Can a Queensland Real Estate Agent Give a Price Guide Before an Auction?
A buyer calls the office the morning of the open home. They’ve seen the listing — no price, no range, just the address and the auction date. “Can you at least give me a ballpark?” they ask. The agent on the other end of the line knows exactly what the vendor wants for it. They know what the CMA says. But giving that number — even casually, even verbally — is something Queensland law expressly prohibits.
That prohibition surprises agents transferring from other states and consistently confuses buyers new to the Queensland market. Understanding precisely what the law requires, why it was designed this way, and what agents can legitimately share is essential knowledge for anyone selling property in Queensland under the hammer.
The Short Answer: No, and the Law Is Unambiguous
Under the Property Occupations Act 2014, a real estate agent is prohibited from giving any type of price guide to potential buyers when a property is going to auction in Queensland. This applies to written guides, verbal estimates, price ranges, and any other form of price representation — before, during, or throughout the marketing campaign.
The Act outlines that, in the case of a property being sold by auction, agents are not allowed to provide a price representation or price guide, whether in marketing material or verbally. That covers print, digital, social media, portal listings, phone calls, open home conversations, and emails. There is no loophole for an informal comment or an off-the-record chat.
The prohibition is not limited to advertising. It applies to any communication directed to a prospective buyer. An agent who whispers a number over the fence at an open home is just as exposed as one who publishes a price range on realestate.com.au.
The Legislative Foundation: Sections 215 and 216
The relevant provisions sit in Part 11 of the Property Occupations Act 2014 (Qld) — the general contraventions part — under the heading “Representation of price of property.”
Section 215 applies where a person wanting to sell residential property asks a real estate agent for information about the price at which the property is likely to be sold. If the real estate agent decides to give the person that information, the agent must, when doing so, also provide either a copy of a Comparative Market Analysis (CMA) for the property, or — if a CMA cannot be prepared — a written explanation showing how the agent decided the market value.
Section 216 is the provision that directly governs what agents may share with buyers. Under section 216(2), where the offered property is to be, may be, or is being offered for sale by auction, the real estate agent must not disclose to a person other than a person acting for the seller: the reserve price set for the offered property; or an amount the real estate agent considers is a price likely to result in a successful or acceptable bid for the offered property.
The maximum penalty for contravening this provision is 540 penalty units. In Queensland, a penalty unit is adjusted periodically by the state government; agents and principals should verify the current dollar value of a penalty unit with the Office of Fair Trading. Even at current rates, a breach carries a substantial financial consequence.
These are not aspirational guidelines or industry codes of conduct. They are statutory offences. A breach can be referred to the Office of Fair Trading, which has the power to investigate complaints, issue formal warnings, impose penalties, and refer matters for disciplinary action that may affect a licence.
Why Queensland Took This Approach
In 2014, the Queensland government passed legislation banning real estate agents from providing buyers with pricing information on auction properties. The move sparked a fierce debate about the role of price guides in the property market.
The dual rationale was deliberate. The changes were motivated by two desires: to prevent underquoting and to keep auctions free from interference.
As an agent cannot know how high the final bid will be, it is considered misleading to give a price guide. The prohibition also prevents agents from “heating up” an auction by drawing in bidders who have no chance of being the final winning bidder. A buyer who attends an auction believing a property will sell for $750,000, having been told informally by the agent that the seller is looking for “something in the sevens,” is a buyer who may have wasted significant resources — inspection costs, legal review fees, finance pre-approval time — if the property ultimately sells for $950,000.
REIQ chief executive Anton Kardash noted at the time that, contrary to some media statements, the absence of price guides in auctions had long been the status quo in Queensland: “Currently in Queensland it is common practice for real estate agents to market an auction property with no price guide or likely sale price indication,” he said. The 2014 Act codified and sharpened what was largely existing practice rather than introducing an entirely foreign concept.
Queensland’s ban on price guides represents a contrasting strategy to other states, prioritising buyer research over any form of price indication. Victoria, by comparison, requires a Statement of Information with comparable sales and does not permit advertising below the vendor’s acceptable minimum — a different regulatory model that attempts to ensure accuracy rather than silence.
What Agents Can Legitimately Provide to Buyers
The prohibition on price guides does not mean buyers must walk into an auction completely blind. The Act preserves one important avenue, and there are legitimate tools agents can direct buyers towards.
Comparative Market Analysis — With Vendor Consent
If they have consent from the property owner, real estate agents can provide prospective buyers with a Comparative Market Analysis (CMA), which includes comparable sales recently sold in that suburb with similar attributes.
This is a meaningful distinction. The CMA itself is not a price guide — it is a collection of factual recent sales data. An agent presenting a CMA is not representing a likely sale price; they are presenting market evidence and letting the buyer form their own conclusion. However, the agent must have the vendor’s written approval before sharing that document with any prospective purchaser.
Under section 216(6), if a real estate agent gives a copy of a comparative analysis or a written explanation to a seller under section 215(2), the agent must not give that market information to a person without the seller’s written approval. Agents should ensure this approval is documented clearly before sharing any CMA with buyers — verbal consent from the vendor is not sufficient.
Property Portal Price Brackets: A Functional Exception
The Act contains a specific carve-out for property portals. A real estate agent does not contravene section 216(2) merely because a price or price range for the property is disclosed by the agent to an electronic listings provider to establish search criteria for listing the property for sale on the provider’s website or other electronic medium.
However, this exemption applies only if the real estate agent is satisfied on reasonable grounds that the electronic listings provider will list the property for sale on the website without disclosing the price or price range, and the listing will include any statement prescribed under a regulation.
While this may be helpful to distinguish a $500,000 property from a $1.5 million property in a suburb, this should not be relied on as a price indicator. You will notice a disclaimer on property listings being sold by auction confirming that while a price guide cannot be provided, the website may have filtered the property into a price bracket for website functionality purposes.
This is a common source of confusion for interstate buyers. When a QLD auction property appears in a portal search filtered to a price bracket, that bracket reflects only the search filter set by the agent for visibility purposes — it does not constitute a price guide or representation about likely sale price.
Directing Buyers to Independent Research
Buyers who want to purchase at auction without a price guide will have to do more legwork. They should do their own independent research and consider getting professional assistance, such as an independent valuation.
An agent can — and professionally should — actively help buyers understand how to conduct that research. Pointing a buyer to recent sales on property data platforms, suggesting they engage a buyer’s agent or independent valuer, and explaining the suburb’s recent auction clearance history are all appropriate actions that fall well within an agent’s duty of care without crossing into prohibited price representation.
The Reserve Price: An Additional Prohibition
The price guide restriction is compounded by a separate but related obligation. The reserve price — set by the vendor before the auction — is also expressly protected information.
Under section 216(2)(a), an agent cannot disclose the reserve price to any person other than someone acting for the seller. This means that even if the vendor has set a reserve that the agent knows and considers reasonable, that figure cannot be shared with prospective bidders before or during the marketing campaign.
However, if during the auction the reserve price is reached or exceeded, the auctioneer does not contravene the prohibition merely by disclosing to persons present at the auction that the reserve price has been met. The classic announcement — “the property is on the market” — is explicitly recognised as permissible disclosure under the Act.
An agent who tells a buyer “the vendor wants a reserve of about $850,000” — even as a rough indication — is in breach. The motivation behind the disclosure (helpfulness, building rapport, managing buyer expectations) does not affect the legal position.
Vendor Price Guidance for Non-Auction Sales: Different Rules Apply
It is worth understanding how the QLD auction regime differs from private treaty rules, because agents frequently work across both methods of sale.
If a property is being sold by private treaty — a method where offers can be made at any time and a sale price is negotiated between seller and buyer — sellers may opt to nominate an asking price or provide a price range. In some cases, however, sellers may opt for a private treaty sale and choose not to provide any price guide, simply inviting offers from interested buyers.
If a seller has opted to sell without a price, real estate agents are required to follow the vendor’s instructions and, by law, cannot provide a price guide or make any representation regarding price. This mirrors the auction prohibition when the vendor has specifically instructed no price disclosure.
Where a private treaty vendor does set an asking price, the accuracy obligations under the Act apply fully. An agent must not give a price guide that is less than the asking price or the price that the seller is willing to accept, less than the reserve price at auction, or less than the likely sale price of the property. Underquoting on private treaty listings carries the same exposure as any other misleading conduct.
In Queensland, an agent can only use the phrase “offers over” if the price is the actual minimum that the vendor is willing to consider. This is a practical point that catches agents who use “offers over” as marketing shorthand for a higher target — the phrase carries legal weight and must accurately reflect vendor instructions.
How This Differs from Other Australian States
Queensland’s approach is the most restrictive in Australia when it comes to auction price transparency. Agents who have worked in New South Wales or Victoria, and buyers familiar with those markets, regularly encounter the Queensland framework as a significant departure from what they expect.
In New South Wales and Victoria, agents are generally required to provide price guides that accurately reflect vendor expectations. In Victoria, real estate agents are legally required to provide a Statement of Information with comparable sales and must not advertise a price lower than the seller’s acceptable minimum. The Victorian approach — and the ongoing reform debate there — is built around ensuring accuracy of price guides, not eliminating them. Queensland went the other direction entirely.
As part of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, the Australian Consumer Law applies to the marketing of properties in that it prohibits misleading or deceptive conduct in trade or commerce. This federal layer sits above and alongside Queensland’s state regime. An agent cannot escape Queensland’s specific prohibition by arguing that a price guide was accurate and therefore not misleading under the ACL. The POA 2014 imposes an absolute prohibition for auction properties that operates independently of whether the information given was true.
A breach of Australian Consumer Law can be punished by a penalty for an individual of up to $500,000 per offence. An agency is liable for a fine of either $10 million or three times the value of the accrued benefit. If there is no way to calculate the benefit, then the penalty may be 10% of the agency’s previous annual turnover. These ACL penalties apply where conduct rises to the level of misleading or deceptive conduct in a broader sense — and they stack with the specific POA 2014 penalties for price representation breaches.
Common Situations That Create Exposure
Agents who understand the rule in the abstract can still breach it in practice. The following scenarios arise regularly and each carries legal risk.
Informal comments at open homes. A buyer walks through and asks what the agent thinks it will go for. The agent, wanting to be helpful, says “I’d expect it to be competitive around the mid-eights.” That is a prohibited price representation, regardless of how casually it was delivered.
Passing on vendor expectations verbatim. An agent tells a buyer that “the vendor has mentioned they’d be happy with anything north of $900,000.” Even without framing it as the agent’s own estimate, disclosing what the vendor is willing to accept is a breach of section 216(2).
Unsolicited price signals in marketing copy. Marketing copy that describes a property as “affordable” in the context of a specific suburb’s price range, or references it as “exceptional value at this price point,” can constitute an indirect price representation. These need careful editorial review before publication.
Back-channel information. An agent who shares price information with a buyer’s solicitor, a buyer’s advocate, or anyone acting on behalf of a prospective buyer is still caught by the prohibition. Section 216(2) restricts disclosure to persons acting for the seller — and a buyer’s representative clearly does not fall into that category.
Sharing the CMA without vendor consent. An agent who has prepared a CMA to assist the vendor in setting a reserve, and then shares that document with an interested buyer without written vendor authorisation, contravenes section 216(6). The CMA is protected information until the vendor approves its release.
What This Means for Queensland Agents
The Queensland real estate agent price guide before auction legal framework is one of the most specific and clearly drafted compliance obligations in the state’s property regime. It leaves almost no room for interpretation. Agents practising in Queensland need to build this understanding into their standard workflow — not just as a rule to follow during the marketing campaign, but as a conversation they have proactively with vendors and buyers at the outset.
With vendors: Explain clearly at the listing appointment that you cannot share any price representation or reserve price with buyers during the auction campaign. Discuss the CMA you’ve prepared, obtain written approval if the vendor wants you to share comparable sales data with buyers, and document that authorisation.
With buyers: Be direct about what you can and cannot provide. Direct them to property data platforms for their own comparable sales research. Encourage independent valuation if they want professional price guidance before auction day. Explain the portal price bracket disclaimer so they understand what it does and does not represent.
With your team: Ensure every salesperson and support staff member understands the scope of the prohibition. A breach does not require the principal’s knowledge or instruction — any team member who provides a verbal price guide at an open home creates exposure for the licence holder.
With interstate or international buyers: Overseas investors and buyers relocating from Sydney or Melbourne frequently expect a price guide as standard practice. A brief, factual explanation of why Queensland operates differently — grounded in the Property Occupations Act 2014 — helps manage expectations and builds professional credibility rather than frustrating enquiries.
Property auctions in Queensland offer efficiency and transparency, but they demand strict compliance with legislative requirements. For agents and auctioneers, understanding bidder rules and authority limits is just as important as achieving a strong sale result.
The absence of a price guide does not mean buyers are without recourse. What it means, practically, is that Queensland auctions place the research responsibility squarely on buyers — and the professional agent’s role shifts from price signalling to market education. Done well, that is a service worth providing.
The provisions discussed in this article refer to the Property Occupations Act 2014 (Qld), which can be accessed in full at legislation.qld.gov.au. Agents with specific compliance questions regarding their circumstances should seek independent legal advice.