For years, homebuyers in New South Wales have entered the property market armed with figures that bore little honest relationship to what they would ultimately need to pay — a quiet deception baked into the system and only lightly punished. Now the Minns government is proposing to change the calculus, raising fines for underquoting to $110,000 or three times an agent's commission, whichever is greater, and requiring agents to publish transparent price justifications alongside every listing. The reforms, modeled on Victoria's decade-old framework, reflect a growing consensus that markets built
NSW to impose $110,000 fines on real estate agents for underquoting
Agents would have to show their work—and the regulator could name them publicly if they didn't.
Mark
So the core problem here is that agents list a property at, say, $800,000 when they know it'll sell for $950,000. Why would a buyer ever fall for that?
Mimi
Because the listed price is what you see first. You think you've found a bargain. You show up to the open house. Then you're in a bidding war with five other people who all thought the same thing.
Luke
But is underquoting actually widespread, or is this a few bad actors? The source mentions Tesolin's 100 properties, but that's one agent over what time period?
Mimi
Fair point. The source doesn't give us the total number of underquoting cases across NSW or how common it is. We know it's happening enough that the government felt compelled to act, and the industry itself apparently agrees stronger rules are needed.
Mark
The fine goes from $22,000 to $110,000. That's a real jump. Will that actually stop agents from doing it?
Mimi
That's the theory. Right now, if an agent makes $5,000 commission on a sale, a $22,000 fine is a serious hit but maybe survivable. At $110,000, or three times commission—whichever is higher—the math changes. You'd have to be pretty confident you won't get caught.
Luke
Except the source says the government is "consulting" with industry. That usually means the final law could be weaker. And we don't know if NSW Fair Trading actually has the resources to investigate and prosecute these cases at scale.
Mimi
True. Victoria's had these laws since 2016, so there's a model to follow. But whether NSW will enforce it as aggressively is an open question.
Mark
What's the "statement of information" actually going to do?
Mimi
It forces agents to show their work. They have to explain how they arrived at the price using comparable sales and median data. It's harder to justify a low listing price if you have to document your reasoning.
Luke
Assuming agents actually do the work honestly and the regulator checks it. The source doesn't tell us how NSW Fair Trading will verify these statements or what happens if an agent just writes something plausible but misleading.
Mark
So we're waiting to see if this actually changes the market, or if it's just theater?
Mimi
Essentially, yes. The intention is clear. The enforcement is the unknown.
O Pulso
- A practice long illegal but rarely punished — advertising properties far below their expected sale price to trigger bidding wars — has persisted across NSW at a scale that one case alone illustrated starkly: a single Sydney agent allegedly underquoted more than 100 properties.
- The existing $22,000 fine has proven too modest to deter agents in a market where commissions on a single sale can dwarf the penalty, leaving buyers to absorb the cost in wasted time, raised hopes, and distorted expectations.
- The proposed legislation would increase maximum fines five-fold to $110,000, require mandatory price statements with comparable sales data, and give NSW Fair Trading the power to publicly name agents who breach the rules.
- The government is consulting with the property industry before introducing the bill to parliament next year, threading the needle between consumer protection and rules that agents operating honestly can live with.
- With Victoria's 2016 underquoting laws now described as widely accepted after nearly a decade, NSW is betting that what became workable there can be transplanted — and tightened — here.
For years, homebuyers in New South Wales have entered the property market armed with figures that bore little honest relationship to what they would ultimately need to pay — a quiet deception baked into the system and only lightly punished. Now the Minns government is proposing to change the calculus, raising fines for underquoting to $110,000 or three times an agent's commission, whichever is greater, and requiring agents to publish transparent price justifications alongside every listing. The reforms, modeled on Victoria's decade-old framework, reflect a growing consensus that markets built on manufactured urgency and information asymmetry ultimately serve no one well — not buyers, not sellers, and not the long-term credibility of the industry itself.
New South Wales is preparing legislation to sharply increase penalties for real estate underquoting — the widespread practice of advertising properties well below their expected selling price to generate competitive bidding. Under the proposed reforms, fines would rise from $22,000 to $110,000 or three times the agent's commission, whichever is greater, representing a five-fold increase in the maximum penalty.
The Minns Labor government is currently consulting with the property sector ahead of introducing the bill to parliament next year. Minister Anoulack Chanthivong framed the changes as a direct response to consumer frustration, promising reforms that balance buyer protection with practical workability for agents acting in good faith. Underquoting has long been illegal under both federal consumer law and state regulations, yet it has persisted because the tactic works: low advertised prices attract more buyers to open homes and trigger the kind of competitive urgency that drives final sale prices far above what was posted.
Beyond the penalty increase, the reforms would require agents to publish a mandatory price alongside every listing, accompanied by a statement explaining how that figure was reached — including reference to comparable recent sales and the suburb's median price. NSW Fair Trading would also gain expanded powers, including the ability to publicly name agents who breach the rules.
The urgency behind the reforms was sharpened by the case of Sydney agent Joshua Tesolin, whose licence was suspended in August after the Strata and Property Taskforce alleged serious and repeated underquoting across more than 100 residential properties — a scale that exposed just how inadequate existing deterrents had become.
NSW is modeling its approach on Victoria's 2016 underquoting laws, which are now described as widely accepted by that state's real estate industry. The implication is deliberate: if a tougher framework proved workable there over nearly a decade, it can be adapted here. The final legislation will be shaped by ongoing industry consultation and parliamentary debate, but the direction is clear — toward a market where advertised prices mean something, and where the consequences of misleading buyers are serious enough to change behaviour.
New South Wales is moving to crack down on a widespread practice in real estate that has long frustrated buyers: agents advertising properties for significantly less than the expected selling price, then using the artificially low figure to generate a feeding frenzy of competing offers. Under proposed legislation the state government is now drafting, agents caught engaging in this tactic could face fines of $110,000 or more—a five-fold increase from the current $22,000 penalty.
The Minns Labor government has begun consulting with the property sector as it prepares to introduce the new laws to parliament next year. The move comes after years of complaints from consumers and growing recognition, even within the real estate industry itself, that stronger enforcement is needed to restore confidence in the market. Anoulack Chanthivong, the state minister for better regulation and fair trading, framed the reforms as a response to widespread concern. "Our message is that we hear you," he said, describing the package of reforms as an attempt to strike a balance between protecting consumers and ensuring the rules remain workable for agents operating in good faith.
Underquoting has long been technically illegal under federal consumer law, and most Australian states, including NSW, have their own additional regulations meant to discourage it. Yet the practice persists. Agents use it to attract potential buyers to open houses and to trigger competitive bidding that can drive prices well above the advertised figure. The tactic works precisely because it exploits information asymmetry—buyers see a number and assume it reflects reality, only to discover later that the actual selling price bears little resemblance to what was posted.
The proposed penalty increase is substantial, but the government's reforms go further. Under the new framework, agents would be required to list mandatory prices on all listings and to publish what the government calls a "statement of information" alongside each property. This document would explain how the selling price was calculated, including reference to comparable recent sales in the area and the suburb's median price. The intent is to make the valuation process transparent and harder to manipulate. NSW Fair Trading, the state's consumer regulator, would gain expanded powers to take disciplinary action against agents who breach the rules, including the ability to publicly name and shame offenders by publishing details of their violations.
The government is modeling its approach on legislation Victoria passed in 2016, which it describes as now "widely accepted" by the real estate industry in that state. Victoria itself has recently moved to strengthen those laws further, tightening rules around which comparable properties agents can use when determining a home's likely price before auction. The implication is clear: if Victoria's framework has proven workable over nearly a decade, NSW can adopt and adapt it.
The high-profile case of Joshua Tesolin, a Sydney agent, illustrates why the government felt compelled to act. In August, NSW Fair Trading suspended Tesolin's real estate licence pending possible disciplinary action after alleging he had engaged in "serious and repeated" breaches of the law. The regulator said Tesolin had underquoted the selling price of more than 100 residential properties. The Strata and Property Taskforce, established earlier this year specifically to investigate misconduct in the property sector, uncovered the pattern. One agent, over 100 properties—the scale of the alleged misconduct underscored how inadequate existing penalties had become as a deterrent.
The government is also proposing a new standalone offence for agents who fail to meet continuing professional development requirements, another signal that it intends to tighten oversight across the board. The final shape of the legislation will depend on consultation with the property and real estate industries, as well as any amendments proposed by opposition or crossbench members of parliament. But the direction is set: NSW is moving toward a market where the price advertised is the price buyers can reasonably expect to pay, and where agents who mislead face consequences serious enough to change behavior.
Citações Notáveis
Our message is that we hear you. We've developed a package of reforms and are now consulting with the sector to ensure we get the balance right between consumer protection and practical implementation for industry.— Anoulack Chanthivong, NSW Minister for Better Regulation and Fair Trading
Quer a matéria completa?
Leia o original em The Guardian ↗
Politics & Governance