Estate Agents Bill Passed

[neubie 2]

Once this regulatory body comes out, employers will be able to check if their staff got moonlighting....

Details

PARLIAMENT on Wednesday passed the Estate Agents Bill, marking an important point in the history of Singapore's real estate industry by regulating property agents for the first time.

The new statutory board - Council for Estate Agents (CEA) - overseeing the industry will begin operations on Oct 22, said National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan.

From Jan 1 next year, all property agents will have to be registered with the CEA and have to meet certain standards to continue working.

The Bill comes as the Government moves to address the standards of an industry dogged by rising number of complaints against errant agents.

It follows a recent housing Bill sped through Parliament and passed in July to close a loophole which had allowed moneylenders to lodge caveats on HDB flats to claim a stake in sale proceeds.

MPs had highlighted the role of irresponsible housing agents who act in cahoots with moneylenders to mislead home owners as among the other unethical practices seen in recent years as Singapore experienced a property boom.

Many MPs that spoke on the Bill on Wednesday supported it, although they also raised various concerns from foreigners operating as agents, to commission guidelines and consumer awareness.

MPs Ho Geok Choo (West Coast GRC) and Lee Bee Wah (Ang Mo Kio GRC) asked if foreigners without local knowledge of laws should be allowed to work as agents. Mr Ang Mong Seng (Hong Kah GRC) went a step further to ask if foreigners could be banned.

Mr Mah said no, as such measures will contravene the various free trade agreements Singapore has signed with trading partners and would be considered a discrimnatory practice.

However, although foreigners will still be allowed to operate as property agents, they will need to qualify for a work pass from the Manpower Ministry and comply with new rules and be registered with an agency under the new Bill.

[leechaorui 2]

Once this regulatory body comes out, employers will be able to check if their staff got moonlighting....

Details

In future, housing agents have to be called salespersons and the agency they represent would be called housing agent. If there is any offence, there could be a fine of up to $75K and 3 years jail. There would also be a renewal fee for agents at $230 per annum. Each salesperson can only be registered with one agency.

The agents who have not passed exam by 31 Dec 2011 will have to leave the trade. Hence, there should be more urgency for agents to take the exams.

[MSlovers 0]

I know of agents who have yet to pass their exams, simply ask their "managers" to handle the paper work.

[leechaorui 2]

I know of agents who have yet to pass their exams, simply ask their "managers" to handle the paper work.

If the government finds out, the housing agency and the salesperson will get into trouble. Since the paper is not very tough, it is best that the salesperson take the exam and pass it. In this way, he can conduct the business without fear.

Cheers!

[Plastic3 0]

In future, housing agents have to be called salespersons and the agency they represent would be called housing agent. If there is any offence, there could be a fine of up to $75K and 3 years jail. There would also be a renewal fee for agents at $230 per annum. Each salesperson can only be registered with one agency.

The agents who have not passed exam by 31 Dec 2011 will have to leave the trade. Hence, there should be more urgency for agents to take the exams.

Pay & Pay

[gimz63251073 0]

well its simply pay back time...after the govt got so much complaint about agents (which they are afraid of losing votes), its just time to get back.

one silly thing i noted about the speech is that MBT says cannot set guideline for agent fees and leave it to market forces. Reason is that it contravenes the competition act. (or is it fair competition act?)

which is totally dumb, the competition act is to make sure consumers get a better deal. With no guidelines and so many experienced agents around, what are the chances of consumers getting a good deal? Consumers transact in a property only a few times in their lives...some only do it once..so naturally they must be better protected with guidelines to prevent agents from taking advantage.

so it is, we are doing things in an illogical and dumb way because "it is like that one".

[Plastic3 0]

Personally, I also hoped the commission can be a fixed percentage.

[leechaorui 2]

Personally, I also hoped the commission can be a fixed percentage.

I saw a flyer that say home owner don't need to pay commission. The agent will collect commission from the buyer. I think agents trying to do a good service will not be rewarded fairly as price competition will drive down incentives and professionalism. T

[Warrior88 0]

Personally, I also hoped the commission can be a fixed percentage.

I favour no guideline for agent fees and leave it to market forces. Reason is that it contravenes the competition act. No need to hear agent saying simi market rate .....

$1000 for agency fees want or not, if not I find others to sell. There are some house that sell like hot cake. Just 1 open house and buyers even bid higher than COVs.

[Plastic3 0]

I saw a flyer that say home owner don't need to pay commission. The agent will collect commission from the buyer. I think agents trying to do a good service will not be rewarded fairly as price competition will drive down incentives and professionalism. T

Yes, I know of Agents who advertise like that....since they earn less, most of them are likely to cut-corners here and there....

btw, I saw your pm, but i'm unable to answer your question right now as your particular estate has no rental data.

I'll check nearby areas and see if I can do a proper comparison.

Edited September 21, 2010 by Plastic3

[Sam Lee Poh Huat 0]

No bills yet in stopping seller agents from getting commission from buyers, rite? Edited September 27, 2010 by FD1976

[forgotten 1]

No bills yet in stopping seller agents from getting commission from buyers, rite?

Even if the bill that 1 agent can only represent 1 side (either buyer or seller) is passed, agents can bypass it. Seller agent can get their partner to represent the buyer at the HDB appointment, and still reap commission from both buyer and seller.

[Sam Lee Poh Huat 0]

Even if the bill that 1 agent can only represent 1 side (either buyer or seller) is passed, agents can bypass it. Seller agent can get their partner to represent the buyer at the HDB appointment, and still reap commission from both buyer and seller.

Something similar like co broking, rite? As a direct buyer, i've recently encountered a agent whom i called out to find out that she will be representing me instead of the seller on a co broke basis. Not all against it but it can be a double edge sword at times; hurtful.

[mel77 1]

Something similar like co broking, rite? As a direct buyer, i've recently encountered a agent whom i called out to find out that she will be representing me instead of the seller on a co broke basis. Not all against it but it can be a double edge sword at times; hurtful.

At times i prefer agents to say no co-broke than say can co-broke, then start all the monkey biz. Cos when the open house starts you'll notice that some how the other agents who came with their buyers, typically comes back without an offer. So strange. Even had a buyer's parents who was so keen on my place and was chatting with me to check on details of my reno done. Then when i ask my agent if this particular buyer made an offer.....it was No! Found it strange.

Conflict of interest is an issue that all home sellers/buyers have to deal with carefully. If you notice any monkey biz going on, don't be afraid to confront the agent. I missed out on a good deal b'cos seller's agent block us. Only found out when i happen to speak to the seller when i bumped into the family. We made an offer that match what the seller was asking, but seller says they didn't receive any offer from us (as told by agent) But they did manage to get the same price, but it is their agent's direct buyer.

[mel77 1]

Even if the bill that 1 agent can only represent 1 side (either buyer or seller) is passed, agents can bypass it. Seller agent can get their partner to represent the buyer at the HDB appointment, and still reap commission from both buyer and seller.

That's a loop hole that should be plugged. Always have to question the agent on who's interest he/she is representing.