A storm is brewing in Victoria’s real estate world, and it’s all about auction rules. What if the very system designed to ensure fairness in property auctions is now under fire? The Real Estate Institute of Victoria (REIV) has withdrawn its support for a landmark government plan, sparking a heated debate that could reshape how auctions are conducted. But here’s where it gets controversial: while the government aims to force sellers to disclose their exact reserve price before an auction, the REIV argues this could backfire, potentially inflating prices and killing the auction spirit. Who’s right? And this is the part most people miss: the REIV’s alternative blueprint includes a demerit point system for rogue agents, free building inspection reports, and a ban on withholding sale prices—reforms they claim go further in addressing buyer frustrations.
The Allan government’s proposal, championed by Consumer Affairs Minister Nick Staikos, was born out of a 2025 investigation that exposed rampant underquoting. Prospective buyers were often misled by inaccurate price guides, with over half of 26,000 Melbourne properties selling above the quoted range. The government’s solution? Require agents to publish the owner’s reserve price at least seven days before the auction. Sounds fair, right? But is this a step toward transparency or a recipe for chaos?
REIV chief executive Toby Balazs calls the government’s plan “counterproductive,” suggesting it could lead vendors to set artificially high reserves, deterring buyers. Instead, the REIV proposes that vendors confirm their reserve is within a 10% range three days before the auction. Andrew McCann of Jellis Craig, part of the REIV’s working group, argues this balances transparency with practicality. “When buyers feel misled, they’re emotionally let down,” he says. The blueprint also advocates for private sales to list a single asking price, rather than a range, streamlining the process for buyers.
But here’s the kicker: What if both sides are missing the mark? The REIV’s plan includes a demerit system for agents, akin to the AFL’s “three strikes” policy, and free building inspection reports to save buyers thousands. Yet, critics like Barry Plant question the practicality of forcing reserve price disclosure, arguing it could stifle auctions. “Don’t kill a system that’s worked for decades,” Plant warns. “Just tidy it up.”
So, where do you stand? Is the government’s push for full transparency the answer, or does the REIV’s middle-ground approach make more sense? And what about those free building reports—a game-changer or a hidden cost? Let’s spark a conversation. Is the auction system broken, or are we fixing something that isn’t entirely broken? Share your thoughts below—this debate is far from over.
