Property agent fined S$30000, suspended 12 months over unethical bid to pocket bigger commission

A property agent was fined S$30,000 and suspended for 12 months after trying to persuade his client to buy a condominium unit at a higher price than the seller was offering so that the agent could pocket a bigger commission, the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) said in a statement on Monday (Oct 21).

Ngu Ping Chuan James Ethan, 39, a property agent with PropNex Realty, was charged with three breaches of the CEA Code of Ethics and Professional Client Care (CEPCC), while representing his client in the purchase of a condominium unit.

The CEA — a statutory board which regulates the real estate industry — said that this is the toughest penalty that the CEA Disciplinary Committee has meted out on a property agent in disciplinary proceedings.

Ngu's wrongful conduct resulted in his client suffering a loss or disadvantage of about S$20,000 to S$30,000, the CEA said. His suspension as a CEA-registered property agent dates from Oct 15.

Ngu was engaged by his client to find him a suitable private property to purchase, in about 2016, in either the eastern or central part of Singapore, that was at least 800sqf in size, costing about S$900,000.

In mid-March 2017, Ngu assisted his client to view a condominium unit, located in the east, and priced at S$1.04 million. After the viewing, Ngu informed the seller’s agent that his client was keen to purchase the property and inquired about the commission payable to him.

The seller’s agent informed Ngu that his client was willing to sell the property at a minimum price of S$1.02 million, and pay Ngu a commission of 1 per cent of the sale price, which totalled to about S$10,000.

Ngu did not convey the seller’s offer of S$1.02 million to his client and told the seller’s agent that he wanted a commission of 2.5 to 3 per cent of the sale price instead. Ngu then told his client that the property was valued at S$1.18 million on average and suggested that his client make an offer of S$1.06 million.

However, when Ngu’s client checked with a bank, he realised that the valuation of the property was about S$950,000. Ngu had filed an appeal with the Appeals Board, seeking a reduction in sentences, but the Appeals Board upheld the decision of the CEA Disciplinary Committee though it reduced the period of suspension from 14 months to 12 months.

Ref: Property Report