Tony Brazier
The Press - Wednesday 7 July 2010
Culture of Complaint
Isn't there a perverse sense of pleasure in looking across the fence of other countries like America and giggling at the seemingly ridiculous rulings that their courts sometimes hand down. The latest I heard was a successful claim for a substantial sum awarded to a woman who tripped over a toddler throwing a tantrum at a department store. This is not too outlandish until you find out that the toddler was her own.
Every person has a right to complain about the goods and services they receive. In fact most good business owners would prefer that you complain to them directly than to all and sundry that you may meet. It is estimated that whether you receive good service or bad you will tell, or influence, 265 other people about that service in your future.
This is why real estate licensees/agents are so proud to announce that they have so much 'repeat business'. You will never really know when someone is talking negatively about you as quickly as you will know, by referrals, that they are recommending you. In fact it is estimated that 95% of people in the past have preferred not to complain but to just not come back to that provider. This is changing.
Recently a member of the public approached me about whether I felt his complaint about another licensee had any merit. I respected him for this and gave it my best efforts as he did not want to waste his or anyone else's time or resources. All I could do, as it is not my place adjudicate, was to point out where I thought his issues may be of his own making, as per normal real estate procedures, and for the more juicy issues, suggest the parts of the publicly available Client Care Rules that he may hang his hat on.
As a country, I hope we never get to the point of suing people at the drop of a hat for frivolous and vexatious reasons but where there is an opportunity for monetary gain this will always be a temptation for some members of the public. On July 1 the Chairperson of the REAA issued a statement on their website saying "The level of complaints to the Real Estate Agents Authority ... has been significantly higher than anticipated", and that if it continues the Authority will "... review how it will manage the complaints ... in future years".
The REAA have worked tirelessly since well before their November 17, 2009 kick-off, to be able to respond to close to 20,000 contacts over various issues. Several hundred of these have been complaints and/or allegations, and although the exact figures are in the hands of the industry it will suffice for me to say that the number that emerge as a charge of 'Unsatisfactory Conduct', or are forwarded as 'Charges Laid' to the Disciplinary Tribunal are in single figures compared to the hundreds of complaints overall put into the system at the front end. This has always been the case as buying and selling real estate is an emotional ride and at times people do come away feeling aggrieved about the process.
It is all very well to allow a culture of complaint to emerge but a system must be able to either handle the volume or mitigate the numbers. There is no surprise on the faces of the nation's real estate Principals as we have watched patiently to see if the new independent regime with fewer numbers can somehow handle the volumes in a more expeditious way than the old REINZ regime. There is no delight in seeing this process struggle, however it has happened, in my opinion, for two reasons.
Firstly, there are now monetary reasons to complain. Although the Determinations handed down under the REAA are excellent for training the industry in acceptable practice, the penalties are now greater, which may have encouraged even more complaints which, judging by the statistics, have been disregarded or adjudged as "No Further Action" in the majority of cases.
Secondly, the work done by the previous regime with greater numbers, although not independent of the industry, may have been underestimated at the time of an enthusiastic change-over, in my opinion.
For most licensees, the mere fact that someone has made a complaint against them is far worse than most penalties that can be handed down. Whether the complaint is frivolous, vexatious, unwarranted or whether it is adjudged as a gross misconduct, the damage is still the same. The defendant, no matter how innocent, goes into a state of shut-down as his/her defence of their own reputation becomes all encompassing. On 100% commission income this can become crippling until resolved.
Having successfully fought off an unsuccessful complainant tenant for three full years from 2006-2009 I personally built up a huge respect for the process of various Commissions and Tribunals and the thoroughness by which they operate. The REAA will be no different. However it leaves one thinking it is a huge waste of resources and time, not to mention sleep, health and productivity, that one has to go through just to prove one's total innocence.
As the REAA look at a better system for handling industry complaints it could be prudent to include some form of process by which complainants can check to see if their complaint is worthy of the effort and of the stress caused to all parties. This would need to go beyond publishing a few of the "No further action" decisions on the REAA website for the public to learn from and offer an initial level of scrutiny to mitigate the resources presently needed. Who knows, maybe the Principals of the various agencies could be formed into a series of local panels to comment on the likelihood of a complainant's success as I was asked to do unofficially. No, that would look too much like going back to the future.
Footnote:
Tony Brazier has worked in the property industry for 23 years and owns a real estate company selling and managing residential and investment properties.
This columns information is of a general nature only. Readers should seek professional advice before acting upon it.
|
RSS | About Us | Policy
