# Buyer's agency collapse leaves 695 clients owed $10.6 million Liquidators' figures for the failed buyer's agency Dashdot show $10.59 million in prepaid fees owed to 695 clients. Three industry bodies now want tighter rules on fees and licensing. --- The liquidation of the buyer's agency Dashdot has left 695 clients claiming $10.59 million for services they paid for in advance and refunds they were promised, according to liquidators' figures reported by Real Estate Business on 18 June. On 23 June the same publication reported that three industry bodies, the Real Estate Buyers Agents Association of Australia (REBAA), the Property Investors Council of Australia (PICA) and Property Investment Professionals of Australia (PIPA), are calling for reform of how buyer's agents are licensed and paid. The company went into liquidation on 28 May 2026, with Teneo Financial Advisory Australia appointed as liquidator. Real Estate Business describes it as a leading Australian buyer's agency, and its clients were property investors spread around the country. For Queensland readers, whichever state their own agent works from, the questions it raises are practical ones: how fees are taken, what a licence proves, and what the state's own rules already require of anyone who buys property here for a client.

What is claimed and what is leftDashdot liquidation, $ million

Liquidators' figures as reported by Real Estate Business, 18 June 2026. Clients' claims cover prepaid services and refunds.

## What the liquidators' figures show The numbers reported by Real Estate Business describe a business with very little left. Total creditor claims stand at $16.57 million. Against that, the estimated realisable assets are $70,674, which leaves a shortfall of about $16.5 million. Clients make up the largest group. The 695 customers are owed $10.59 million between them, a figure the publication gives precisely elsewhere as $10,594,079. Spread evenly, that is a little over $15,000 a client, although individual claims vary with what each person paid and how far their purchase had progressed. The reports also describe a change in ownership that preceded the failure. More than 95 per cent of the company's shares were transferred in February 2024 to a holding company domiciled in the British Virgin Islands, for $100, Real Estate Business reported. The company's founders have attributed the collapse to economic conditions, weaker investor sentiment and reduced borrowing capacity. Industry figures quoted in the same coverage point instead to the speed at which the business grew. Those are competing accounts, and the liquidator's investigation is the process that tests them. ## How the fees were structured The feature of the business that has drawn most comment is the way clients paid. According to Real Estate Business, the agency charged upfront fees ranging from $6,000 to more than $22,000. Clients were also given a contractual promise: that the property bought for them would outperform the market by at least 10 per cent, or the fee would be refunded in full. Both elements are unusual. A fee paid in advance moves the risk of non-performance from the agent to the client. If the agent stops trading before the property is found, the client has paid for a service that was not delivered and becomes one creditor among many. A performance guarantee adds a second promise that depends entirely on the company still existing, and still having money, when the time comes to honour it. Zoran Solano, REBAA's vice-president, told the publication that upfront fees of $15,000 to $20,000 were "abnormally large". He described the structure the association regards as ordinary: a small engagement fee at the start, with the bulk of the fee earned only when a purchase is successfully completed. He also cautioned that guarantees about market performance were too good to be true. ## The list of replacement agents The 18 June report dealt with what happened to clients after the liquidation. The failed agency referred its stranded customers to nearly 50 "approved" buyer's agencies that had agreed to help them. Real Estate Business reviewed the list and reported concerns about its quality. It found part-time operators who held full-time jobs in other fields, agents with less than six months' experience in the role, and people who had come to the work from retail, technology, healthcare and teaching. Seven of the agencies had been operating for less than two years. Several were not registered for GST, which a business must be once its turnover reaches $75,000. One of the listed agents could not be found on real estate licence registers at all, the publication said. None of that means the agencies on the list were incapable. A new business is not a bad one, and many respected buyer's agents came from other careers. The finding matters because of what it shows about entry to the profession. The barrier is a general real estate licence or registration, and a person who clears it may describe themselves as a buyer's agent from the first day. ## What the industry bodies are asking for The three bodies quoted on 23 June start from different positions and arrive at similar requests. REBAA represents agencies that act only for buyers. Its emphasis was on fee structure and on experience: it steered consumers toward established agencies whose principals have worked through more than one property cycle. PIPA represents property investment professionals across several occupations. Its chair, Cate Bakos, called for improved licensing and for national regulation of the industry. She criticised business models built on rapid growth and urged better training in due diligence and risk management, along with consistency between the states' licensing pathways, which currently differ. PICA speaks for investors as consumers. Its chair, Ben Kingsley, warned against what he called self-interested property spruikers and gave the most direct consumer message of the three. "Never pay 100 per cent upfront," he told Real Estate Business, adding that payment should follow the service as it is delivered.

What each body asked forAs reported on 23 June 2026

Body	Who it represents	Main request
REBAA	Agencies acting only for buyers	Small engagement fee, the rest on completion; no market guarantees.
PIPA	Property investment professionals	Stronger licensing, national regulation, consistent state pathways.
PICA	Property investors	No full payment upfront; caution about promised returns.

Taken together, the list of reforms reported by the publication covers stronger licensing standards, transparency requirements, restrictions on upfront fees, an end to performance guarantees and consistent professional qualifications across the states. None of these is a government proposal. They are requests from industry and investor groups, and no regulator is quoted in the coverage as having responded. ## Where Queensland's rules already stand Some of what is being asked for exists in Queensland in general form, and some does not. Licensing is in place. Buying property for others for reward is real estate agency work under the Property Occupations Act 2014, and the Office of Fair Trading's licensing pages state that a licence or registration is required. A full licence rests on 19 units of training and a salesperson's registration on 12. What the state does not have is a qualification specific to buyer representation. REBAA made that point in a statement in June 2025, when it argued that generic licensing prepares people to sell property, not to buy it for clients. Written terms are in place too. The Queensland Government's guidance for buyers says a buyer's agent is appointed on Form 6, and that the form must state the services, any limits on them, all commissions, fees and expenses, and the date each is due. The Office of Fair Trading adds that a property agent cannot provide services before that written appointment exists, and that an appointment must not contain unfair contract terms. What the Queensland rules do not do is cap a buyer's agent's fee or dictate when it is paid. The Office of Fair Trading states that it sets no limit on the commission an agent may charge and that agents and clients are free to negotiate. An upfront fee of the size described in the Dashdot reports would have to be written on the form, with its due date, but writing it down is what the law asks. Whether to agree to it is left to the client.

In Queensland

Every fee, and its due date, must be on the appointment form

Government guidance says a buyer's agent's appointment must set out all commissions, fees and expenses and when each is payable. The form shows a client, before signing, how much is asked for in advance and how much depends on a purchase going through.

## What comes next Three processes now run in parallel. The liquidation continues. A liquidator's task is to collect what assets exist, investigate the company's affairs and report to creditors. With realisable assets estimated at $70,674 against claims of $16.57 million, the published figures give clients little reason to expect a meaningful return, though the final position depends on what the investigation recovers. Clients who still want to buy are deciding whether to engage another agency, from the referral list or elsewhere. A new engagement is a new appointment on new terms, with a new fee. The reform argument moves to governments. Licensing of real estate agents is a state matter, which is why PIPA's call for national regulation and consistent pathways is the most ambitious item on the list: it would need the states to act together. A change to Queensland's own requirements would come through the Property Occupations Act or its regulation. No such proposal has been announced. The profession's own bodies have been careful to separate one company's model from the work most buyer's agents do. Their shared message to consumers is about sequence: a modest amount to begin, and the main fee when there is a result to pay for.