Zue Shin Real Estate violated the Fair Trade Law for failing to fully disclose trade information, and therefore mislead its trading counterparts

Chinese Taipei


Case:

Zue Shin Real Estate violated the Fair Trade Law for failing to fully disclose trade information, and therefore mislead its trading counterparts

Key Word:

advantageous position, concealment of important facts, mediation fee

Reference:

Fair Trade Commission Decision of May 12, 1999 (the 392nd Commission Meeting); Disposition (88) Kung Ch'u Tzu No. 053

Industry:

Real Estate Agents (6812)

Relevant Law:

Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law

Summary:

  1. When the complainant contacted the respondent to discuss matters relating to the purchase of apartment, the respondent demanded that the complainant pay it a “mediation fee” if it desired preferential treatment in price negotiations. Not knowing the nature of the mediation fee, the complainant inquired as to whether the fee was equivalent in nature to a deposit. The respondent replied that the amount was not a deposit, and would be refunded immediately should the complainant decide not to make the purchase.

    The complainant, unable to raise the necessary capital for the purchase, called the respondent by phone the next day and informed the respondent of his decision not to make the purchase. However, the respondent told the complainant that the amount was a deposit, and the amount would be forfeited should the complainant decide not to make the purchase.

    The complainant then claimed that the respondent had failed to disclose information related to the Ministry of the Interior’s standard “offer” form [as an alternative to signing the contract], and had not honestly explained the nature of the mediation fee.

  2. In terms of the access to relevant information during the process of negotiation, the position between real estate agents and purchasers are often asymmetrical. For a real estate agent to use its advantageous position to demand a mediation fee, but fail to fully disclose information that would enable the consumer to choose another method of trade (such as using an “offer” form), is deemed by the Fair Trade Commission (the Commission) to be an patently unfair act capable of affecting trading order under Article 24 of the Fair Trade Law (FTL).

  3. Although both parties made conflicting statements in which the respondent insisted that it had disclosed the relevant information regarding the “offer” form to the complainant but the complainant asserted otherwise, further investigation by the Commission indicated that the respondent, after the investigation was completed, could only cite a limited number of cases where it had used the “offer” form. During the investigation, the respondent claimed that due to the long period of time that had since transpired, it could not provide cases to show that the “offer” forms were used. In addition, the respondent was unable to provide convincing evidence to dispute the complainant’s claim that it did not provide the “offer” form to the complainant. Thus, it was difficult to believe that the respondent had indeed informed the complainant about the option to use the “offer” form.

    In sum, it was determined that the respondent, when requesting payment of the mediation fee, did not inform the complainant of the option to use the “offer” form instead [of signing a contract]. The respondent’s concealment of important trading information was a deceptive act used to mislead the complainant to trade with the respondent, which had violated Article 24 of the FTL. Penalty was thus imposed pursuant to the fore part of Article 41 of the FTL.

    With regard to the complaint that the respondent did not inform the complainant of the nature of the mediation fee, it was deemed not to violate the Fair Trade Law since the respondent had given the complainant a receipt with for the mediation fee that clearly stated the rights and obligations pertaining thereto, and such a receipt had been signed by the complainant.

 

Summarized by Liang, Ya-ch'in

Supervised by Hu, Kuang-yu

 

Appendix:

Zue Shin Real Estate Co., Ltd.'s Uniform Invoice Number: 88836722


**: For information of translation, click here