A major New Zealand real estate disciplinary case has seen four licensed real estate professionals found guilty of unsatisfactory conduct after failing to properly verify claims surrounding alleged plumbing replacement work on a residential property.

The case — Complaint:

SOURCE REA:

📄 C59543

has resulted in findings against Property Brokers agents:

👤 Anna Peka
👤 Sandra Pearman
👤 David Klue
👤 Moyra Matson

with the:

⚖️ Real Estate Authority

finding multiple breaches of the:

📘 Real Estate Agents Act 2008
and
📘 Professional Conduct and Client Care Rules 2012.

The case highlights the growing legal and professional risks facing agents around disclosure obligations, due diligence and vendor representations in New Zealand property transactions.

🚨 WHAT THE COMPLAINT WAS ABOUT

The disciplinary findings centred around representations made to buyers concerning:

🚿 Alleged plumbing replacement work

at a residential property.

According to the Complaints Assessment Committee (CAC), the agents involved failed to take adequate steps to verify statements made by vendors regarding the condition and replacement of plumbing infrastructure.

The Committee found several agents:

❌ Failed to act in good faith
❌ Failed to deal fairly with all parties
❌ Failed to verify vendor claims properly
❌ Potentially misled buyers
❌ Fell below expected professional standards

⚖️ MULTIPLE RULE BREACHES FOUND

The CAC found breaches of several key professional conduct rules, including:

📘 Rule 5.1
(Must exercise skill, care, competence and diligence)

📘 Rule 6.2
(Act in good faith and deal fairly with all parties)

📘 Rule 6.4
(Must not mislead or provide false information)

📘 Rule 10.7
(Disclosure obligations regarding defects)

The decision also cited:

📘 Section 50 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008

which relates to proper supervision of salespersons.

👀 SUPERVISION FAILURES ALSO IDENTIFIED

One particularly significant aspect of the ruling involved the supervision obligations of:

👤 David Klue

The Committee found his supervision of the other licensees did not demonstrate the level of:

✔ Skill
✔ Care
✔ Diligence

expected of a reasonably competent supervising licensee.

This serves as another warning to branch managers and agency leaders that supervisory obligations are taken extremely seriously by regulators.

🏚️ PROPERTY DEFECT DISCLOSURE UNDER SPOTLIGHT

The case again reinforces a major issue increasingly confronting the NZ real estate industry:

⚠️ Hidden or underlying property defects.

Under Rule 10.7, agents are not necessarily required to discover hidden defects themselves — but if there are warning signs or reasons a competent agent should suspect issues may exist, they must:

✔ Investigate further
OR
✔ Disclose concerns appropriately

The Committee found the agents involved failed to take reasonable steps regarding the plumbing claims.

💥 WHY THIS CASE MATTERS TO BUYERS & SELLERS

The ruling is likely to send shockwaves through parts of the industry because plumbing, weather-tightness, drainage and building defect claims are among the most sensitive issues in residential property transactions.

Buyers often rely heavily on:

🏡 Marketing representations
🏡 Property files
🏡 Salespeople statements
🏡 Vendor disclosures

when making six or seven-figure purchasing decisions.

If those statements later prove inaccurate, the financial consequences can be enormous.

📉 LEGAL RISK FOR AGENTS CONTINUES TO RISE

The NZ property market has become increasingly litigious in recent years, particularly around:

🚨 Building defects
🚨 Leaky homes
🚨 Drainage issues
🚨 Unconsented work
🚨 Misrepresentation claims
🚨 Disclosure failures

As property prices rose sharply over the past decade, buyers and regulators have become far more aggressive in pursuing complaints where transactions allegedly fall below professional standards.

⚠️ “GOOD FAITH” NOW A MAJOR INDUSTRY FOCUS

One of the strongest aspects of the CAC ruling was the repeated finding that some parties:

❌ Did not act in good faith
❌ Did not deal fairly with all parties

These obligations sit at the core of the real estate profession under New Zealand law.

The industry regulator increasingly expects agents to move beyond simply repeating vendor claims without reasonable verification.

🏡 THE DAYS OF “JUST TRUSTING THE VENDOR” ARE OVER

This case sends another strong message that agents cannot simply rely on what vendors tell them — particularly around major building or infrastructure claims.

Increasingly, regulators expect agents to:

✔ Ask further questions
✔ Seek supporting documentation
✔ Verify statements where reasonable
✔ Warn buyers appropriately

particularly where representations could materially influence purchasing decisions.

📋 PENALTIES & FINES STILL TO BE FINALISED

The CAC issued formal:

⚖️ Findings of unsatisfactory conduct
⚖️ Censure rulings

with further:

💰 Penalties and fines still to be determined.

The complaint process itself stretched over nearly two years, with complaint activity beginning in:

📅 September 2024

before final CAC decisions in late 2025 and penalty decisions continuing into 2026.

🧠 INDUSTRY REPUTATION AGAIN UNDER PRESSURE

Cases like this continue placing pressure on public confidence in the real estate profession.

While the vast majority of agents operate professionally, high-profile disciplinary findings can damage trust across the wider industry.

It also increases pressure on agencies to ensure:

✔ Better training
✔ Stronger supervision
✔ Improved compliance systems
✔ More rigorous disclosure processes

🔥 THE BOTTOM LINE

A major New Zealand real estate disciplinary case has resulted in four licensees being found guilty of unsatisfactory conduct over misleading plumbing-related representations in a residential property sale.

💥 Misleading representations
💥 Failure to verify vendor claims
💥 Good faith breaches
💥 Supervision failures
💥 Industry compliance under scrutiny

And as legal expectations on agents continue rising…

🏡 New Zealand’s property industry is being reminded that disclosure, diligence and transparency are now more important than ever.