Advertising Property Without Owner’s Consent – Singapore HDB flat for sale
Facts of Case
An owner of a HDB flat had granted an estate agent exclusive authority to sell his property. The estate agent posted a classified advertisement in the Straits Times. The Respondent saw the advertisement and advertised the property on the Property Guru website without seeking consent from the owner. The owner was aggrieved and complained to CEA. Singapore HDB flat for sale.
Charges
The Respondent was charged for advertising the owner’s HDB flat in breach of paragraph 3.8 of the Practice Guidelines on Ethical Advertising read with paragraph 4(1) and paragraph 4(2)(a) of the Code of Ethics and Professional Client Care (‘First Charge’).
The Respondent was also charged for misleading the owner, of another HDB flat, that there were prospective viewers for such flat contrary to paragraph 7(1) read with paragraph 7(2)(a) of the Code of Ethics and Professional Client Care (‘Second Charge’).
Outcome
The Respondent pleaded guilty to, and was convicted of, the First Charge. The DC imposed a financial penalty of $3,000 upon the Respondent for this charge.
However, the DC considered that the Second Charge was not established by the evidence.
The DC also ordered the Respondent to pay fixed costs of $1,000.
Source: CEA website
Please click here to search for Singapore HDB flat for sale.
