False advertsing of land zoning

I came across a block of land for sale that looked good.

It was advertised for sale as 'ready for rural-residential sub-division'

I checked with the relevant council and the land is zoned rural rather than rural-residential so the minimum lot size means that sub-division is not possible.

I queried this with the agent and they said the council was correct and that the advert was wrong but the advert remains unchanged.

What is the legal situation where property is purchased based on information provided in an online advert on realestate.com.au which turns out to be false.

is there legal recourse?

If so then who is liable the agent or the vendor?

 

Yes. Misleading and deceptive advertising Australian Consumer Law.
Both potentially liable.

 

Agent is likely in breach of the relevant licensing legislation for the State also

 

Rough...

Good work on checking with council and please report it so other potential purchases don't get mislead..

 

I am quite keen on this block but I can't get the price down.

They are still advertising it as zoned RR with subdivision plans.

I want to report the advert so they are forced to change it and maybe I can get the price down but I don't want to annoy them.

The agent seems to be taking a big risk since he stands to be sued. The risk might be worth it if it was his block but if he is just the agent it seems a bit crazy.

Who is best to report the advert to REIQ or Fair Trading QLD?

REIQ says they charge $220 just to listen to a complaint.

 

I thought realestate.com.au would have a feature for reporting false listings but I cannot find it.

 

REIQ is an employer organisation, they do nothing for consumers in this regards. You may be able to so something biz Fair Trading.

What evidence do you have to add weight to your case - do you have the Zoning Certificate, DCP, LEP & any relevant SEPP confirming that it is bit a permissible use? Have you accessed a copy of the planning & rezoning proposal prepared by council or the applicant which may have been approved by Council but awaiting Ministerial assent? Have you got a copy of any relevant Land & Environment Court/court of appeal judgements rejecting the proposal?

Has the agent actually advised that the land has a DA? You have noted it has subdivision plans, a BIG difference.

What's in it for you If they change the advert but not the price?

 

I see this occasionally when clients come to me after buying only to find they can not do what the real estate agent told them as per the development options for the property. However it may be the same as an agent saying "nice home in great condition" and then finding during a building inspection etc that there are structural flaws and termite infestation. All part of Due Diligence really.

Do all the checks needed, including zoning etc since you will never be fully compensated by trying to sue a real estate agent for the total value of your loss of potential profit.

 

Is it advertised as STCA ?? Its often overlooked that Subject To Council Approval may be years away. Or its in the pipeline.

Speak to Fair Trading since they regulate agent licenses and advertising and consumer laws. I would have thought you dont want the ad changed since it just acts to confuse and worry potential buyers who should all be checking same issue only to finds its a red flag.

 

I'll listen to your complaint too for $200 + GST

 

The ad claims that the property is zoned rural residential which is not true. It is zoned rural.

The ad clams that the property is ready for rural residential subdivision (STCA)

The agent has replied to my query email and said that he 'has since' found out that it is not rural residential or subdividable.

But that was 2 weeks ago and the advert remains unchanged.

I am thinking they are trying to hold out in the hope that a buyer does not check and pays a higher price in the hope of sub-dividing.

If the claims were removed they might settle for a price that is a bit less since there would be no chance of snagging someone paying extra for the claims.

If the zoning is wrong I don't think hoping for a rezoning could count as plausible council approval.

 

Anyone looking at rezoned subdivisible land will know what they are looking at. Or be in over their heads.

Ahhh so it is advertised as STCA....Subject to council rezoning. I would talk to the council town planner and discuss councils views on that area. It may be on its way ? Just hasnt occurred yet but be on the cards. I dont see a issue. STCA is a warning sign to buyers to do some due diligence and have some patience...Some in Sydneys Badgerys creek were waiting 50 years and others just 2.

Maybe a stretch but also maybe not. If they know council WONT approve a potential future change its definitely a problem. And I would be 100% certain the land owner would know just as much as the agent.

 

Dude, they know it's not going to get a council approval, they're not going to change the ad, and yes, they are hoping somebody misses the fine print and will pay more. This is ethically dubious but, alas, pretty standard procedure. It's probably not illegal because they've put in just enough disclaimers to protect themselves and can claim you should have done your own due diligence.

ie You're making a fuss about something they've done intentionally.

 

If this is really your only motivation (which it seems to be), then you are going about it the wrong way.......

 

All land is sold STCA. Its not on signs because its plainly evident. Applies to all existing stock and vacant land too. Any existing use should be permitted and be approved (although not all improvements ! Some may be illegal and be subject to potential demolition.) and the onus is on any buyer to check they are buying those existing rights. If not they may be acquiring a liability.

Not sure if mojo has learned the art of negotiation.

 

So far all I have done is point out to the agent that the land is not subdividable, to which he has agreed (but not changed the advert) and then made a couple of offers.

I have not really gone about it any way so far. So what would be your suggested approach?

So what would be your suggested negotiation tactics?

 

If your offers have been rejected then you have only two options - increase your offer or look for another property. It seems this vendor wants more than you are prepared to pay, a far from uncommon situation.
Marg

 

Heaps of people own land and list it at high (unrealistic) prices hopping a sucker falls on it. Some are more motivated. A mate of mine says his is always for sale. Its the price that buyers dont like. He recently low balled and sat on his price while three other buyers made higher offers that couldnt settle. A year later he bought it. He never increased his price.

Principled negotiation is a process of not negotiating based on position but co-operating to solve a problem. One of the best negotiation strategies is to agree on known facts to find which apparent facts are flawed or based on a matter you disagree with. Telling them they are wrong just means they ignore you. Its then not a negotiation. You need to generate options and focus on their interests.

 

I'm wondering why you are still interested in buying it then?

I don't think I am capable of distilling 40 years of experience in negotiation, down to one or two posts on a forum, and still do it justice....sorry.

 

Thanks Paul. That is some very useful commentary. I have lowballed 3 offers and not followed up with any further comments on the false advertising, following his admission that it is false, so I am endeavouring to keep them onside.

I am not really interested in subdivision. I just want a nice piece of land and this one looks good.

Sure, but it is one of those unique tricky situations which I thought would have a veteran negotiating expert like yourself on his best game.

Both myself and the agent know that the claims in the advert about the zoning are false and he has admitted that in an email so is their any way to leverage that in a negotiating process.