Sydney real estate agent suspended, fined after buying vulnerable man’s home for half its value

A Sydney real estate agent has been suspended for 12 months and fined A$11,000 after buying the home of an elderly man with Alzheimer’s disease for A$600,000 — about half the price of a neighboring home that sold for A$1.1 million a month earlier. The Civil and Administrative Tribunal delivered the ruling against Rachelle Nohra, the director of Eser Property, in a decision that highlighted concerns about the treatment of vulnerable clients in real estate transactions. The purchase occurred in April 2023, when the 82-year-old man relied on Nohra to manage his finances and decisions under a power of attorney arrangement. The tribunal underscored the breadth of the power she held and the potential consequences of her actions for the client and the wider industry.

Rachelle Nohra, who runs Eser Property, has denied that she took advantage of the pensioner, who also had alcohol issues and a form of dementia. The tribunal’s findings emphasize that the man depended on her for financial and personal decisions, and it was on that basis that the case was examined. The tribunal noted that the elderly man agreed to sell the home on the condition that he would be able to remain living there for as long as he required, but the agent did not secure his tenure in the property, exposing him to the risk of eviction. This outcome meant he could face a 90-day eviction process, giving him only a short window to locate alternative accommodation. The decision paints a stark picture of how power can be used in such arrangements and the potential harm when tenure protections are not guaranteed.

The tribunal’s Senior Member Lachlan Bryant described the pensioner as isolated and vulnerable when approached by Nohra. He said that Nohra’s belief that purchasing the property in the circumstances was the right thing to do was of serious concern and criticized the conduct as potentially placing the real estate industry in disrepute and falling short of the community’s expectations of a licence holder. The panel upheld a decision by the Commissioner of Fair Trading to suspend Nohra’s licence for 12 months and to fine her A$11,000. In his assessment, the conduct was deliberate and of major harm and severity, reflecting a clear breach of standards expected of licensed professionals.

The neighbour’s home, which sold for A$1.1 million roughly a month before the purchase, underscores the gap between market values in the same street and the price at which the pensioner’s home was acquired. The tribunal noted that the 82-year-old man’s capacity to sell was undermined by his cognitive and health challenges, including alcohol issues and dementia, and that those factors must have been foremost in any evaluation of the deal. The tribunal’s ruling signals the seriousness with which such disparities are viewed in licensing proceedings and the government’s commitment to protecting vulnerable individuals from exploitation within real estate transactions.

Nohra has criticized the interpretation of the events, and Daily Mail reported that she was contacted for comment on the tribunal’s findings. Her public-facing bio on the Eser Property website emphasizes persistence, patience and a tireless drive to secure the best possible result for clients, which lawmakers and the tribunal found incompatible with the conduct in this case under the circumstances described. The decision and its reasoning released by the tribunal provide a formal reprimand that serves as a warning to industry participants about the boundaries of advocacy, fiduciary duty, and the responsibilities attached to power of attorney in real estate transactions.

The case contributes to a broader conversation in Australia about safeguarding older and vulnerable clients in real estate deals, particularly around powers of attorney, capacity assessments, and tenure protections for sellers who rely on agents to manage complex transactions. While the property market has seen strong growth in many regions, the tribunal’s decision demonstrates that licensing bodies will impose disciplinary measures when licensed professionals are perceived to put personal gain ahead of client welfare. The ruling also illustrates how quickly the dynamics of family and financial responsibility can intersect with professional licensure and consumer protections.

As this matter concludes in a formal disciplinary setting, industry observers expect the case to inform ongoing discussions about ethical standards, training requirements for real estate professionals, and the effectiveness of safeguards designed to prevent exploitation of elderly or cognitively impaired sellers. Whether the decision will lead to further scrutiny of similar cases remains to be seen, but the tribunal’s decision clearly signals that violations involving power of attorney and vulnerable clients will be treated seriously and met with enforcement actions when warranted.