This month, NSW agents will have to curb underquoting further, or risk $110,000 penalties as new rules tighten price guides and impose stricter limits on advertised property prices.
NSW’s new underquoting laws will take effect on 17 November, introducing stricter requirements for real estate agents as the state seeks to rebuild confidence in the property market, or risk hefty fines.
Under the new reforms, “the days of ‘price on inquiry’ will be over”, requiring agents to add and update the selling price or price range to all residential property campaigns.
Additionally, penalties for underquoting will increase from $22,000 to $110,000 or three times an agent's commission, whichever is greater.
To estimate or revise a property price, agents will have to use the three most comparable sales and keep detailed records showing how the residential asset was valued.
When the estimated price changes, agents must update information in all online ads within one business day to ensure buyers know the property value and comply with the law.
Under the new rules, advertised prices cannot fall below the estimated selling price, the highest registered bid at a passed-in auction or a written offer rejected solely because it was too low.
For a property with a $900,000 estimate, agents could advertise it at $900,000, $950,000 or within a $900,000 to $990,000 range, but not at $850,000 or within an $850,000 to $950,000 range.
The new state reforms also mandate agents to retain their agreements electronically.
Additionally, a second phase of the reforms will begin on 8 February 2027, requiring agents to provide a Statement of Information detailing the estimated selling price and the comparable sales used to substantiate the price guide.
Agents will be required to publish the Statement of Information with online property listings and make it available at inspections, allowing prospective buyers to review the pricing evidence before making an offer.
According to the Minns government, the reforms will give buyers greater transparency across NSW’s 150,000 annual property transactions and real estate agents more clarity throughout the sales process.
It said that the reforms build on earlier changes that doubled penalties for businesses engaging in dummy bidding to $110,000 and strengthened NSW Fair Trading’s enforcement and disciplinary powers.
Minister for Better Regulation and Fair Trading Anoulack Chanthivong said the reforms aim to curb underquoting and stop homebuyers “being taken for a ride”.
"Buying a home is one of the biggest financial decisions people make, and we know how overwhelming it can. Buyers deserve clear and reliable information when deciding what they can afford, so that they’re not wasting their time or their hard-earned money.
“Together with the tougher penalties and the regulator’s increased powers, we’re confident these reforms will make a real difference in people’s lives and create a fairer property market,” Chanthivong said.
Vendors to lose the most
According to Real Estate Institute of NSW (REINSW) CEO Tim McKibbin, while curbing underquoting is essential, the upcoming price disclosure reforms pose a high risk to sellers and need amendment.
McKibbin said the rules would prevent agents from advertising a property below an offer the vendor previously rejected purely on price.
He said that the restrictions could disadvantage sellers who lower their price expectations during a campaign and exclude potential buyers who might otherwise be able to afford the property.
“For government’s reforms to work, one of the many requirements is for home prices to always be rapidly growing. In other words, the opposite of the current market,” McKibbin said.
McKibbin said that the new rules did not allow enough flexibility for vendors facing unexpected changes that forced them to sell at a lower price.
He said circumstances such as illness, an urgent relocation or a sudden financial setback could prompt a seller to accept less than originally expected, but agents could be restricted from adjusting the advertised price to reflect those changed circumstances.
Additionally, McKibbin said confusion remains about whether a vendor can provide a revised price directly to a prospective buyer, even though the agent cannot.
“The advertising restrictions at the centre of the price disclosure reforms miss the practical mark. They unreasonably punish vendors without improving transparency for buyers,”
“Unless amended, agents will be required to advertise their vendor’s property for a price above that which the vendor is willing to accept. In effect, they will be forced to make a price representation which no longer reflects the vendor’s position or the market,” McKibbin said.
Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?Make Real Estate Business a preferred news source on Google.
