IT was disappointing that REIWA was implicated in your story “Agent to Face Inquiry” (WA Business News, March 20 2003) as the apparent source of media comment on a matter concerning a REIWA member agent.
That story was not based on comment by any official REIWA spokesman, and it should be noted that REIWA would in any case never make adverse or prejudicial public comment about any alleged complaint in advance of final judgemental finding by the institute’s arbitration and dispute resolution service.
In accordance with basic tenets of natural justice in the administration of its arbitration and dispute resolution procedures, it would be inequitable for there to be any form of judgmental public comment on a matter being processed through that service. Any person wishing to query or complain about the professional service of any REIWA member can always have confidence in the objective integrity of the institute’s arbitration and dispute resolution services – services which have been authorised by the ACCC in the context of REIWA’s Codes of Professional Conduct.
All REIWA members are bound by the institute’s high standards of professional conduct, based upon the fundamental pre-requisite of always acting in a client’s best interests. Although there are comparatively few agencies that do not subscribe to REIWA membership, the institute is a voluntary membership association representing professional agency practice. REIWA, through its members, therefore has a commitment to fostering the goodwill, security and confidence of consumers in all aspects of real estate and business agency practice.
For that reason it is important that REIWA clarify any misunderstanding as to the nature and operation of its arbitration and dispute resolution services.
Michael A Griffith
chief executive officer