Login
iscover
A New Zealand real estate agent who failed to reveal information that would impact the property, then tried to falsify records to hide her mistake, has lost her real estate licence.
Former Auckland real estate agent Indra Prasad has been found guilty in a High Court appeal decision for serious misconduct and acting disgracefully when she altered documents to cover her mistakes, the The NZ Herald reported.
Kamaljit Singh bought a Goodwood Heights property she had listed at auction in February 2016. He then renovated the home and put it back on the market, and it sold at auction in July that same year.
The sale was not finalised once the purchaser learnt the property would be affected by road upgrades, which would mean it would lose 107 sq m from the front of the property.
Mr Singh laid the complaint against the former Harcourts agent and claimed he only found out about the roadworks plans when he tried to re-sell it.
He also claimed the loss of the sale cost him $NZ160,000, which included $NZ40,000 in renovations.
Ms Prasad appeared before the Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal last year, and was found guilty of misconduct.
However, she told the tribunal that she informed people who visited the open home about the upcoming roadworks after she learnt about them via a neighbour.
She also claimed she told her colleagues at Harcourts Image Realty about the roadworks in sales meetings, but they denied this claim.
Ms Prasad then claimed her colleagues lied as part of a conspiracy against her.
As a result, the tribunal suspended her licence for 18 months and ordered her to take further training.
The case landed in the High Court after Ms Prasad and the Complaints Assessment Committee appealed the decision.
But Justice Timothy Brewer dismissed her appeal.
In the High Court appeal decision, Justice Brewer upheld the earlier findings of her misconduct.
“Of greatest significance is that Ms Prasad maintained her lies,” Justice Brewer said.
“Ms Prasad refuses to accept responsibility for her actions and accordingly demonstrates neither insight nor remorse.”
As a result, instead of suspending her real estate licence, he found it appropriate to cancel it.
“Ms Prasad did not come before the tribunal as a penitent but as a recalcitrant,” he said.
“In my view, the penalty of suspension of licence was imposed in error.
“I order the cancellation of Ms Prasad’s licence.”
