well adrift of their lab-tested claims. In its inaugural testing of EVs, the results of which were released this week, the BYD Atto 3 electric SUV was found to have 23 per cent less range than claimed and 21 per cent higher energy consumption. In previous testing, a raft of petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles were also found to exceed their advertised fuel economy and CO2 emissions claims. The previous-generation BMW X3, for example, was found to use 20 per cent more fuel and produce 23 per cent more CO2 than claimed, while the Chery Omoda 5 used 32 per cent more fuel and produced 26.8 per cent more CO2. Other disappointing results included previous generations of the MG 3 (+19 and +13 per cent, respectively) and Suzuki Swift (+31 and +31). The latter was also found to produce more than double the mandated lab limit for carbon monoxide. Some hybrids have also fallen short in the AAA testing program, with the GWM Haval Jolion Hybrid found to use 32 per cent more fuel and produce 31.5 per cent more CO2 than its claims. The AAA has said the need for real-world testing was first demonstrated by the Volkswagen emissions scandal (commonly referred to as Dieselgate), in which Volkswagen vehicles were found to use software to trick lab tests, and it claims real-world data is important during the cost-of-living crisis for households and fleets alike. It subsequently received $14 million in government funding for the Real-World Testing Program, which is conducted from a facility in Geelong and on public roads in and around the city. The aim remains to examine up to 200 cars, utes and vans over a four-year period. "Australian car buyers have for too long been misled regarding their vehicle's fuel consumption and environmental performance," said AAA managing director Michael Bradley in 2023. "This Program will deliver Australians truth-in-advertising and drive down demand for cars that over-promise and under-deliver. Better information will enable families and fleet buyers to buy vehicles that will meet their budget and environmental requirements. While the FCAI represents most auto brands (notable exceptions include EVC members Tesla and Polestar), the AAA is the peak organisation for Australia's motoring clubs and their 9.5 million members, representing the likes of the NRMA, RACV, RACQ and others. MORE: EV range claims from BYD, Tesla, others scrutinised in new real-world testing MORE: Real-world testing shows Ford Ranger among emissions-breaching models MORE: Real-world testing shows not all hybrids are created equal at saving fuel MORE: Popular Australian models found to use up to 35 per cent more fuel than claimed MORE: New data shows even more new cars are thirstier and dirtier than claimed MORE: Real-world tests reveal the cars that are thirstier than they claim MORE: The popular cars, SUVs and utes that can't match their fuel economy claims MORE: Real-world fuel use shows popular Australian new cars drastically exceed claims MORE: Which SUVs don't match their fuel economy stickers in the real world? Content originally sourced from: The peak body for car brands in Australia has criticised a government-funded program that tests the fuel economy, emissions and range claims of automakers, arguing it causes "unnecessary confusion". The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) recently expanded its Commonwealth-funded Real-World Testing Program, which commenced in 2023, to include testing of the range and efficiency of electric vehicles (EVs). However, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) has questioned the merit of the AAA's testing. CarExpert can save you thousands on a new car. Click here to get a great deal. "All vehicles, including EVs, sold in Australia are tested under strict laboratory conditions set out in Australian Design Rule 81/02," said FCAI chief executive Tony Weber in a statement. "This consistent methodology ensures vehicles can be reliably compared, regardless of brand or model. "Tests conducted outside the ADR process are influenced by many variables, including traffic, terrain, weather and driving style. No two drivers or journeys are the same. "We support transparent, evidence-based information for consumers, but it must be consistent. When conflicting figures are published, it undermines confidence and causes unnecessary confusion." The FCAI argues ADR 81/02 laboratory testing is already mandated by the federal government, so the funding of a real-world test program results in inconsistencies. The peak auto industry body and the Electric Vehicle Council (EVC) appear to have found some common ground. "All cars, including petrol and diesel cars, often present different results in the lab compared to real-world conditions. Laboratory testing occurs in controlled conditions while real-world driving throws in all sorts of variables such as traffic flows, hills, rough roads, weather, extra passenger or luggage weight, and the unique driving styles of motorists," said the EVC's head of legal, policy and advocacy, Aman Gaur, in a statement. "Given the unpredictable nature of driving needs, it's inherently challenging for manufacturers to provide real-world estimates. That's why electric vehicle manufacturers are following the rules and advertising the test results that are required by law." The EVC also noted hat most EV manufacturers use more realistic WLTP electric range figures, instead of the NEDC standard that was phased out in Europe several years ago but still underpins the local ADR 81/02 figures. In AAA testing, various models were found to return results well adrift of their lab-tested claims. In its inaugural testing of EVs, the results of which were released this week, the BYD Atto 3 electric SUV was found to have 23 per cent less range than claimed and 21 per cent higher energy consumption. In previous testing, a raft of petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles were also found to exceed their advertised fuel economy and CO2 emissions claims. The previous-generation BMW X3, for example, was found to use 20 per cent more fuel and produce 23 per cent more CO2 than claimed, while the Chery Omoda 5 used 32 per cent more fuel and produced 26.8 per cent more CO2. Other disappointing results included previous generations of the MG 3 (+19 and +13 per cent, respectively) and Suzuki Swift (+31 and +31). The latter was also found to produce more than double the mandated lab limit for carbon monoxide. Some hybrids have also fallen short in the AAA testing program, with the GWM Haval Jolion Hybrid found to use 32 per cent more fuel and produce 31.5 per cent more CO2 than its claims. The AAA has said the need for real-world testing was first demonstrated by the Volkswagen emissions scandal (commonly referred to as Dieselgate), in which Volkswagen vehicles were found to use software to trick lab tests, and it claims real-world data is important during the cost-of-living crisis for households and fleets alike. It subsequently received $14 million in government funding for the Real-World Testing Program, which is conducted from a facility in Geelong and on public roads in and around the city. The aim remains to examine up to 200 cars, utes and vans over a four-year period. "Australian car buyers have for too long been misled regarding their vehicle's fuel consumption and environmental performance," said AAA managing director Michael Bradley in 2023. "This Program will deliver Australians truth-in-advertising and drive down demand for cars that over-promise and under-deliver. Better information will enable families and fleet buyers to buy vehicles that will meet their budget and environmental requirements. While the FCAI represents most auto brands (notable exceptions include EVC members Tesla and Polestar), the AAA is the peak organisation for Australia's motoring clubs and their 9.5 million members, representing the likes of the NRMA, RACV, RACQ and others. MORE: EV range claims from BYD, Tesla, others scrutinised in new real-world testing MORE: Real-world testing shows Ford Ranger among emissions-breaching models MORE: Real-world testing shows not all hybrids are created equal at saving fuel MORE: Popular Australian models found to use up to 35 per cent more fuel than claimed MORE: New data shows even more new cars are thirstier and dirtier than claimed MORE: Real-world tests reveal the cars that are thirstier than they claim MORE: The popular cars, SUVs and utes that can't match their fuel economy claims MORE: Real-world fuel use shows popular Australian new cars drastically exceed claims MORE: Which SUVs don't match their fuel economy stickers in the real world? Content originally sourced from:
