REINZ is launching a new series of non-verifiable training courses throughout 2018, including auctioneer training with Mark Sumich, and a series with Graham Crews. Check out the list of upcoming opportunities here.
2018 Verifiable Education
Last chance to register for the Christchurch Verifiable Training Seminar scheduled for 7 - 8 March. Registrations close Monday, 26 February at 5:00pm, any late registrations will incur a fee of $50 + GST per person.
Due to high demand, an additional Auckland Verifiable Training Seminar has been scheduled for Auckland Central on 4 – 5 April at the REINZ Centre of Excellence.
Check out our Education page for all our nationwide sessions happening this year.
PLUS exciting new Non-Verifiable courses have been added for 2018, you can find them all here.
Please note: numbers are limited in some locations, so please make sure you secure your spot.
| Region | Dates | Location | |
|---|---|---|---|
| March | |||
| Christchurch | 7 - 8 | The Atrium | Book Now |
| Queenstown | 21 - 22 | Mercure Queenstown | Book Now |
| April | |||
| Auckland Central | 4 - 5 | REINZ Centre of Excellence - Grafton | Book Now |
| Dunedin | 11 - 12 | The Dunedin Centre | Book Now |
| Gisborne | 11 - 12 | Emerald Hotel | Book Now |
| May | |||
| Thames | 2 - 3 | War Memorial Civic Centre | Book Now |
| Whangarei | 9 - 10 | Toll Stadium | Book Now |
| New Plymouth | 16 - 17 | Novotel | Book Now |
| Hamilton | 23 - 24 | Hamilton Working Mans Club | Book Now |
| Invercargill | 23 - 24 | Ascot Park Hotel | Book Now |
Final chance to register for the 2018 REINZ 15th Annual Fishing Tournament scheduled for Friday 2 March.
We have over $1,000 of amazing prizes from TopCatch and $2,250 worth of cash prizes from PropertyPress.
Don’t miss out – Grab your tickets here!
Upcoming REINZ Regional Meetings
Registrations for the Ashuburton Regional Meeting and the Christchurch Regional Meeting are now open.
Join Bindi Norwell and Dame Rosanne as we bring you the 2018 regional update.
Plus come and say goodbye to Dame Rosanne who is stepping down at the end of 2018 from serving 8 years as the Chair of REINZ.
Morning tea will be supplied - registrations required for catering and CE purposes.
| March | |||
| REINZ Fishing Tournament | 2 March | 8am – 5pm | Auckland |
| RPM Sector Breakfast | 6 March | 7.30am – 10am | Wellington |
| Ashburton Regional Meeting | 23 March | 10am – 12pm | Hotel Asburton, Ashburton |
| Christchurch Regional Meeting | 23 March | 2pm – 4pm | The Tannery, Christchurch |
| April | |||
| Gisborne Regional Meeting | 6 April | 4pm – 6pm | Emerald Hotel, Gisborne |
| C&I Sector Breakfast | 10 April | 7.30am – 10am | Hotel Pullman, Auckland |
| May | |||
| Superstars Breakfast | 1 May | 7.30am– 10am | Grand Millennium, Auckland |
| June | |||
| NZ Auctioneering Championships Draw | 17 June | 5.30pm – 7.30pm | REINZ, Auckland |
| NZ Auctioneering Championships Heats | 18 June | 10am – 5pm | REINZ, Auckland |
| NZ Auctioneering Championships Finals | 19 June | 10am – 6pm | REINZ, Auckland |
| Manawatu & Wanganui Regional Meeting | 20 June | 4pm – 6pm | Manawatu Golf Club, Palmerston North |
Composite and Discrete Meth Testing at Premises
Facts: The Landlord was claiming cleaning costs for meth from the Tenant. Before the start of the tenancy, the Landlord commissioned a lab composite test for the presence of meth at the premises. The composite result was 0.28ug/100cm2, with a theoretical maximum value of 1.4. This reading was done directly after the premises had been cleaned for meth.
After the tenancy ended, another test was undertaken by the same company that carried out the testing before the tenancy started. The testing was a field composite that revealed a reading of 1.73ug/100cm2. The report gave a theoretical maximum level of 3.46.
The certificate of analysis noted:
“The results are reported as ug/sample and represent the average of all residues from the two samples making up the laboratory composite. Results cannot be directly compared with the NZS 8510 guidelines but can be used to screen for methamphetamine contamination as outlined in NZS 8510” (emphasis added by REINZ).
After receiving the results, the Landlord had the premises cleaned. After the cleaning, the Landlord had discrete sample testing carried out. The certificate stated that the results can be compared with the NZS 8510 guidelines.
A director of the testing company gave evidence at the hearing and said the only discrete testing analysis was from the testing after the premises were cleaned after the end of the tenancy. He confirmed different readings between testing could result from testing in different places, or inadequate cleaning.
The Tenant denied the allegations that he used meth at the premises.
Decision: The Tribunal reiterated that as the Landlord is the claimant, it has the responsibility to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the Tenant contaminated the premises with meth.
On the evidence, the Tribunal was not persuaded that the Landlord had proved its claim. The only test results produced before and during the tenancy were results from composite testing. It noted that both the NZS 8510 Standard and the certificate of analysis stated the composite results cannot be directly compared with the NZS 8510 Standard.
The Tribunal considered the theoretical maximum value stated in the reports was not an actual test reading and cannot be used as a measure against the value of 1.5ug/100cm2 in the Standard.
Ultimately, the Tribunal said that if the Landlord intended to claim the Tenant contaminated the premises, then it should have carried out testing that could be measured against the Standard.
This case suggests that if a Landlord seeks to rely on the test results against a Tenant, they should ensure the meth testing carried out, before and at the end of the tenancy, should be capable of being measured against the NZS 8510 Standard. Landlords should ask the testing company if unsure, as there are a range of testing methods and different factors which can affect test results.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tenant subletting premises through AirBnB
Facts: The tenancy had ended and the Landlord claimed against the bond monies for, amongst other matters, damages for stress and inconvenience arising from an alleged breach of contract by the Tenant subletting the premises through AirBnB.
The Landlord said the tenancy agreement contained the “standard” clause that the premises could not be sublet without the Landlord’s written consent. However, the tenancy agreement had this clause partially crossed-through.
The Landlord said the partial cross-through was intended to be an underlining of that clause. The Tenant disputed this – he said the Landlord agreed for subletting to occur and this was reflected in the “no subletting” clause being scored through.
Decision: The Tribunal did not find the Landlord had proved its claim. The Tribunal considered the partially crossed-out clause and found it more probable than not that the tenancy agreement did allow for subletting without the Landlord’s written consent.
It also noted the Landlord is a company and cannot claim for “stress and anguish” the way a natural person can. In addition, it noted the general legal principle that one can’t recover damages for stress and anguish arising from breach of contract, unless the contract expressly provides for peace of mind or freedom from distress.
Landlords should ensure the tenancy agreement clearly reflects the agreed intent of the parties, (e.g. if subletting is permitted without the landlord’s express consent, then clearly and unequivocally cross out the standard “no subletting” clause) to avoid ambiguity and disputes later.
Click here for the decision
Disclaimer: The information in these case summaries is for general informational purposes only and may only discuss some, not all, aspects of a case. It does not constitute legal or other professional advice and does not replace your company’s internal policies and guidelines. Always check your company’s guidelines, policies and information first and seek legal advice if you have any queries.
Licensees should let purchaser know if they intend to call for other offers
We have received a number of queries from members of the public (purchasers) alleging that licensees have not presented offers to the vendor right away, but instead have tried to turn the situation into a multi-offer one by calling for interest from other prospective buyers first.
Whilst this is not strictly prohibited under the Real Estate Agents Act and the Rules, and you may simply be acting in the vendor’s best interests (or following their instructions), or following your company protocols, we recommend that you let prospective purchasers know in advance if you will call for other interest first instead of presenting their offer immediately to the vendor. Explain carefully your reasons for doing so (e.g. you are following the vendor’s instructions). This can prevent or minimise misunderstandings and complaints from upset prospective purchasers.
It is understandable that a prospective purchaser may view this type of conduct unfavourably and think the licensee is deliberately “disadvantaging” them – transparency in communication is therefore critical for licensees in this situation.
For more information and best practice tips on handling multiple offers, please click here for the REINZ Information Sheet for Multiple Offers.
Please email any advisory or compliance questions to Sonia Ng, Lawyer, REINZ Advisory Services, and we may feature your question and our response here. This column is intended for general information only and does not constitute legal advice and does not replace your agency’s internal policies and guidelines. Always check your agency’s guidelines, policies and information first and seek legal advice if you have any queries.
Overseas Investment Amendment Bill (OIA)
Next week, REINZ will be presenting its submissions orally to the Select Committee hearing in regards to changes to the OIA. REINZ submitted on the proposed changes to the Overseas Investment Act that would restrict foreign ownership of residential property. A copy of the submission can be found here.
Tribunal Powers & Procedures Legislation (TPPL) Bill
REINZ submitted on the TPPL Bill, which proposes to give the Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal the power to award monetary compensation against real estate agents for unsatisfactory conduct. A copy of the submission can be found here. REINZ has requested an oral hearing of its submission before the Select Committee and is awaiting confirmation of the hearing date.
Feedback welcomed for review of Agreement for Sale and Purchase of Real Estate
REINZ and the Auckland District Law Society are undertaking a full review of the standard REINZ/ADLS Agreement for Sale and Purchase of Real Estate form. This revision concerns the content and clauses within the Agreement (not just formatting and style). We welcome any industry feedback on changes you would like to see to the agreement. We are especially interested to hear about issues that are prominent for the industry, e.g. methamphetamine testing. Comments can be sent to Sonia Ng.
Million Dollar Homes
This week, REINZ released its latest update on million-dollar homes in New Zealand showing properties sold around the country for more than a million dollars during 2017 decreased by 13.8% when compared to 2016 (10,027 down from 11,639). However, this figure is still up significantly on 2015, when 9,574 million-dollar plus properties were sold around the country.
Read the full report here.
Click here to view the infographic
REINZ works in partnership with NetYourJob recruitment to provide maximum industry coverage when you’re looking for real estate staff. NetYourJob can provide REINZ Members with competitive marketing rates for job advertising. Contact NetYourJob on 0800 638 968 to find out more or click here to view new jobs this week.
