# IAVI upheld complaint but no compensation



## EniotS (5 Feb 2008)

We filed a complaint against our Estate Agent after they sold our house. We were basically overcharged and misinformed about the duration of certain processes after the sale was agreed. The claim was upheld and we are to get back the money we were overcharged.

Apart from that we were looking for compensation as we lost thousands in additional bridging loan interest. The IVIA ruled that the estate agent did break 2 rules of conduct and fined him 1.000€ to pay the IVIA for the cost of the investigation but did find that the agent had to pay us any compensation!

I am considering taking this matter to the Small Claims Court and want to claim half of fee involved i.e. 2000€. Is this wise or will the fact that the IVIA didn’t think this was appropriate convince the court I don’t have a claim?


----------



## ClubMan (5 Feb 2008)

Are you sure that the _Small Claims Court _would deal with this sort of case?


----------



## EniotS (5 Feb 2008)

As far as I understand teh Small Claims Court do deal with claims up to 2000€ by a private person that bought goods or a service from a company. If you have any otehr suggestion please tell me...


----------



## Banking2006 (5 Feb 2008)

Send copies of the IAVI reply and complaint to Senator Shane Ross- He is Business Editor or columnist in Sunday Independent and is keeping a watchful eye on them!


----------



## bacchus (5 Feb 2008)

EniotS said:


> We filed a complaint against our Estate Agent after they sold our house. We were basically overcharged and misinformed about the duration of certain processes after the sale was agreed.


 
I would be very interested in knowing (there are not trick questions BTW, just genuinely interested as to not to get caught myself)
1- how did manage to overcharge you without you noticing straigh away?
2- what responsability EA had in duration of some processes? i thought such processes were under the full control of solicitors and not EA's anymore..


----------



## MrMan (5 Feb 2008)

> Send copies of the IAVI reply and complaint to Senator Shane Ross- He is Business Editor or columnist in Sunday Independent and is keeping a watchful eye on them!



Shane Ross - The voice of reason, i think his eye is on broadband now, or at least whatever campaign that will keep his voice heard (unfortunately)


----------



## Banking2006 (5 Feb 2008)

Sorry to disagree with your view on Senator Ross. IAVI has been a long running topic with him- over a year ago he successful applied to Bray District Court and became an 'auctioneer'- with the sole aim of showing up a so-called profession.

So in my books- this is not a short term campaign he is leading...


----------



## MrMan (6 Feb 2008)

> Sorry to disagree with your view on Senator Ross. IAVI has been a long running topic with him- over a year ago he successful applied to Bray District Court and became an 'auctioneer'- with the sole aim of showing up a so-called profession.
> 
> So in my books- this is not a short term campaign he is leading



Feel free to disagree to anything i say. shane Ross takes a very skewed view on this topic and seems to be more concerned with soundbites than actual debate.


----------



## ubiquitous (6 Feb 2008)

MrMan said:


> Shane Ross - The voice of reason, i think his eye is on broadband now, or at least whatever campaign that will keep his voice heard (unfortunately)


His column last Sunday was devoted entirely to serious allegations against a very prominent auctioneer, whom he named.

Do you think Ross should stop criticising sharp practice among auctioneers?
Do you think he should stop criticising our poor broadband infrastructure?
If so, on either count, why?


----------



## MrMan (6 Feb 2008)

> BS
> 
> His column last Sunday was devoted entirely to serious allegations against a very prominent auctioneer, whom he named.
> 
> ...



I think that re: auctioneers he should try to leave a little room for balance. We are an easy target, just look at the posts on this site, money grabbers, chancers etc etc, Ross taps into this and tries to portray himself as a crusader against a corrupt industry. We not sharp practices in every profession, why not broaden his debate issues to look at how the IAVI also are trying to eliminate sharp practices. His current campaign re: broadband has him asking for us to email him with our problems, I emailed him previously on a number of occasions to discuss the topic of how the public perceived the profession and he failed to acknowledge these requests let alone open himself to even private debate. This debate was part of a survey that I was conducting and as one of the main critics of the profession it was disappointing that he could not engage in debate.

By all means point out those that are operating beyond the realms of the law, but every story should be told in true context and not that it is representing the profession in its entirity.


----------



## EniotS (6 Feb 2008)

bacchus said:


> I would be very interested in knowing (there are not trick questions BTW, just genuinely interested as to not to get caught myself)
> 1- how did manage to overcharge you without you noticing straigh away?
> 2- what responsability EA had in duration of some processes? i thought such processes were under the full control of solicitors and not EA's anymore..


1) We did notice it straight away he just disputed it until he was corrected by the IAVI. This process took 8 months!
2) We were waiting on the purchasers to get contracts signed for their house before they could sign with us. The estate agent was aware of complications in this process but misled us as to how long this would take (4-6 weeks instead of 4-6 months!) Had we been correctly informed we wouldn't have proceeded with this purchaser.


----------



## ubiquitous (6 Feb 2008)

Any comments on this

"The auctioneer and the OAP"


----------



## Bronte (6 Feb 2008)

I've just read your post MrMan (which seems to have disappeared).  While you went through the article from the Sunday Independent in detail point by point you did not address at any point the issue of the seller (old lady) of the land in question nor did you address the actions of the IAVI auctioneer.   I don't know what advice to give the OP but I'm sure a member of the auctioneering body such as yourself would know what he should do.


----------



## MrMan (6 Feb 2008)

> I've just read your post MrMan (which seems to have disappeared). While you went through the article from the Sunday Independent in detail point by point you did not address at any point the issue of the seller (old lady) of the land in question nor did you address the actions of the IAVI auctioneer. I don't know what advice to give the OP but I'm sure a member of the auctioneering body such as yourself would know what he should do.



Hi, its been removed for reasons I'm not going into because I'm not sure if I'm allowed, but I didn't remove it. I didn't address the issue of the seller directly but I did say that she was wronged allegedly (just covering myself here from infractions). I have every sympathy for that lady and at least she did have a happy ending. I thought I did address the Auctioneer by describing the nature of his dealings. I really can't go over it as you may have guessed byt he disappearnance of the last long post that it did not meet the criteria of posting guidelines and this time i'd like to stay within them if possible.

Just to provide my own feelings on the subject, I am not an apologist for any auctioneers that have done or are doing deals that are to the detriment of their clients or are contrary to the IAVI rules. I do understand that there is need for a regulatory body and I am definitely all for it. I have spoken to many auctioneers and a similar mindset is there to mine. There is more than a small majority of less than moral agents out there but I feel that proper regulation and defined (strict) entry requirements are needed. I don't feel that because of the lack of these two that there should be an open season on all auctioneers. Its a business some are better than others and some have been around a very long time and have developed good reputations on the back of good service.


----------



## ubiquitous (6 Feb 2008)

Point taken, but the fact is that it has been Shane Ross, more than any other journalist, who has repeatedly highlighted the malpractices that some auctioneers have been up to, and who has repeatedly called for the need for proper regulation of the sector. Whatever about his tendency for drama and exaggeration, I think he deserves at least some credit for that.

Fwiw, Ross has also repeatedly attacked the Institute of Chartered Accountants (of whom I am a member), and did so once again in passing in the article which I linked to. Even though I am an accountant and an ICAI member, I don't take any exception whatsoever to these attacks. It is up to everyone in professional life to get their houses in order, including the regulators themselves.


----------



## MrMan (6 Feb 2008)

> It is up to everyone in professional life to get their houses in order, including the regulators themselves.



Agreed, it's just the manner in which its often done that is irksome.


----------



## Banking2006 (6 Feb 2008)

As a matter of interest, what manner would be acceptable to highlight such issues? It's always hard to highlight these type of issues and get everyone to stand up and listen- so some 'poetic' licence (did i spell it right!) may be necessary!

In any case, once the relevant institution (or otherwise) takes note and makes some effort (if necessary) to correct the problems, then in my view, it's a win-win for all sides. The problem arises where the IAVI or similar might just decide to bury their heads in the sand!


----------



## MrMan (7 Feb 2008)

> As a matter of interest, what manner would be acceptable to highlight such issues? It's always hard to highlight these type of issues and get everyone to stand up and listen- so some 'poetic' licence (did i spell it right!) may be necessary!



The same way as any other issue - write a credible story and let the headlines do the selling. Why the need to label entire professions, why not use a balanced story instead of trying to portray something that isn't actually the norm as the norm.



> In any case, once the relevant institution (or otherwise) takes note and makes some effort (if necessary) to correct the problems, then in my view, it's a win-win for all sides. The problem arises where the IAVI or similar might just decide to bury their heads in the sand!


It's a win win but it won't have been down to the ramblings of any particular senator. The IAVI have issued there recommendations for regulation which have been backed by members and are waiting to here back for a number of years now. The IAVI head has been above the parapet rather than buried in the sand.


----------



## ubiquitous (7 Feb 2008)

MrMan said:


> The same way as any other issue - write a credible story and let the headlines do the selling.



In fairness this might be asking a bit much when the entire media have been utterly dependent on advertising income from the auctioneering industry for an entire decade.


----------



## MrMan (7 Feb 2008)

> In fairness this might be asking a bit much when the entire media have been utterly dependent on advertising income from the auctioneering industry for an entire decade.



Is this the same media that have been printing doom and gloom for the last year, producing epic disaster 'movies' like futureshock, I don't think that argument will stand up anymore. What are they going to do now if they are 'utterly dependent on advertising income'?


----------



## MugsGame (7 Feb 2008)

MrMan said:


> There is more than a small majority of less than moral agents out there .



So by your own reckoning, more than 50% of estate agents are less than moral?


----------



## ubiquitous (7 Feb 2008)

MrMan said:


> Is this the same media that have been printing doom and gloom for the last year, producing epic disaster 'movies' like futureshock, I don't think that argument will stand up anymore.


Yes. But you're only fooling yourself if you think that the doom and gloom in the property markets (globally, as well as domestic) is merely an invention of the media.



MrMan said:


> What are they going to do now if they are 'utterly dependent on advertising income'?



Lose money, probably. The leading local newspaper in my neck of the woods has already announced redundancies.


----------



## MrMan (7 Feb 2008)

> So by your own reckoning, more than 50% of estate agents are less than moral?


Give or take a few.



> Yes. But you're only fooling yourself if you think that the doom and gloom in the property markets (globally, as well as domestic) is merely an invention of the media.



I don't remember saying it was an invention, I'm saying it is reported which in no terms is good news for Ea's which contradicts your first assertion.


----------



## ubiquitous (7 Feb 2008)

MrMan said:


> I don't remember saying it was an invention, I'm saying it is reported which in no terms is good news for Ea's which contradicts your first assertion.



Of course the property market crisis has been reported in the media. Given its magnitude, the story would have been impossible to suppress indefinitely. However this not alter or contradict my assertion that the Irish media have been utterly dependent on advertising income from the auctioneering industry for the past decade. Anyone who has literally read a newspaper in that period could tell you that.


----------



## bamboozle (7 Feb 2008)

Banking2006 said:


> Sorry to disagree with your view on Senator Ross. IAVI has been a long running topic with him- over a year ago he successful applied to Bray District Court and became an 'auctioneer'- with the sole aim of showing up a so-called profession.
> 
> So in my books- this is not a short term campaign he is leading...


Fair play to Shane Ross, I thought his appearance on Primetime debating against the president of the IAVI was one of the funniest things I’ve seen on tv in a long time,
He has a long record of campaigning for tighter regulation of the auctioneering industry and has shown the industry up time and time again as a bunch of rogues!
If it was me I would email him.


----------



## MrMan (7 Feb 2008)

Your assertion that the Irish media depend on the income of property advertising was the grounds for this claim:





> In fairness this might be asking a bit much when the entire media have been utterly dependent on advertising income from the auctioneering industry for an entire decade.


 with reference to credible writing on the issue.




> If it was me I would email him.


If it was you what?



> He has a long record of campaigning for tighter regulation of the auctioneering industry and has shown the industry up time and time again as a bunch of rogues!



For industry read individuals.


----------



## ubiquitous (7 Feb 2008)

MrMan said:


> Your assertion that the Irish media depend on the income of property advertising was the grounds for this claim: with reference to credible writing on the issue.
> "In fairness this might be asking a bit much when the entire media have been utterly dependent on advertising income from the auctioneering industry for an entire decade."



...which I stand over, 100%.


----------



## MrMan (7 Feb 2008)

So does this not contradict that opinion 





> Of course the property market crisis has been reported in the media. Given its magnitude, the story would have been impossible to suppress indefinitely


----------



## ubiquitous (7 Feb 2008)

No, it does not contradict it. (I think I said that earlier, btw)

I'll put my point differently, in case you misunderstand me.

1. The Irish auctioneering industry and the property market in general enjoyed years of positive publicity from newspapers and other media.

2. My own suspicion is that at least part of this positive publicity was linked to the media's dependence on revenues from property advertising.

3. Notwithstanding this, the media have reported the current crisis in the market, because the extent of the crisis, globally and locally, is such that not to report it would bring their entire credibility into serious doubt.

Do you disagree with any of these points?


----------



## MrMan (7 Feb 2008)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by MrMan
> The same way as any other issue - write a credible story and let the headlines do the selling.





> In fairness this might be asking a bit much when the entire media have been utterly dependent on advertising income from the auctioneering industry for an entire decade.



My original point was that you do not need to use colourful language and demonise people to make your point, if the story is true then an accurate portrayal of that story should suffice. Your point to my understanding was that writing a credible story on abuses by EA's was unlikely because the papers were so dependent on their advertising income. My final point highlighted the overly newgative portrayal of the current market as proof that the media does not bow to EA's, but you dismiss this as simply because they have no other choice than to report it. It doesn't quite add up that across the board the media would completely turn a blind eye to scoops on corruption, greed etc purely on the basis that it would affect their income. If anything reporting on such things would be welcomed because it would help eliminate the 'bad eggs' and help the rest of us to restore some credibility.

With relation to your points:

1. The Irish auctioneering industry and the property market in general enjoyed years of positive publicity from newspapers and other media.

I would agree with this and add to that many vendors, developers and even purchasers to that list.



> 2. My own suspicion is that at least part of this positive publicity was linked to the media's dependence on revenues from property advertising.



That may be your suspicion, but it sadly lacks proof. It would have been hard to knock the market in the last 10/15 years, there were plenty of doomsayers and their voices were heard, but the market moved on regardless.



> 3. Notwithstanding this, the media have reported the current crisis in the market, because the extent of the crisis, globally and locally, is such that not to report it would bring their entire credibility into serious doubt.



They have reprted this because its happening, but the overtly negative vibe that is attached to any report or even if a commentator has a positive spin they are talked down, so I don't think they are reporting because they have to, i think this is the next big story and a crash would make great news. Disasters sell papers almost as much as sex!


----------



## EniotS (7 Feb 2008)

MrMan said:


> If it was you what?


If think he is refering back to my original question that started this Thread. But now it seem to have gone on a bit of a tangent...

Still not sure wre I should go with my complaint though. As I said the IAVI has 'fined' their estate agent (he has to pay the IAVI) but I get no compensation?!...


----------



## MrMan (7 Feb 2008)

sorry, I nearly forgot there was a question in here. From what I can see from your following quote, the second point is where you want your compo from. From the way I read it 4-6 weeks turned into 4-6 months, but no matter how misleading he was you had the power at all times to pull the sale. I don't understand how nayones powers of persuasion could get you to wait 3/5 months longer than you wanted. You could go to the courts but I think its best to chalk it down as experience. I don't think the IAVI would have reasonable grounds to hit him for compo regarding your 2nd point. 


> 1) We did notice it straight away he just disputed it until he was corrected by the IAVI. This process took 8 months!
> 2) We were waiting on the purchasers to get contracts signed for their house before they could sign with us. The estate agent was aware of complications in this process but misled us as to how long this would take (4-6 weeks instead of 4-6 months!) Had we been correctly informed we wouldn't have proceeded with this purchaser.


----------



## bamboozle (7 Feb 2008)

MrMan said:


> Your assertion that the Irish media depend on the income of property advertising was the grounds for this claim: with reference to credible writing on the issue.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Mr. Man, you seem perplexed by my comments, they did not relate to you the were for the attention of the OP who i believe should email Shane Ross to highlight the issue at hand as it obvioulsy was not dealt with by the relevent regulatory body.


----------



## MrMan (8 Feb 2008)

> Mr. Man, you seem perplexed by my comments, they did not relate to you the were for the attention of the OP who i believe should email Shane Ross to highlight the issue at hand as it obvioulsy was not dealt with by the relevent regulatory body.



Ya I was perplexed? thats why the initial part of my response wasn't aimed at you it was obviously for ubiquitous.




> He has a long record of campaigning for tighter regulation of the auctioneering industry and has shown the industry up time and time again as a bunch of rogues!



I am part of the industry that you were so flippant about so I would content that it was aimed at me.


----------



## Bronte (15 Feb 2008)

OP you said  "The estate agent was aware of complications in this process but misled us as to how long this would take (4-6 weeks instead of 4-6 months!) Had we been correctly informed we wouldn't have proceeded with this purchaser. "

You also said you got back the money overcharged basically the auctioneer overcharged you and you got this back and that is all the IAVI thinks he did wrong.  Is it possible that when he told you 4 to 6 weeks he himself believed it to be true.  Often in property transactions something that seems quite simple can in fact turn out to be long and protracted and that would not be the fault of the auctioneer.  If this is an option then going to court might be futile.


----------



## EniotS (15 Feb 2008)

Bronte, you are quiet right; this is all the IAVA thinks he did wrong. The majority of our issues weren’t even addressed. Basically the point I am making is we had to spent almost a year to get a basic overcharge back and (no apologies or anything else) the real issues we had we the estate agent were mainly ignored and we were thanked "for bringing this to our attention", that was it...


----------

