MAIN IMAGE: Jan le Roux, CE of Rebosa
Staff writer
“Whenever one wants to untangle a seemingly complicated issue, the saying goes ‘follow the money’. The only reason why Home Owners Associations (HOAs) in security estates insist on the registration of estate agents and the payment of accreditation fees is because of the revenue it generates”, says Jan le Roux, CE of Rebosa.
Le Roux’s comments are based on the recent assertion by Jeff Gilmour, president of ARC (Association of Residential Communities), that the PPRA was, in fact, open to considering a standardised annual accreditation fee for agents wanting to operate within estates, in contravention of the Property Practitioners Act. While it is not illegal for HOAs to charge these fees, it is illegal for an agent to pay them, and therein lies the rub.
Gilmour has previously asserted several justifications for these fees, including training estate agents on the estate’s guidelines and house rules, and increased security costs around show days.
Le Roux says, “The issue of accreditation fees, or whatever name HOAs prefer to call it, is contentious, problematic, unacceptable, unnecessary, and detrimental to transformation. It is of great concern to property practitioners who have been waiting on the PPRA to apply the Regulations and take action to eradicate this ill-conceived practice. Very little has happened so far to bolster our confidence”.
He continues, “I believe this concept, under whatever guise, is aimed at obtaining financial benefit and the exclusion/limitation of property practitioners. Even if the exclusion is not intended, which I doubt, it remains the result. Fees of around R 6000 will result in the exclusion of many. It remains our contention that the argument that show days require more security than say a dinner party held on the estate remains to be proven, and the claim that selling in an estate is more complex, thus necessitating training is spurious at best”.
While the issue remains, and the PPRA is currently investigating 11 complaints, it now appears as though the PPRA never entertained the idea of a capped accreditation fee. Le Roux raised the issue with the PPRA, and it was found that not one of the relevant senior executives, including the acting CEO, the COO, the Head of Compliance, nor the Head of Enforcement attended the alleged meeting with Mr Gilmour. In fact, Mr. Clarence Caitin, executive manager of Investigation and Enforcement at the PPRA, communicated that the PPRA sees this allegation seriously and is proceeding with actions in this regard”.
Agents are encouraged to report their counterparts engaging in these activities to the PPRA by filling in a complaint form here.
