Does breach vendor’s privacy?

4 minute read

OzHomevalue is a owned website for property vendors providing them with sales data information in relation to the suburb where the vendor’s property is located. From their homepage:

OzHomeValue provides a comprehensive property report to help find the value of your home. Try our easy to use, obligation free system and receive your FREE property report.

Well, it is not entirely obligation free given after a vendor fills in the form and receives a free property report, their contact details are then sold to local agents who contact the vendor regarding a appraisal.

But what’s more interesting about OzHomevalue is the sold data provided in the free property report. These property reports showcase recently sold properties and a Price Range for each property in the suburb where the vendor’s property is located. It’s this Price Range which is provided for sold properties which raises the question as to whether a property vendor’s privacy is being breached. Given most vendors explicitly request their agents do not publish sold prices, why then do all of these prices appear?

Given Ozhomevalue is owned by then a reasonable assumption is that REA are providing Ozhomesvalue with this sold data. As the sold dates of the properties in the report are between April 4 and April 12, 2011 than this sold data has not been sourced from the Valuers Generals office (because settlement has not occurred). Therefore more likley than not, this sold data is what has been reported on by agents once a property has sold. What’s interesting is, if you look at the sold properties on which are listed in the Ozhomevalue property report, you will see the price (for most properties) is not displayed on but is displayed on

A perfect example of this is if you click on the sample property report on the website (after this post was published they updated their report to change the results but you can see a ozhomevalue_sample_report.)

You will see there are 12 recently sold properties in the report. Now if you search the sold properties on you will see that 11 out of the 12 properties do not have the sold price displayed. Below are the 12 properties in the report. Although the report outlines the property prices I have substituted the price with $X  to maintain the vendor’s privacy.

  1. 197-199 Castlereagh Street SYDNEY – $X (REA No Price)*
  2. 612/2 York Street, SYDNEY – $X (REA NO Price)*
  3. 3701/129 Harrington Street, SYDNEY – $X (REA NO Price)*
  4. 324/298 – 300 Sussex Street, SYDNEY – $X (REA NO Price)
  5. 1307/98 Gloucester Street, THE ROCKS – $X (REA NO Price)
  6. 1809/183 Kent Street, SYDNEY – $525,000 (REA Price $525,000)
  7. 303/420 Pitt Street, SYDNEY – $X (REA NO Price)
  8. 2007/98 Gloucester Street, THE ROCKS – $X (REA NO Price)*
  9. 2007/98 Gloucester Street, SYDNEY – $X (REA NO Price)*
  10. 1409/168 Kent Street, SYDNEY – $X (REA No Price)*
  11. 129 Harrington Street, SYDNEY – $X (REA NO Price)*
  12. 129 Harrington Street, THE ROCKS – $X (REA NO Price)*

*I decided to cross reference the 12 properties against the Australian Property Monitors database and the properties marked with * appeared in APM. All of these properties have the price withheld in APM.

Ozhomevalue refer to this price as a Price Range but make no reference to what this Price Range figure means. If it is the sold price of the property, then vendors (along with agents) would be outraged and should have every right to demand the sold price removed immediately.

After further examination it appears that another owned company is displaying exactly the same sold property data as what Ozhomevalue does in a similar Sales Reports. However, instead of displaying the price as ‘Price Range’ simply has it displayed as Price.

Tell us if you liked this content.
Show CommentsClose Comments


  • Nick
    Posted May 16, 2011 at 10:41 am 0Likes

    Sounds like another information leak from REA like was it the Commonwealth Bank’s app which used REA data but leaked all the prices?

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 16, 2011 at 11:39 am 0Likes

    No information leak. They are prices archived in the backend of REA that the Agent has selected not to display.

  • snoop
    Posted May 16, 2011 at 11:53 am 0Likes

    And the issue is?
    Seems this is happening on portals all over the world.
    Isnt transparency a good thing to keep markets dynamic ?

  • Glenn Rogers
    Posted May 16, 2011 at 12:39 pm 0Likes

    Their Privacy policy states they may give your details to suppliers :ie agents I presume so they can contact you.

    This would appear to be a bit unethical, people don’t usually read a privacy policy, and in any case they woudn’t expect it to say we will share your info around meaning their is no privacy.

  • Ryan O'Grady
    Posted May 16, 2011 at 3:35 pm 0Likes

    Vendors have personal reasons for not wanting the sold price of their property to be made public. These requests should be followed by all companies displaying the data.

  • Peg Greg
    Posted May 16, 2011 at 9:59 pm 0Likes

    I agree with Ryan O’Grady. Food for thought…. what if all the Real Estate Institute bodies changed their contracts so that the vendor can legally opt in or out of this information being provided to portals? That way, REA (and others) would at least need to consider the vendors point of view. Surely, the contract could be changed so that the Vendor, at time of signing can legitimately state that under privacy law, the information is not to be made public if this is their wish. Is there a lawyer out there who can add some value as to whether this is feasible? This way, REA would need to change their Privacy Policy to accommodate a specific request. Surely, a vendor is in the driver’s seat and has a right to close the door on this information going public? This would force REAs hand. It’s not your job to convince the vendor to make it public, after all. If REA won’t co-operate and change their policy go back to your Real Estate Institute sites and refuse to play ball with REA. REA will come on board – guaranteed. It is a sad fact of life across many businesses that if an opportunity to make a buck from your Granny presented itself, then they will put Granny in the firing line. The only way to save Granny is to refuse to pull the trigger. That power sits with every real estate agent. Perhaps take a poll and then take it directly to REAs Board. Stick some heat behind it. Agents think REA survives off them. It doesn’t. It’s the vendors wish to go on the No. 1 site. If the No. 1 site won’t listen to the ultimate customer and wants to splash their information without concern, then encourage your vendors to look elsewhere. They’ll soon get the message.

  • Peg
    Posted May 16, 2011 at 10:32 pm 0Likes

    … furthermore, if handled properly at the grassroots level REA and others could be required to send out a new contract for your subscriptions – highly inconvenient for them, with the changes in hand and how the information can be handled. They may even be required to change the back end of their site so that YOUR VENDOR chooses whether the data can be used or displayed. Imagine if you needed to look at your Offer and Acceptance and the client had to specifically sign to say that the data may be used by a body other than a Government body. Then, the back end of REA and other sites need to put an option for you to say “No, won’t give you this info” or “Yes, Vendor is happy to provide this information – here is the price”. This is a job for a lobbyist so it’s taken seriously. And let’s face it, privacy is a serious issue. Essentially, it appears that REA are seeking the revenue traditionally provided by RP Data. Or am I missing something here? If you can change the contracts to say they can’t use the information without signature, then they need to respect it. Food for thought. At the same time the State-based Real Estate Institutes could run a specific campaign which flies in the face of what REA appear to be doing – something like, “We protect your privacy” and explain why their position is unique – they offer choice. If you are comfortable “tick yes” if not, that is ok too “tick no” – a respectful way to treat the vendor. So who is going to make it happen, I wonder? Perhaps the Real Estate Institutes should weigh in on this and make a stand. Change the Offer and Acceptance, I say.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 12:00 am 0Likes

    Here is a sample of the REIV contract that a vendor signs and consents to the REIV/REV collecting of the sold information under the Privacy Act 1988. The last section pertains to collectoin of information and privacy.

    A vendor in VIC does not consent to their data being included or collected by RP Data, APM, Onthehouse, REA or any other place for that matter of fact.

    Do the contracts from other states also include this section?

  • snoop
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 4:20 am 0Likes

    Thepoint would be doesnt all this go too far?.
    Assume the above happened.
    Wouldnt agents be shooting themselves in the foot?
    No comps available for a legally required cma?
    Or is Peg saying this data must only be avail to agents??
    What about Valuers
    I can ask any agent in my neighborhood what a property sold for and he will tell me anyway,never had one say ohh that sale is confidential,if he did i wouldnt talk to him again and phone the next guy.

  • Vic
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 9:15 am 0Likes

    A couple of points re the REIV contract provided by Tatiana.

    Firstly, it does not specifically mention that the data cannot be distributed to REA. If the agent is requested by the vendor to promote through REA then the agent has to comply. This being the case REA agreement with the agent then comes into play.
    Secondly, why is an REIV prepared contract include distribution of data to ?

    The vendor is definitely being “shortchanged” whether it be by REIV/review or by REA, as I’d be sure that until they see their data being displayed, other than for the purpose of selling, they would have no idea how their data is being used.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 9:43 am 0Likes

    Vic, the data componenet of the contract is not about the property whilst its for sale.

    Advertising of the property for sale is not what the contract states. It only pertains to the sold result after the sale.

    With VIC, there are too many undisclosed sales to suggest that vendors would not know where their sold data goes.

    It is a conversation that most agents would have when the contract is being signed.

    Whilst yes, it does not say that the data/property for sale will not be sent to REA, it also does not say that REA can collect the sold data. In fact, it states that only REIV can.

  • PaulD
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 10:46 am 0Likes

    All this regulation seems academic to me when, within a month of a property settlement, the sale details can be obtained from the Land Titles Office or Valuer General or whatever is the corresponding state body. How does regulating all the players make any difference? Secondly in an auction situation, as soon as the property is knocked down, it becomes public knowledge. You can’t unring a bell.

  • Vic
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 11:11 am 0Likes

    Tatiana, the contract is with the vendor and the agent. Is this not correct? The privacy section does not only refer to “sold data”, it refers to information collected by the agent- includes everything. My point is that when the vendors sign this document – do they know how their data will be used and where it will be sent to and for what purpose.. and if the agent passes on to the REA or REIV or Review, do they know that this information, “the Vendors” is going to be used to make money by someone other than the vendor?

    There is a modicum of hypocrisy here when agents complain about having to pay for the privilege of giving away “their data” to REA and the like- when they don’t pay the vendor for it in the first place.

    When a property is sold at auction, yes it is immediate public knowledge, however when a negotiated price is achieved when the property is passed in it is not made public. Similarly, the sales by private treaty are exactly that and agents should not be providing this information to portals.

    In my view the privacy issues need some strong legislative review with a likely out come of some really strong and clearly worded vendor OPTIONS along the lines suggested by Peg above.

  • Sal Espro
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 11:13 am 0Likes

    What matters is that and Homeguru are acting illegally by disclosing information that agents have elected to not display.
    You’d reckon the ACCC would have a ball with the REIV’s vendor contract only providing sales data to REView.
    Roll-on better agency websites and industry-wide apps (or m-sites) that will wrest control from these bully-buggers who are making us pay for our own information!!!!!

  • Sal Espro
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 11:27 am 0Likes

    It’s just a jump to the left…. Does anyone know of an app (or m-site) that works across all portals and websites? (Apart from that Hysteria rort thing, sorry that was Nestoria, wasn’t it).
    I just can’t see that anyone is really trying to service buyers and vendors. As a result REA, Domain, REI’s etc etc are screwing us rotten!. Everything seems to be just going down the same old advertising road set by the newspapers so long ago.
    i.e. I would like to be able to list on *any* website and have a buyer consider it along with whatever other listings they have come across.
    Ultimately, this would mean we would only need to list on agency websites – Is that just a silly dream from a frustrated, silly old man who is now expecting so much more from technology ?!
    (Perhaps this should be a separate stream, Peter? How could that be organised?)

  • Peg
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 11:40 am 0Likes

    I think you will find that as agents, you are all being used by REA as “agents” of information. They laugh all the way to the bank. So, you pay to be a part of this site, you may even get in a bidding war for lucrative products and pay over the top prices for them (that’s another story), you give your information in good faith and then you get charged for it when you need to do analysis because it’s an important part of your sales pitch. It should be free for agents at least. But wait, REA will probably just increase your subscriptions – they don’t give much away for “Free”. The best course of action, in my humble opinion is to change the contracts. Option 1 – force REA to be the one to have to go to the Land Titles Office and pay for the information themselves. They would then need to on-sell it at a higher price to cover costs and make a buck. I think you will find that REA is all about being the one stop shop. They are eating into markets which support real estate and are seen to be “helping you”. They are helping you in a sense, but will charge for it. Imagine if they “own” all the “stuff” that supports you? Where are you forced to go? Does it give you choice? Or are you stuck with it? Who would you rather pay for the information? REA or your Land Titles Office? Option 2 – REA will boast speed to market because you go to their site to show that you have sold a property. You give them the information. It looks good on your “resume” in the sold section of their site. Just stop putting the $ in the back end and their strategy is temporarly finished. Even better, seal it with a change of contract. On the flip side, if the information is useful maybe it’s worth paying for. Option 3 – Why don’t your State bodies get together and put in a formal agreement in the contract that this information will be available but it is charged for and billed to REA? The money goes back to the body or, even better, the vendor. This way, if REA want the information THEY CAN PAY FOR THE SPEED AT WHICH THEY CAN HAVE IT:) Let’s see how quickly they pay their bills when charged.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 12:02 pm 0Likes

    Snnop, it is their =job to collect it and they have the appropriate licences to do so. I am amazed how little is known of the process of data collection.

    There are only certain Institutes (REI’s) and companies (APM, Pricefinder etc) that have a licence to collect sales data.

    As per Privacy Victoria:

    Property sales data is not just information about land and buildings. With today

  • Peg
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 12:09 pm 0Likes

    Look people, I can sense your frustration and I empathise. Firstly, you need to believe that you can make a different to the way REA treats you. Secondly, you need to choose one thing that annoys the masses and stick with it. Thirdly, you need to organise a get-together and bring in the masses to sort it out. This site is a jumping off point but you need to take it further. Don’t be surprised if REA will send it’s people in on your discussions but the very fact that you have got past step 1 of raising the issue and are addressing it, will surprise them.

    How do I know? I know how they think (read between the lines here). They do read these blogs. The feedback I will give you is that they know as agents that you raise alot of concerns about them. In fact, some of their ideas come from you. They also know that as soon as a hot new topic comes on board, you all go off in that direction and they are free to breathe again. In fact, a few of the names in this blog are probably “undercover agents” of REA who give a flip side view just to put you all in a muddle and get you all emotional. I know you know this already so no need to comment. For those of you who are legitimate………

    Here’s my advice, show them that you can stick with one issue and see it through. It will show that you can take an issue through to conclusion. The local State bodies need to come together – strength comes in numbers. Go put some heat on the heads of your bodies. All of you need to believe that REA could see it’s day. I fully believe it will. In fact, I have an idea on how that can happen but would never put it here because REA are very strategic. You need the element of surprise because in my view, you are dealing with a nacissistic organisation and as agents who speak openly here you are what is known as “narcissistic supply”. Take a look at this video. It speaks of an individual but can be attributed to an organisation . Sam Vaknin is a master because he is one himself and openly admits it. When you know what you are dealing with you can become strategic. Just know one thing, the narcissist does not change and will not change for you. Any change is “perceived” or “surface” and appears significant but is not. So if REA “give a little”, I would be suspicious of their motives. It’s terribly important that you take the opportunity to educate yourselves at this moment so take time out to have a look at the video. All this guys videos are good because he comes from his cold heart and tells the truth. An organisation that has lost it’s soul is often narcissistic. It’s all about money and not alot else. I can tell you are caring, feeling people who love your craft but you need to take the emotion out of it because REA think strategically, not emotionally. Separate……. and play them at their own game.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 12:19 pm 0Likes

    Also, if you read through the REA T & C, they state:


    For the purposes of this section titled Contributions,

  • Bill Burdin
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 12:20 pm 0Likes

    PaulD, I’m with you. What would be beneficial to the industry is if state valuers opened up the public data via API’s and stop the practice of creating monopolies for a few organisations that can afford to pay $80k+ per year for data from a particular state.

    Why not open up the data to developers who would create neat reporting applications. Those applications would be layered with different types of data that is already in public databases. I think we would see some pretty awesome applications created.

  • Sal Espro
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 12:37 pm 0Likes

    Like it Bill (and PaulID)
    Unfortunately do’t like our chances with the Valuers being jut so old and fuddy duddy. Could they make a dollar out of it perhaps? 🙂

  • Bill Burdin
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 12:41 pm 0Likes

    Sal, if Facebook posts can bring down dictators, surely enough noise on a humble blog like this may change a paradigm or too.

    I encourage authors to start a discussion on this very topic.

  • Sal Espro
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 2:23 pm 0Likes

    Unfortunately, Bill, I think ‘Peg’ may be right. i.e. We all talk about this stuff but when another topic is introduced on this blog we head-off over there and the stuff we wanted to change just keeps keeping on. Perhaps someone does need to start a Facebook fan page for something like, ‘Real Estate Agents Unite’.

  • Peg
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 3:20 pm 0Likes

    Ok, so can you all put a big fat $0 as the sale price or leave it blank when you go into the backend of the REA site to update it as “sold”? Don’t even entertain a figure even if they promise to “hide” it. You seem to think they are using the information so don’t provide it. That’s a starting point.

    Back to my point around doing this strategically. Every organisation has a personality and a character. The personality is the way they project to the outside world (perceptions). Character is more around how a person operates i.e. actual actions. Is the personality and the character consistent? Do they match? Are they congruent? Let’s go back to personality. REA are probably seen as young, hip, fun, forward thinking, listeners (their front line staff do listen to you and most of them do care about you). Now let’s go back to character. Do their actions match their personality? When you meet their leaders do they concede when they are wrong? Do they ever concede? More importantly, do they publicly concede? Even more importantly, do they make changes to show and demonstrate that they are listening. The ultimate test are changes which don’t line their pockets to try and keep you happy. A great example would be when REA held off rate increases due to GFC. I bet that softened all of your hearts. Exactly as it was meant to do. Since then, what has happened? Rate increase after rate increase after rate increase. If you want to understand how REA operates start asking questions of your Consultants around their relationships with their line and national managers. Ask them how many times they have made commission in the past six months. Ask them the last time their feedback was actually implemented into something meaningful. Does their line manager take feedback up the line and push through the barriers or is it top down? Consultants can’t hide their misery. If they are not being paid they will tell you. VIC consultants are doing ok. After all, they sit under the heirachial nose so let’s not ruffle feathers. SA are also doing well but then, it’s not a big team so at least it’s a good news story – clever strategy. As for the rest, start asking questions. Word on the floor is that targets are through the roof in an effort to become a 400m business by 2013. Who knows if that’s true but your Consultants will tell you if they are not making much. Are the top performers leaving? The CEO of course, has hit all his KPIs and did very well financially. That’s public information. So does the personality fit with the character? Food for thought.

  • Peg
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 3:51 pm 0Likes

    It’s the character that runs the organisation – don’t be fooled by the personality. Also, don’t let the good front line staff who do have pure intentions for the best part, fool you into thinking that the character is the same.

    Stick with the character on all issues. What are the demonstrable actions we have witnessed to date? Therein lie your answers. Forget the hype and fuzzy feel good stuff and look at the core of what you know you are experiencing. The facts! Then, decide what is within your sphere of control, put some focused energy behind it and stay on track. You will shock yourselves with how much leverage you actually have. Believe you can win.

  • Vic
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 4:02 pm 0Likes

    http;// – this is what a Canadian realtor is trying to champion. Is someone prepared to go the hard yards to get started. Get your own portal, control the listings,eliminate the privacy issues, change viewer behaviour, make squillions through advertisers and get rid of the rest of that which helped you make sales in the good times.
    Good luck with it– it just wont happen.

  • Vic
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 4:03 pm 0Likes
  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 4:43 pm 0Likes

    Bill, the Valuers (State and otherwise) use PDOL (REIV product), Pricefinder, APM, RP Data – usually all at once to compile the best valuation.

    They do not have their own data product not the capability to collect it or the capability to cross reference the data with the Valuer General (VG) data once it becomes available. They rely on places like REIV to collect and compile the data for them.

    The Land Titles Office is in the same boat

  • Peg
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 4:54 pm 0Likes

    Vic, it’s a start but you are right. Way too hard and too big a project for now. You need small wins and you need to chip away. I would seriously think about getting the contract changed. Surely, someone in the real estate industry who is on this site, has a legal friend who can provide some free advice. Imagine the revenue REA would lose if the contract was changed? Imagine the inconvenience to REA of having to re-send out all your contracts for re-signing due to a breach? And what about the customer? Do you care enough about your customers? I’m sure you do.

    Remember the character. What does the character of the organisation care about? Is it “revenue”? The gain point is also the pain point. What’s in your sphere of control? You can put a $0 in there, maybe put nothing at all. Ultimately though, the vendor can force REAs “change of heart” because they can insist on privacy. It’s all about the contract.

    Once you get one win on REA, others will follow and they will be more careful. At the moment, do you think REA think you will give up and go away? I would hedge a bet “yes”. Seriously, someone has to be friends with the head of REIV – get some heat on it. REIWA is also strong. Someone send the link from this blog to people who can at least investigate whether you have a case. Be quick with it. You have the benefit of momentum. Start tweeting this out to your friends. Get your vendors to write to REA and say that they do not wish the information to be published and insist that they take it down. Have a pre-set form that you get your vendors to sign and then send it in AFTER REA has published the information. Imagine if REA had to invidually go in and take down the information. How painful! You could force them to do it if you are strategic. Set up that Facebook page and use social media to your advantage. Send this link to everyone in your real estate circle and BEG them to weigh in on the discussion on this site. Send a clear message. When is the next real estate conference for REIV and such bodies? Make it a topic of discussion. Talk about the appropriate ways the information should be used. Then, ask REIV and the like to follow through on their contracts. If this is a breach, surely they too are investigating it?

    If it’s a lost battle after you have the facts, move on. Another player will come in. That’s for sure. The tides always turn and it’s much harder to be number 1 than the close follower.

  • Peg
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 4:57 pm 0Likes

    Tatiana, that’s a great piece of research. And yes, you don’t want to wait for data and REA know that. So how about this – why don’t you change the tide and find a way to make REA pay for the information. If they want it, they can pay you for it. They have no other way of getting it quickly. You are their source. Make REA pay for it! Reverse the tide.

  • Bill Burdin
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 5:28 pm 0Likes

    Maybe I referred to the wrong department, I referred to valuers and probably meant land titles, We licence ACT data from ACTPLA and get sold prices mid month for the previous month. So some data is only around 2 weeks old.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 5:30 pm 0Likes

    Bless you Peg – I like you – 🙂

    No point making them pay for it, ultimately the Privacy Act is the Privacy Act; it exists for a reason and should be respected.

    Interestingly enough, not even Agents are technically allowed to cold call vendors.

    Reverse directories/ownership details in real estate exist, however RP Data, APM etc all have a clause saying: this is not to be used for cold calling.

    Most names in the reverse directories also have red asterisks

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 5:41 pm 0Likes

    Hi again Bill, this is where they compile the data you are receiving:

    Read the section: Authorised property sales information resellers

    Usually the top supplier is their prefered source, in this case (PDOL) which is the REIV/NSW product.

    I hope you are reporting your sales there! -:)

    Trust me – all Government, Councils, Valuers, Land Surveyers and related industries use the same sources. The official licenced ones.

  • Vic
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 5:43 pm 0Likes


    There is a feedback form on REA site that agents can give feedback- if the issue is sound enough why not let them know this way?
    Then do the same with Domain, REIV and whoever else you think is misusing the vendor’s data.

  • Peg
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 5:47 pm 0Likes

    Thank you Tatiana:) Between a rock and a hard place, I would say. As long as you can get your data for a sale somewhere else, don’t give it to REA. Perhaps you can answer a question for me. If you go into the back end of the site, can you put $0 as the sale price or are you obligated to put the actual sale price?

    If REA won’t listen to you, start adding some zeros to each sale price and flaw their data. Then, buy your data elsewhere. No one will want REAs data and it will become meaningless and not useful. Garbage in, garbage out.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 6:15 pm 0Likes

    You have to add a price, however it mostly comes from the XML data feed (portal push of the listings from the agents website to the portals).

    So the problem does not lie with REA backend, but in agent

  • Peg
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 6:16 pm 0Likes

    There is another competitor that is likely to come into the market. The approach is fresh and new. This is not their core industry. In fact, it has bugger all to do with their core industry. They are playing because they can. They are financial too and internet geniuses. They are going to play for fun. Yes, they want to make money but “no” it’s not all about the real estate portal. They will leverage the real estate portal because of the potential traffic they can gain for their other businesses.

    It’s going to be awhile before they come on the scene but when they do, watch out! REA who? This brand has the potential to kick REA off the Internet planet and will probably see you all dump your subscriptions in a heartbeat so that you can be a part of it.

    It won’t come out of NSW or VIC. It will come out of another state. It has the potential to gain loyalty overnight but it needs to be executed very carefully.

    In the meantime, keep fighting for what you believe in. You have that right. You need to believe in yourselves. That’s half the fight. That you are worthy of better treatment. Understand the character of the organisation you are taking on. Forget about the so called “mufty fluffty” things the organisation does to show it’s humanitarian side and look at how it conducts itself day by day and treats you on the things that matter.

    You will remember this when it arrives. But you will need to be patient.

  • Ryan O'Grady
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 9:55 pm 0Likes

    Peg, thanks for your interesting comments around this topic. Yes, readers please feel free to follow Peg’s advice and spread a link to this post around your networks (B2 would love the exposure).

    I’d be very surprised if there are any xml loaders out there who do not already have a check box (or similar) “Display Sold Price” in the section where agents mark a property as sold and add the price. This is included in the REAXML and from my personal experience if this is not reflected on REA (or other portals they advertise on) then agents become frustrated.

    I think REA should be free to showcase sold properties and they should be able to share this info with other companies (like they do). As long as the data which is to be displayed is the same as what the agent has requested.

    There is another concern here which has not yet been addressed and that is in relation to the accuracy of the data. Because this data has not been cross referenced with the VG data, how do we know an agent hasn’t over stated the selling price? This could result in variations in median prices between sold data providers resulting in further confusion for vendors.

    Bill, I like the way you think. Do what google does and open up the data through an API to the web development community. Suddenly we’ll see some excellent apps developed.

  • Ryan O'Grady
    Posted May 17, 2011 at 9:57 pm 0Likes

    Cmon Peg, give us a little bit more about this revolutionary new competitor?

  • Peg
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 1:20 am 0Likes

    I would like to Ryan. It just wouldn’t be smart on my behalf. Besides, there is alot to do. Let REA innovate away, we say. This concept is simple in idea but still requires work to put together. Once it lands, it won’t matter what REA are doing at the time, I suspect.

    We are working at “sanding the floor and painting the fence” with the lessons from our Mr Miyagi. We are not so arrogant to think we are perfect but we are willing to listen and learn the lessons from our Mr Miyagi who is also not arrogant and continues to listen and learn in business.

    Here’s some inspiration for all of you. It’s about the journey required to be a success. You can’t build a house in midair, it needs a foundation.

    It’s about needing time. We are just getting started so REA will live another day. In the meantime, you all have choices. As Real Estate Agents you can influence your vendors behaviour by doing online presentations using sites such as REIV and REIWA instead of . How many real estate agents are out there? How many presentations are they doing on any one given day? Multiply that by 365 days a year. How many searches can you take away from REA and direct to a company that cares about you. If asked “why not REA”, be honest. If the behaviours of REA are perceived as unethical by you, you are within your rights to communicate that to the very person who surfs the sites and signs a contract for sale with you. Use social media such as Facebook to get your points across. Write to REA about your concerns. Tell REA you will be publishing their answer. If they don’t respond with a fair answer or ignore your request, discuss it in social media. Jump on REAs Facebook page where customer’s go – voice your dissatisfaction – your customers and their advocates will get food for thought. If you keep it alive, it becomes a culture and a norm. Eventually, it will take hold, grow legs and your message will get through. You may even see them change or yield on certain decisions.

    Just don’t ever give up.

  • Vic
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 6:08 am 0Likes

    I am amazed at the direction this thread is taking. Ryan post is about preserving the confidentiality (and to a lesser degree of the accuracy)of a vendors “sold” price. However, the price is publicly available following settlements anyway. The issue therefore is whether that which is posted to REA via sales reports is in fact accurate..that is, whether the agent reports it accurately or not.

    Now to make the issue of accuracy work against REA, there are spruikers like Peg and Tatiana who are suggesting that the data provided by agents to REA should be deliberately sabotaged. Why?

    In Tatiana’s case at least she has been transparent and we all know from previous posts that she has an affinity with everything REIV/Review. We know where she is coming from and she doesn’t try to hide it.
    However, Peg is another kettle of fish. We don’t know who she is (if she is a she at all) .
    Peg comes on here very articulately and spruiks a line directly from “leadership think tanks” which makes everyone all warm and fuzzy, nodding their heads about the revelations on personality and character of corporations. Then she build from there and by her final post it becomes clearer. Obviously a former REA employee, and probably embittered at that, Peg wants every one to show incorrect data in their reporting to REA.
    Then she announces that something “big” and revolutionary is underway: that all agents should do as she says to soften up REA ahead of this revolutionary launch. “Be patient” she says.
    Peg is anonymous and doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously. Particularly as her motivations do not appear to be in the best interests of those she is trying to stir up.

    Peg show yourself, give us your motivations and stop working a strategy of fear and sabotage behind anonymity, and you will be taken seriously.

    Bill, I agree that great aps from the only accurate source would be good for the industry overall. A recent discussion on APAC regarding the privacy issue gave me hope that government aquired data will be heading in this direction.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 10:50 am 0Likes

    Vic, to suggest that I am pro REIV/REview is incorrect. Our history has been colourful to say the least and far from amicable at times, this is no secret at all.

    I would like to suggest that I am and always have been pro industry. If you do not understand the importance of the sold data, that is another issue.

    As an independent consultant, I try to keep my views balanced as I receive no compensation either way. I also feel yours may be flawed as you have your agenda of building a real estate portal and find REView annoying.

    But please, make no mistake as to the relevancy of REView.

    Dynamic elements such as images, floor plans, property descriptions, virtual tours get uploaded from there into

    The relevancy of REView is not just to bring buyers to properties, but more importantly to collate and collect sold data in the most dynamic and detailed form possible.

    It is so detailed and accurate, that in fact valuers, councils, Government departments, banks and land surveyors use it. Each record is manually checked individually before it is processed and collated.

    There are guidelines implemented on what you can and cannot use i.e. agency branded floor plans cannot be used as they are not able to be used by agents moving forward in their comparative sales reports if they have another agents branding hence rendering the record void.

    The meticulous process that goes on behind the scenes to prepare a sales record to be entered into is astonishing to say the least. It also requires a call centre, a team with attention to detail, technical support.

    Yet the institutes do this for their members at a very small cost because they understand that if agents try to complete a comparative sales report for a vendor without these dynamic elements – all you have is an address and some numbers.

    The portal game is totally irrelevant in this case and the threat to the industry is not coming from where the buyers go. The industry gave away its buyers to the media companies and portals a long time ago.
    A now you have to pay the media companies so that they view YOUR properties on their portals.

    The threat to the industry is in giving away its sold data and access to its vendors

  • peg
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 10:58 am 0Likes

    Vic, I can absolutely understand why you feel this way about what I have been saying. On reflection, I would not talk about sabotaging data. You are right. It’s not fair. The discussion should have stayed more on the line of what is in your control. I too suffer from the human condition where the mind goes off in the wrong manner. I apologise. Let’s not forget that REA and others have a responsibility to play the game fair. If you feel forced into something due to circumstance it screams of control. I take a balanced view that if the information is worthwhile, then it’s worth paying for. If REA can get it to market quicker than others then that is their strength. If you are unhappy about paying the price for it, you need to think strategically. The sphere of influence you have is voting with your feet and where your focus and direction goes. You can also utilise social media to your advantage. Your can communicate directly with REA too. Of course, REA is the site right now but who says that will be true in one year’s time. I hold no grudges towards REA as a site. I do question the character and personality. It’s such a interesting study. Look to great companies and you will see that they are aligned. Do I know for a fact there is a difference? Yes, I do. They are sometimes very different. Does that come from being there? Yes, it does. Am I bitter? No, I am not bitter. I see an opportunity to drive for change by looking for the achilles heel and keeping a temperature check on Agent sentiment. All Agents are very open emotionally on the site. It’s good. It gives my team a true understanding of the profile of a real estate agent and how best to keep you happy while striking a balance with the business bottom line. If a company is seen to be fair and reasonable to it’s best ability, then it has a chance of taking the number one position. For now, I need to remain confidential. It’s essential. I will be checking in on this blog frequently and won’t make further comments for now but will be observing the way you interract. It gives so many clues as to what is important and if nothing else, this thread has tipped this as a hot issue. My comments have clearly shown that people on this thread are ready for change and want to embrace it. I have been on this site and one other for the past 12 months without any comment. I weighed in because I think you have a chance of influencing your outcome here if you stay true to your focus. The “giving up” and “out of our control” style comments need to stop if you want true and lasting change. Of course, if you explore an issue and concede it really it not an issue, then that’s fine too. Confidentiality is an issue in the world we live in. So, is this thread truly about confidentiality? Or is it really that you feel controlled and forced by REA to play ball and it smells of injustice? Or is it about not wanting to pay for the information at all? Do you see REA as the giant who sucks your wallets dry? Is that really the issue here? Everyone comes from their own perspective and drilling down to the core issue is critical. So what is the core issue? My take is that you respect REAs ability to get the information to market – you need it but you don’t want to pay for it as you supplied the information. Your strategy is to look for the confidentiality clause in the contract which is smart. Your challenge is that you will probably shoot yourselves in the foot if you win. The data will be slower to market unless a body like RP Data delivers near on the timelines of REA – in which case, you should focus on getting the contract explored professionally and stick with it through to conclusion.

    “One of the best ways to cultivate a possibility mind-set is to prompt yourself to dream one size bigger than you normally do”. It’s taken from a great book by John C Maxwell titled “Thinking for Change”. I do dream one size bigger, maybe a couple more sizes bigger. It would be strategic suicide for me to expose myself here. I am not a real estate agent. I am working on a business which is strategic and if everyone’s cup can get a little fuller than surely that’s a good thing.

    This is my last post because I understand you want transparency and I can’t give that to you. I will be watching closely to see whether one of you sees this issue through to the end. If I were to hedge my bets I would say that Tatiana is the most likely to explore this deeply to conclusion so giver her your support if she waves the flag. Only one of you should take ownership, the others need to support, encourage and check in and keep the language positive and encouraging.

  • Vic
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 11:26 am 0Likes

    Nearly 20 years doing valuations for a major bank qualifies me for the title of “understanding the value of sold data”. And your post above only confirms to readers that you have a leaning towards REIV and Review. So what’s so bad about admitting it?

    My only gripe about Review is that it refuses to allow it’s agents to feed to other portals. The ONLY gripe. As I have alluded to before, if review is a marketing arm of REIV, why doesn’t it act in the best interests of their agent members and allow them to choose who they send their listings to.

    Agents are not stupid they will do their own value propositions regarding REA and what they should or shouldn’t give to them. And if they have gripes they can flood the REA Feedback form with comment or stop their REA subscription.

    To me, putting aside the question of sold data, REA are definitely having to come up with something that gives them added value for their enterprise. They have reached saturation point in terms of agent membership, they can see the writing on the wall with the market downturn and can read as well as anyone that the market will continue to decline over the next few years. Agencies will close or be merged and this means that they see the pressures on them in relying on subscriptions. They are embarking on their changes as all corporations do – weighing up a proper balance between all stakeholders- Employees, clients and shareholders (not necessarily in that order)

    Whether you believe that REA needs a lesson is your opinion only- Agents, as individuals and as franchise groups, will decide if they get value from REA. And I don’t think that you will get them, as an industry, getting behind a campaign to “stuff up” their sold data inputs.

    Luv ya Tatiana.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 1:05 pm 0Likes

    LOL!!!! Right back at ya Vic!:)

    Well, you never know do you, miracles might just happen -:)

    I hear you about your valuer past life, let me rephrase then – may not understand the sold data collection process (which most people probably don

  • Bill Burdin
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 1:18 pm 0Likes


    I’m having a senior moment. Can you elaborate on your statement:

    contact the vendor to sell them a Premier Property at $2 K before the property is even listed


  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 1:47 pm 0Likes

    Premier Property is REA

  • Andy Del Vecchio
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 1:50 pm 0Likes

    Oh My God !

    did we just have a visit from the New Messiah…Oh Great Anonomous Peg !

    will you come back down so we can sacrifice you on a sales sign and worship your words for ever more.

    we have been blessed, thankyou, I have your effigy on my dashboard and will await your second coming !


  • Andy Del Vecchio
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 2:01 pm 0Likes

    ; )

    that was my first reaction to that last post, from deep within my subconscious.

    Surely when you sell a property, the government collects stamp duty which is based on a calculation of a percentage of the sales or transfer price…

    Which means they have a record of all transactions between its constituents who owns the government in the first place…

    so in effect you and me own the data and we should be able to see it when ever we want. Its ours.

    If it is private then maybe governments shouldn’t be collecting it for us ?

    Because they have then no right to know the prices also and neither do we.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 2:15 pm 0Likes

    Andy, stamp duty in VIC is paid upon settlement. Could be 30, 60, 90 or even 120 days after the sale. It is then, upon settlement, entered in to the Goverment (Valuer General) system.

    So by the time it comes out the other end and is avaialbe for everyone to see, it is in fact too old and no longer relevant.

    This is unusable data for a real estate agent to base appraisals on as it is not in real time. Reporting sold data in a timely manner, on a weekly basis, is really important for correct price estimates for all agents.

    The Governemt data you are refering to – yes, you can see this data whenever you want, but its actually too old even for the general public and of no real value.

    The REA issue are not in the historicals, its in the real time data.

  • Ryan O'Grady
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 2:24 pm 0Likes

    Andy, we all pay income taxes and the government knows how much each of us earn. Yet, individuals income is not made publicly available, why should the price of the properties they owned be any different.

  • vic Del Vecchio
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 2:26 pm 0Likes

    Peg the Messiah- I think is Lewis Nelson from Canada.

  • Andy Del Vecchio
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 2:43 pm 0Likes

    Thanks Tatiana i understand now : )

    and you’re probably right Ryan…

    But..then If thats the case, are you suggesting the government has no right in giving the sales data away at all? even if its historical?

    the whole thing to me says

    we either have Complete Transperacy in all things
    we have secrets and lies with a little truth here and there to feel good. (Oh yeah and if you have the money, you get whatever and withhold whatever you want)

  • Bill Burdin
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 2:52 pm 0Likes

    “Andy, stamp duty in VIC is paid upon settlement. Could be 30, 60, 90 or even 120 days after the sale. It is then, upon settlement, entered in to the Goverment (Valuer General) system.”

    Maybe dated data that is accurate is better than misrepresented recent data.

    Recent data may give the agent a nice warm feeling, but for the client it’s like weeing in a wetsuit, if it is inaccurate it will present a nice warm feeling for a little while but the suit will go cold real quick.

    “Reporting sold data in a timely manner, on a weekly basis, is really important for correct price estimates for all agents.”

    Who verifies that this data is accurate and the correct prices are reported?

    Or maybe no one cares that it is?

    Do many potential clients who the data is being presented to every ask: “Is the sold price data you are using in the appraisal accurate?”

    Probably that question never gets asked.

    I would think that a much more effective appraisal would contain two sets of data.

    1. Recent data collected to the best of the agents ability.
    2. The latest accurate sold prices available and provided by government agencies. (which should be made available to everyone, not just parties who can afford the restrictive prices being charged)

  • PaulD
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 2:59 pm 0Likes

    Interesting comments.
    I guess all you agents out there have seen your REA questionaire regarding REA setting up virtual websites for individual offices, and a whole lot of other interesting questions about themselves. When you answer them – you need to be brutally honest. If you don’t like it — say so. They talk about data, and about what constitutes a good website etc.etc. It will be interesting to see if any of it materialises. As far as Review goes, it is not an industry site. It is owned by a number of industry identities, who could just as easily sell the whole thing off. If that’s not the case – someone clear it up for me please !!!! and describe the ownership structure, if you can. (I’m guessing that I have buckleys of getting a straight answer there)

  • Bill Burdin
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 3:14 pm 0Likes

    Actually as I’ve learned from bitter experience a property isn’t sold until settlement occurs and stamp duty has been paid.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 3:26 pm 0Likes

    We are going around in circles.

    “Dynamic elements such as images, floor plans, property descriptions, virtual tours get uploaded from REV into

    The relevancy of REView is not just to bring buyers to properties, but more importantly to collate and collect sold data in the most dynamic and detailed form possible.

    It is so detailed and accurate, that in fact valuers, councils, Government departments, banks and land surveyors use it. Each record is manually checked individually before it is processed and collated.

    There are guidelines implemented on what you can and cannot use i.e. agency branded floor plans cannot be used as they are not able to be used by agents moving forward in their comparative sales reports if they have another agents branding hence rendering the record void. The data needs to remain branding neutral.

    The meticulous process that goes on behind the scenes to prepare a sales record to be entered into is astonishing to say the least. It also requires a call centre, a team with attention to detail, technical support.

    Yet the institutes do this for their members at a very small cost because they understand that if agents try to complete a comparative sales report for a vendor without these dynamic elements

  • Bill Burdin
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 3:44 pm 0Likes

    From what I understand propertydata can provide sold prices of homes sold a few days ago. (Accepted)

    A few weeks or months later government release the actual sold price that stamp duty was paid on.

    Are there any statistics available that show any difference (if at all) between the two?

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 3:54 pm 0Likes

    Funnily enough, the Valuer General is mostly were the error lies in many cases due to their own manual imput processes.

    You see things like $1350 as the sold results instead of $1350 000 or $45# 000 instead of $450 000 – human error stuff.

  • Vic
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 4:04 pm 0Likes

    There you go again Tatiana- independent or not, you are spruiking for REIV/review- and didn’t you once say REIV owns 75% of Review (just recently).
    Or did my ears fail me? 🙂 🙂 🙂 – then someone from REIV told me it was bid please?

    Just a few days ago I was told that REA had given a FSBO site some extra grace on their site. Could this whole sold data thing/vendor interaction with REA be about them hedging their bets with the growing FSOB market????

  • RMac
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 4:10 pm 0Likes

    I’m sure you’ve all seen that hoax email “Stop buying fuel for one day”.

    Perhaps you could employ the same principal – Don’t send your data to REA for one day… then see what happens…

    Subscription prices are only going one way –

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 4:20 pm 0Likes

    Again, seriously, I

  • Vic
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 4:46 pm 0Likes

    I am not anti REIV, I am not anti Review. It doesn’t cloud my opinion in this debate.

    I countered your comments re encouraging agents to input sold data to REA with $1 instead of the real sold price and your close affiliation to REIA/Review, which in my view makes it hard to to be independent minded, IMHO

    I aplogize if this has upset you.

    As I mentioned before, Ryan has brought up a real issue here and as it affects agents, I have not seen an agent respond. It obviously is not a big issue to them. And if it were they have legitimate avenues to follow to bring this a head. Give REA the feedback or dont renew the subscription. That’s the way private enterprise works.

  • Bill Burdin
    Posted May 18, 2011 at 5:04 pm 0Likes

    So does anyone know of any published statistics available that show any difference (if at all) between the two?

  • Sal Espro
    Posted May 19, 2011 at 9:08 am 0Likes

    Now I’m concerned. Who owns the other 10-25% of REView? Who is on its Board? How much does it make each year? Where does the money go?

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 19, 2011 at 9:54 am 0Likes

    Seriously, who cares? It seems only a few on B2 even worry about this. What does this 10% or so ownership change? Yet it seems to be the only thing that is ever question.

    One thing I do know is the REIV has systematically been buying out all their shareholders for years because of this carry on that is beyond laughable. In effect, these shares have been worth close to $0 for over a decade.

    Is this the only stumbling block you see that some agents out there might possibly be receiving

  • PaulD
    Posted May 19, 2011 at 11:38 am 0Likes

    Tatiana, – a bit manic this morning. Do you understand the difference between a public company and an unlisted private company? Because comparing them is like comparing apples and bananas. I think you are missing the trees for the forest.

  • Vic
    Posted May 19, 2011 at 12:18 pm 0Likes

    If you can’t see the forest for the trees- maybe it’s because there is no forest 🙂

    Tatiana, you don’t have to feel the need to answer SALE PRO’s question. Maybe Enzo Raimondo can do that and by doing so may bring some finality to the question- and even get brownie points for it. I would not like to throw my lot into any company, private or public, unless I knew its structure.

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 19, 2011 at 12:32 pm 0Likes

    LOL! True, true. I couldn’t anyway, I don’t know the details.

    Interestingly though, no one had a problem with Ray White or McGrath being a mjor shareholder in REA for years?

    Anyhoo, I’m out – getting all my work finalised before for AREC. Be well everyone!-:)

  • Sal Espro
    Posted May 19, 2011 at 12:54 pm 0Likes

    As PaulD says, there is a big difference between an ASX Co. and one funded by agents both through their REI membership and their REView subs. Why is the 10-25% REView ownership kept secret?
    (Tatiana, your vested interest in keeping on the good side of REView and its major shareholder REIV for consulting work in the agency industry is embarrassing! What a rant!)

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 19, 2011 at 1:14 pm 0Likes

    LOL! Yes, ranted on this thread I have, I am totally aware of it as it is an issue that is extremely important to me.

    However, I have never made a consutling cent from REView, REIV or any of their associated companies.

    In fact, years of bad blood between us is a matter of public record. In VIC your statement would be met with great amusement, as I am sure it would be from Enzo himself.

    My opinions are mine and mine alone and are certainly not $$ driven.

    In the spirit of protecting the real time sold data and continued access to potential vendors, you need to impartially pick a side that knows how to handle it, collect it, protect it, collate it, verify it and put personal feelings aside for what I feel is an issue for greater and long term good of the Industry.

    In VIC, in my opinion, that would be REIV. It most certainly is not REA and that is what this thread is about. I stand by that 100%

  • Tatiana Mijalica
    Posted May 20, 2011 at 7:13 pm 0Likes

    OK, so quick update.

    According to the Privacy Commissioner, the Agent is the one breaching Privacy. Even though the sold price/undisclosed sale is contained in the XML data feed, it appears that the Agent sending the data in the first place is at fault.

    According to the Privacy Commissioner, the Agent is not exercising duty of care with confidential information i.e. undisclosed sales. So if a vendor was to find out that their undisclosed sale was in fact revealed in Ozhomevalue/Homeguru

  • Vic
    Posted May 21, 2011 at 1:39 pm 0Likes

    Not really breaking news. The privacy conditions always covered this aspect. However, it is overcome by the vendor expressly signing an agreement to acknowledge how, why and where their information can be used.
    So looking at the REIV sample agreement (posted by Tatiana earlier in this thread) if the vendor signs this document with the agent, sold data can be distributed to REIV and Review for use, amongst other things “, for the general public”. The only thing then incumbent on the agent is to ensure that they report the sold data accurately.

    So now, in Victoria, we have the data in the public domain and is no longer PRIVATE. Logic then tells me that if it is no longer PRIVATE, then the agent can also give the data to REA or to whomever they feel they want to, on the proviso that it is accurately given.

    Do the other States have their exclusive agent agreements (REI recommended) with clauses that give the agent the right to give the sold data to their state REIs? If so then the same logic would apply and REA and any other Portal can freely publish the sold data without fear of being sued. Only the agent is at risk if the data is inaccurate.

    A legal opnion would be handy here please.

  • Ryan O'Grady
    Posted May 23, 2011 at 8:47 am 0Likes

    In that case REA should remove the field in their XML indicating whether to Display the Sold Price. This way agents can make the decision as to whether to send the price through their software provider.

  • snoop
    Posted June 2, 2011 at 4:28 am 0Likes

    I stil dont get this debate.
    Sold data creates industry transparency.
    State Govts legislate you must provide a vendor with a formal comparative market analysis document?
    Dont you want this to be as right and up to date as possible as professionals?
    Who collects it?,lets face it commerical businesses do this best.
    Valuer General orgs are tax collectors.
    So that leaves the data companies.
    Rea clearly collects this data and from my understanding will reate analytics to help agents manage their business.
    As for REIV they are out in the merchant banking world trying to do an On the House!!!
    Forget the for Members thing its just Another commercial business!!

  • Vic
    Posted June 2, 2011 at 11:32 am 0Likes

    Got to agree with you snoop. So in summary- let REA have the data, Agents input it correctly, so that they don’t get sued, REA gives the summarized data to agents free of charge, REA gives it to vendors and public for a cost, everyones happy and we don’t have a problem.

  • Loyld K
    Posted April 13, 2012 at 9:15 am 0Likes

    What is wrong with that is a whole host of things.

    Importantly, transference to new owner.

    That and any consent is not ongoing, and no longer applies. New owner is the owner.

    And at law is able to have all data privacy and more protected.

    If not continuing breaches occur, incurring costly sums and penalties for data providers — and a la ‘scum ware’ sites that feed off the main portals with and without their permission, especially.

  • not happy
    Posted January 9, 2013 at 5:47 pm 0Likes

    Just come across this whilst looking for my legal right about this exact situation!
    Myself (vendor) and the new owners agreed and requested to the agents that the sale details be kept private and not to disclose any information to the public or any other interested parties.
    This was agreed upon before signing contract and in front of 3 agents (2 directors) and 8 witnesses.
    Well of course the very next day all info regarding our private sale was in all major newspapers and splashed across the net!
    After contacting agents they kindly passed the buck and directed me to blame the reiv!
    Reiv tell me they can only display info regarding sales if the agents disclose it.
    Then back to the agents- They finally apologize for their mistake and said all info will be retrieved!
    4 weeks later its still out there for everyone to see….
    Fair trading and reiv are not much help “noted it down” was the best they could do!!

    I now have the new owners hounding me to fix the situation and im not to keen on going through a drawn out court proceeding over this matter so im wondering if anyone has any ideas ??

Leave a comment