May 2008

Incomplete PAMDA forms ... what are the risks?

The Supreme Court recently considered the consequences of a signed Appointment of Real Estate Agent (PAMDA Form 22a) in which part 4.1 - the section which specifies how the Agent is to perform the services - had been left blank.

It was ultimately not necessary for the court to come to a final conclusion on this point as it ruled that the contract was invalid for other reasons.

However, in very persuasive comments His Honour was of the view that the blanks in the form 22a rendered it invalid:

“..it is strongly arguable that the plaintiff was not properly appointed as the defendant's agent under … PAMDA in that its appointment was not in the approved form because it did not state how the service was to be performed.”

His Honour then went on to state such circumstances, the agent would be prevented from recovering commission by s140.

Section 140 is the PAMDA provision that restrict recovery of commission by agents where their appointment is defective.


Tina Carruthers
Conveyancing Section Leader

Clearly the lesson from this case is that all PAMDA forms should be fully completed and that an incomplete form will put an agent's entitlement to commission at risk.

Active Property Marketing Services v Joelco Pty Ltd, QSC 167 (13/07/2007)

Should you have any queries regarding any conveyancing or PAMDA issues email Tina Carruthers or call her on 3210 3415.

Apply now for your free Agent & Developer Centre membership!

"Your people are the best! Give them a gold star."
Natasha