Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
- Unreported Judgment
Le v Mayaroma Pty Ltd QCAT 124
Le v Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate & Ors  QCAT 124
Ms Nga Le
Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate (Receiver Appointed)
Mr Thien Dinh Chau
Ms Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau
Other civil dispute matters
On the papers
24 April 2015
REAL ESTATE AGENT – management of residential property – rental moneys not disbursed from trust account – claim on Claim Fund – claim partially accepted
Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 (Qld), s 488, s 489, s 490, s 530
Williams v Kaech  QCA 176
This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) (QCAT Act).
REASONS FOR DECISION
- Mayaroma Pty Ltd traded as Chau Real Estate, and operated as a real estate agent and property management and letting agent in Brisbane and Ipswich.
- Ms Nga Le was the owner of a residential property at 18 Adonis Street, Inala, Queensland. She appointed Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate to manage the property.
- Ms Julie Williams was appointed Receiver over the Trust Property of Mayaroma Pty Ltd ACN 089 100 612 trading as Chau Real Estate, on 3 June 2014, by the Office of Fair Trading, Department of Justice and Attorney-General pursuant to the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 (Qld) (the Act).
- The records of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) show that the Directors of the company from 16 August 1999 until the date of the appointment of the receiver were Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau and Thien Dinh Chau.
- Ms Nga Le lodged a PAMD Form 50 Claim against the claim fund on 17 June 2014 and claimed an amount of $11,286.65 as outstanding rental monies for the period 14 July 2013 to 1 May 2014.
- The receiver relied on the trader’s books and records collected by the Office of Fair Trading and records sourced from external parties.
- An assessment of the actual funds due for comparison to actual funds paid to Ms Nga Le revealed the following:
- The paid up to dates as recorded in the rental card and rental statements were incorrect. Rent was collected to week ending 21 April 2014 as at date of termination of service.
- Rental income received into the trust account for that period totals $26,440.00
- Bond received into the trust account totals $1,120.00
- Management and rent collection fee based on the agreed rate of 6.5% plus GST totals $1,890.46.
- Sundry expense of $7.00 plus GST for eight (8) statements issued to date of appointment totals $61.60.
- Expenses deducted for that period total $2,155.00 inclusive of GST.
- Funds disbursed to RTA for the period total $1,120.00.
- Funds disbursed to the claimant for the period total $12,318.00.
- Funds still to be disbursed to claimant calculated to be $10,014.94.
- The receiver concluded that the Claimant’s claim should be partially rejected in the sum of $1,271.71 and be accepted in the sum of $10,014.94 being the value of funds retained and not disbursed from the trader’s trust account.
- The receiver’s report was forwarded on 5 September 2014 to Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate, Mr Thein Dinh Chau and Mrs Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau, at their last known addresses, and also to the addresses shown as the registered office address and other addresses on the BACHCO, MACS and ASIC databases, pursuant to s 474 and s 475 of the Act.
- I gave Directions on 20 October 2014 which provided for the filing of material in response by Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate, Mr Thein Dinh Chau and Mrs Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau by 15 December 2014, and for the matter to be determined on the papers after 12 January 2015. The letters were sent to the addresses provided by the Department as their most current addresses. The letters containing the directions were not returned to the Tribunal. No material has been filed by Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate, Mr Thein Dinh Chau and Mrs Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau.
- I also directed that Ms Nga Le was to file any material in addition to the material filed with the application by 17 November 2014, and any reply to the response of Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate, Mr Thein Dinh Chau and Mrs Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau by 12 January 2015. No material was filed by Ms Nga Le.
- There is no challenge to the report of the receiver by either the Applicant or any of the respondents. I accept the report of the receiver, and am satisfied that the financial loss suffered by the claimants is established as $10,014.94.
- I am also satisfied that Mr Thein Dinh Chau and Mrs Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau, as the executive officers of the company, are persons who are liable to reimburse the fund under s 490(2) of the Act, and should be named as persons who are liable for the Claimant’s financial loss pursuant to s 530(b) and s 488(3)(c) of the Act, together with the company.
- Accordingly I find that:
- Pursuant to s 488 of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000, the claim is partially allowed in the sum of $10,014.94.
- Pursuant to s 489 of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000, at the expiration of the appeal period the Chief Executive must pay to the Applicant the sum of $10,014.94 from the Claim Fund, and if there is an appeal, payment must not be made until after the appeal is finally decided.
- Pursuant to s 488(3)(c) of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000 the Respondents, Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate, Mr Thein Dinh Chau and Mrs Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau are named as the persons liable for the financial loss of the applicant.
- Upon payment from the Claim Fund and pursuant to s 490 and s 530 of the Property Agents and Motor Dealers Act 2000, Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate, Mr Thein Dinh Chau and Mrs Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau are jointly and severally liable to reimburse the Claim Fund by paying the sum of $10,014.94 to the Chief Executive, Department of Justice and Attorney-General.
- Published Case Name:
Nga Le v Mayaroma Pty Ltd t/a Chau Real Estate, Thien Dinh Chau and Hanh Thi Ngoc Chau
- Shortened Case Name:
Le v Mayaroma Pty Ltd
 QCAT 124
24 Apr 2015