Queensland Real Estate Agent Complaints and Disciplinary Process: How OFT Enforcement Works

A client lodges a complaint against you with the Office of Fair Trading. You find out — not from the OFT — but from a colleague who heard about it through the grapevine. What happens next, how long it takes, what the OFT can actually do, and what you should do right now are questions every Queensland agent should be able to answer before they’re ever in that position.

The Queensland real estate agent complaints and disciplinary process operates under a layered framework. Understanding it isn’t optional for a licensed professional — it’s fundamental to protecting your registration, your agency, and the clients who depend on you.

The Legislative Framework: What Governs Agent Conduct

The primary legislation governing Queensland real estate agent conduct is the Property Occupations Act 2014 (Qld) (the PO Act). The Act provides for the regulation of the activities, licensing and conduct of property agents and resident letting agents and their employees, and protects consumers against particular undesirable practices.

The PO Act works alongside the Agents Financial Administration Act 2014 (Qld) (the AFA Act), which governs trust account obligations. QCAT has made clear it is prepared to exercise its disciplinary powers for breaches of the Property Occupations Act 2014, the Agents Financial Administration Act 2014, and the Agents Financial Administration Regulation 2014, in order to ensure that the integrity of the industry, as well as the protection of consumers, is maintained.

The Fair Trading Inspectors Act 2014 (Qld) also plays a supporting role. That Act enacts common provisions for the PO Act and particular other Acts about fair trading, granting inspectors powers that operate alongside those in the PO Act itself.

Understanding which Act applies to which conduct matters — trust account breaches predominantly engage the AFA Act, while misleading conduct, unlicensed activity, and professional standards are primarily dealt with under the PO Act. Disciplinary proceedings can be founded on breaches of either, or both.

How Complaints Reach the OFT

Complaints from the general public are one of the main ways the OFT becomes aware of any wrongdoing in the industry, and these complaints can come from anyone. A complaint can be lodged by a buyer, a seller, a landlord, a tenant, a competing agent, or anyone else with knowledge of the alleged conduct. There is no threshold — any person can submit a complaint, and the OFT will assess its materiality.

If a member of the public is dissatisfied with the work, service or advice they receive, they should contact the OFT in the first instance to make a complaint. Complaints are submitted through the OFT’s online portal at qld.gov.au/fair-trading. There is no fee for lodging a complaint, and the OFT is not obliged to notify an agent that a complaint has been received before it conducts preliminary inquiries.

The OFT does not rely solely on public complaints. The OFT has auditors on the ground who are its eyes and ears in the marketplace. They check audit reports as a very good form of intel that will help identify red flags that will attract investigation. Beyond on-ground auditing, the OFT also does data analysis and cross-matching from financial institutions, so it has sophisticated processes in place. Audit triggers, intelligence from other agencies, and referrals from professional bodies like the REIQ can all initiate OFT scrutiny without a formal consumer complaint.

The OFT Investigation Process

Initial Assessment

Once a complaint is received, the OFT does not automatically launch a full investigation. The OFT completes due diligence to determine the materiality and seriousness of the complaint before conducting a complete investigation. Complaints that disclose no apparent breach of the PO Act or AFA Act — a dissatisfied vendor who simply didn’t get the price they wanted, for example — are unlikely to progress beyond initial assessment.

Where the complaint does raise a potential statutory breach, the OFT will assign an investigator. The investigator has broad powers under the Fair Trading Inspectors Act 2014 to require the production of documents, inspect records, interview relevant persons, and enter and inspect licensed premises. Agents should not underestimate the scope of these powers — investigators can compel the production of trust account records, agency agreements, correspondence files, and internal communications.

The Role of Trust Account Audits

According to the Queensland Fair Trading Commissioner, trust accounts are the source of many problems for the OFT. Common issues include: agents and agencies not notifying the OFT when opening a new trust account; using trust account money to pay for business or personal expenses; and paying commission early using trust account money.

Annual trust account audits, conducted by qualified auditors and submitted to the OFT, are a systematic source of investigative intelligence. Discrepancies in an audit report — unexplained shortfalls, delayed disbursements, misclassified entries — will trigger OFT scrutiny regardless of whether a consumer complaint exists. Principals should treat their annual audit as a regulatory checkpoint, not a formality.

Referral to QCAT

Upon completion of the investigation, the OFT will determine if a matter is appropriate to refer to QCAT for consideration in disciplinary proceedings. Only the Chief Executive of the Department of Justice (Office of Fair Trading) can refer a disciplinary matter to QCAT to conduct further disciplinary proceedings. A complainant or licence holder cannot commence the QCAT disciplinary process.

This structure has a critical practical implication: you cannot pre-empt a QCAT referral by applying to QCAT yourself, and a complainant cannot bypass the OFT to go directly to QCAT. The OFT acts as the gatekeeper to formal disciplinary proceedings.

Pursuant to section 173 of the PO Act, the Chief Executive may start disciplinary proceedings by applying to the Tribunal to decide whether grounds exist under section 172 of the PO Act for taking disciplinary action against a licensee or real estate salesperson. Section 172 sets out an extensive list of grounds — including conviction of a relevant offence, acting while unlicensed, trust account breaches, misleading conduct, and acting unprofessionally. A single investigation can reveal multiple concurrent grounds.

What Conduct Triggers OFT Action

Trust Account Breaches

Trust account misconduct is the most frequently prosecuted category of agent conduct in Queensland. The AFA Act imposes strict obligations on how trust money is received, held, disbursed, and accounted for. Agents who use trust funds for personal expenses, fail to notify the OFT when opening a trust account, draw commission before an entitlement crystallises, or direct clients to deposit funds into a general business account are all at serious risk. When the OFT deals with actions of fraud and dishonesty, that’s when matters end up in court and disciplinary action is taken, and that’s when penalties can escalate to very considerable amounts of money for the individuals or businesses involved.

Misleading and Deceptive Conduct

Real estate agents are bound by specific conduct standards set out in the Property Occupations Act 2014, with their primary duty being to their clients. However, agents also owe certain obligations to buyers and must avoid misleading or deceptive conduct. Failing to adhere to these standards can lead to disciplinary action, legal disputes, and damage to reputation.

Misleading conduct complaints most commonly arise from property marketing — statements about a property’s attributes, price guide representations, claims about buyer interest or competitive offers that are not accurate, and misrepresentation of comparable sales. The Australian Consumer Law operates concurrently with the PO Act in this space, which means that conduct triggering the ACL can simultaneously ground OFT disciplinary action.

Unlicensed Activity

Acting as a real estate agent without a current licence is a prosecutable offence under the PO Act. An unlicensed real estate agent may be required to not only pay back any amount already claimed as commission, but may also be subject to disciplinary proceedings. In 2018, a Mr Bomhof was charged by the OFT for acting as an unlicensed real estate agent.

Section 89 of the PO Act provides that a person is not entitled to sue for, recover or keep a reward or expense for the performance of an activity as a property agent unless, at the time the activity was performed, the person held a property agent licence. Retaining or suing for commission when not properly entitled to do so can attract a maximum penalty of 200 penalty units.

It is crucial that anyone who purports to carry out real estate activities holds a current licence at all times. A failure to do so can lead to prosecution by the OFT, as well as an inability to claim a fee or commission. This applies equally to salespersons whose registration has lapsed and who continue working — and to principals whose corporate licence has expired but whose agency continues to operate.

Other Grounds

Beyond these core categories, OFT action can be triggered by conduct that goes to an agent’s suitability to hold a licence. Existing licensees can have their licences cancelled as a result of breaches of the Property Occupations Act 2014, and can even have their licences cancelled due to conduct in their private capacity which goes to their suitability to continue to hold registration. A criminal conviction — even for conduct entirely unrelated to real estate — can constitute grounds for disciplinary action under section 172 of the PO Act where it bears on suitability.

Disciplinary Outcomes: What QCAT Can Order

QCAT may hear disciplinary proceedings against real estate agents for alleged breaches of the Property Occupations Act 2014. The range of orders QCAT can make at a disciplinary hearing is broad, and the outcome will depend on the nature and severity of the conduct, the extent of consumer harm, and whether the conduct is isolated or persistent.

At the less severe end, QCAT can issue a caution or reprimand — a formal finding of unsatisfactory conduct that is recorded but does not directly affect an agent’s ability to continue practising. A fine may be imposed. Conditions may be placed on a licence, such as requiring the agent to work under supervision, to complete additional training, or to submit trust accounts for independent review at intervals.

Licence suspension removes an agent from practice for a defined period. Cancellation terminates the licence entirely, and the agent must re-apply if they later seek to return to the industry. Most significantly, QCAT can impose a permanent disqualification from holding a licence or from acting as an executive officer of a licensed corporation.

The Chief Executive v Jones & Anor [2020] QCAT 10 decision illustrates how seriously these powers are exercised. The Respondents’ transgressions demonstrated either an unwillingness or inability to comply with legislative requirements, and there was at least a reckless disregard for compliance; the behaviour was not an isolated one-off event, but was persistent and repetitive. The Tribunal ordered that Mr Jones be permanently disqualified from being an executive officer of a corporation which holds any form of licence issued under the PO Act. Legal costs awarded against Mr Jones in that matter amounted to $47,767.56.

Disciplinary proceedings against agents or agencies are intended to protect members of the general public, as well as the professional standards of other members of the real estate industry. Tribunals do not regard “I didn’t intend it” or “it was a small business mistake” as mitigating to the point of avoiding serious outcomes where the conduct was persistent and consumers suffered loss.

The OFT Claim Fund

Separate to the disciplinary stream, consumers who suffer financial loss due to an agent’s conduct may access the OFT Claim Fund established under the AFA Act. You may have grounds to make a claim against the OFT Claim Fund if you have lost money due to the conduct of a property agent, motor dealer, chattel auctioneer, their salespersons or a debt collector. Only the OFT deals with financial claims against the Claim Fund in the first instance and not QCAT. Where a Claim Fund payment is made, the OFT can seek reimbursement from the agent — adding a financial liability that compounds any penalty imposed.

How to Respond to an OFT Complaint

Receiving formal notification that a complaint has been lodged against you, or that the OFT is conducting an investigation, demands an immediate and measured response. The following applies both to agents under investigation and to principals whose salesperson is the subject of a complaint.

Engage legal representation early. Real estate agents who are facing criminal allegations or allegations of breaching the real estate legislation in the course of their practice of property agent work should seek legal advice immediately from lawyers experienced in criminal law and in disciplinary law matters. The OFT investigation phase — before any QCAT referral — is the period when early legal advice has the greatest effect on outcomes.

Cooperate, but do so with guidance. Obstruction of an OFT investigation is itself a serious matter. However, cooperation does not mean providing unguarded statements or producing documents beyond what is legally required without first understanding your obligations and any available protections. In Jones & Anor, the respondent participated in a formal record of interview with the OFT prior to proceedings being commenced. That interview admissions formed part of the evidentiary record at QCAT.

Locate and preserve all relevant records. Whatever the conduct alleged, your position is best served by comprehensive documentation. Agency agreements, trust account records, email correspondence, marketing materials, and internal notes should all be secured. Where a trust account shortfall is alleged, an independent reconciliation should be commissioned immediately.

Do not approach the complainant. Direct communication with a complainant once OFT involvement is confirmed can be characterised as interference with the investigative process and will not improve the OFT’s assessment of your conduct.

Understand the principal’s exposure. Principals are not automatically insulated from disciplinary action because the breach was carried out by a salesperson. Where a principal failed to adequately supervise, or where systemic agency-level failures contributed to the conduct, the principal and the corporate licence holder are both exposed.

The Appeals Process

If the OFT makes an administrative decision under the PO Act that adversely affects an agent — such as refusing to grant or renew a licence — an information notice is required, and the agent generally has the right to seek an internal review and then appeal to QCAT.

Where a QCAT disciplinary hearing has been conducted and a decision made, the avenue of appeal is the QCAT Appeal Tribunal (QCATA). Further appeal on a question of law lies to the Queensland Court of Appeal. Both appellate processes operate on defined grounds and within strict timeframes — a matter requiring immediate legal advice if you intend to challenge a QCAT order.

If you have just received notification of a disciplinary referral where you are named as the respondent, you should ensure you understand the QCAT disciplinary process and how the matter will be progressed to a final hearing. Generally, if you are named as the respondent in the disciplinary referral, you do not need to do anything until QCAT issues directions setting out how the matter will proceed. However, the period between receiving the referral notice and QCAT’s first directions is not a period for inaction — it is the period in which to brief legal representation and begin preparing your evidence and submissions.

The time for QCAT to finalise a case may vary depending on QCAT’s workload and the number of steps to be completed by parties as required by QCAT to resolve the dispute. Disciplinary matters are not resolved quickly. Agents should expect a process that spans months, and in complex cases, over a year from the OFT investigation to a final QCAT determination.

What This Means for Queensland Agents

The Queensland real estate agent complaints and disciplinary process is not a system that forgives carelessness, and it does not distinguish between intentional misconduct and poor administrative practice when consumer harm results. QCAT has made clear that reckless disregard for compliance is sufficient for serious disciplinary outcomes.

The practical implications are straightforward. Trust accounts require disciplined, contemporaneous management — not periodic reconciliation. Marketing representations require factual grounding. Every person performing real estate activities must hold a current, appropriate licence at all times. Principals bear responsibility for the compliance culture of their agency, not merely their own individual conduct.

While the adverse publicity generated by disciplinary decisions can be damaging to the real estate industry, agents can also consider these decisions a win for the industry, serving as an assurance to the public that the industry has effective and transparent systems in place to protect and promote its integrity. The system works as intended when it removes bad actors and reinforces standards. For the overwhelming majority of Queensland agents who operate with integrity, understanding how enforcement works is simply part of professional competence.

If a complaint is lodged against you, the worst response is to minimise it and wait. The best response is to take it seriously from day one — preserve your records, engage qualified legal advice, cooperate appropriately with the investigation, and understand exactly where you stand under sections 172 and 173 of the Property Occupations Act 2014.