Proposition 53K2517

Projet de loi organisant la profession d'agent immobilier.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP the Di Rupo government

Submission date

Nov. 22, 2012

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

professional ethics professional society organisation of professions broker real estate business access to a profession disciplinary proceedings freedom to provide services

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld MR

Voted to reject

VB

Abstained from voting

∉ N-VA

Party dissidents ¶

• Peter Logghe (VB) abstained from voting.
• Peter Luykx (CD&V) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

Jan. 10, 2013 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Minister, colleagues, on 11 December in the committee was discussed the bill holding the organization of the profession of real estate agent. For detailed information, I would like to refer to the report of the committee, but I will give a brief summary here. Next, I will explain why the N-VA abstains in the vote.

The Minister explained that the bill addresses the demand to improve existing legislation. The committee agrees with this. For example, the table of real estate agents is divided into two columns: on the one hand the real estate agents-intermediaries, on the other hand the real estate agents-syndicates. In addition, certain procedural rules are also being changed to prevent the fraud of unfair syndicates.

At the same time, the Flemish Interest Group submitted a bill for the establishment of a Dutch-speaking and a French-speaking professional institute, in order to meet the wish of the Confederation of Real Estate Professions. The unitary and paritary composed organ is inefficient. The problems with BIV stem from contrasting visions, which deal with organizational and socio-economic factors. That was the motivation of Vlaams Belang.

The committee, however, did not support that bill, among other things, to give institutional decentralization all opportunities in the future. Indeed, the Council of Ministers of 25 May 2012 postponed pillars 1 and 2 concerning decentralization in light of the upcoming sixth state reform.

The main reasons for the abstinence in the vote of the N-VA. It is a missed opportunity if decentralization is not carried out now. The sector itself is the demanding party, it has already found a comparison and is already working decentralized in practice. The legislative work therefore lies behind the work on the ground.

It was also remarkable that the State Council’s opinion states that different systems of duty doctrine are not clearly defined. This is crucial, however, because it is about ensuring quality for the consumer. The real estate consumer should be given an efficient and unambiguous quality for that service, regardless of the principal profession of the practitioner, whether notary, landmeter or real estate agent.

The disciplinary process law is indeed an improvement, but also there was more to get out of it. Some concepts are too vague and lead to arbitrariness. It also continues to seek a delicate balance between transparency and the right to privacy.

In addition, all the powers in deontology and discipline are further consolidated, which, of course, complicates future division.

It is also offensive that the federal dome remains competent for the establishment and recognition of internships, while training and training are subjects of the Communities.

In short, no one can make major objections to this bill, but unfortunately it is a missed opportunity. The present bill is only a slender version of the reform that was announced. For this reason, the N-VA abstained from voting in the committee.

Mevrouw Coudyser, bedankt in proficiat met uw maidenspeech in de plenary vergadering. (The Applause)

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker.

The real estate agent business now benefits from a specific framework that will allow for increased professionalization, but also, or even above all, which will mean more transparency and rigour.

If the reorganization does not profoundly disrupt the very structure of the IPI (Professional Institute of Real Estate Agents), which could be the subject of the next reform, it will ⁇ , we hope, the essential objective of restoring confidence in the heads of consumers and more ⁇ of co-owners by giving them in the end a better protection. If co-owners will see themselves better protected, this will also be the case for tenants who also suffer the direct effects of undelicated syndics.

In the end, the whole chain will be better defended.

Of course, this is a first step. It will be necessary to continue and address the training of real estate agents, guaranteeing a quality service and minimum standards common to the whole of a profession that holds an important place in the daily life of many people. This is more true for trade unions whose work directly affects the well-being and daily comfort of hundreds of thousands of people, especially those living in apartments.

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Minister, dear colleagues, the bill of Minister Sabine Laruelle, which is submitted to us today, adapts the existing legislation on the profession of real estate agent. The changes made to this legislation allow, among other things, to clarify the role of each and restore the trust of real estate consumers.

In particular, we will keep in mind the distinction that will be made between intermediate real estate agents and syndicate real estate agents. This division will allow for the imposition of specific obligations on these two categories in terms of professional liability insurance, minimum capital or vocational training.

Among the adjustments envisaged in the text, the possibility of exercising the profession of real estate agent with limited liability in the form of a legal person, the heightening of penalties for the most serious cases, such as abuse, the improvement of the course and transparency of disciplinary proceedings are not negligible advances.

We also note that the obligation for real estate agents to ensure their professional responsibility, as well as the commitment of the Professional Institute of real estate agents in this regard, are to be positively emphasized.

The proposal to split into two institutes, one French-speaking and the other Dutch-speaking, has not been abandoned; it has been transferred to the Committee for the Implementation of Institutional Reforms, which we find consistent.

I will further emphasize that this text is the compromise arising from the consultations with the various instances of the sector, the Professional Institute of Real Estate Agents, the National Syndicate of Owners and the representatives of the liberal professions. The balance has been achieved, which is obviously very important.

Finally, I thank the Minister for performing this acrobatic exercise with a certain precision and a sense of measurement.

Mrs. Minister, no one will deny that your bill proposes measures that are useful and necessary. Syndicates will indeed be better and more controlled. They must annually provide a list of buildings in which they are active. It is intended to give the Professional Institute of Real Estate Brokers more tools to effectively act against a certain minority of real estate brokers who go wrong. Their name and surname will be made public and a penalty will be added. Professional liability insurance, in the interest of everyone, of course, becomes mandatory. Consumers can only get better. It also wants to adapt the conditions for exercising the profession to the European requirements. Until then I can follow. I said that in the committee.

However, you did not take advantage of the opportunity to make some fundamental changes. For example, you did not use it – which is not surprising to me – to adapt the structure, organization and daily functioning of the real estate agent profession and the professional institutions to the socio-economic reality of the profession and the country.

Therefore, the Flemish Interest Group has submitted its proposal to divide the Beroepsinstitut van Vastgoedmakelaars into a Netherlands-speaking and a French-speaking institute. You will remember that we had a reason before the first submission.

After all, the complicated voting procedure for that institution actually ensured that the Flemish majority in the national council was bound. The unified national council does not work efficiently, as has already been said. The Executive Chamber and the Chamber of Appeal were in fact already divided since the establishment of the BIV. So you are there with a very hybrid structure that, in our view, could have been best addressed in the present bill. The division of the National Council, of the Bureau and of the Budget is actually just a puddle in comparison to what has already happened. We are therefore very sorry that you did not take advantage of the opportunity to carry out the split.

Is this just a language problem? No, and you know that. The Flamings and the French speakers have developed a different vision in many real estate policy areas. This is not only due to cultural differences, but also to a significant extent to differences in organizational and economic reality. The real estate agents in the different regions also have legislation that is increasingly diverging, which covers a different reality and which therefore also requires different organizational rules. Mrs. Minister, here you have missed an opportunity to go further and, as our colleague said, to capture the reality with the legislation. You are still following the reality with your bill.

There is more, Mr. Minister. In our statement that we have not taken advantage of the opportunity to move forward, we are supported by the BIV. That recently released a paper stating that the consumer could have been even better defended in the bill, which you sadly left behind.

The purchase or sale of a property can be done, for example, by a real estate agent, as well as by a notary or a landmeter. One can have an apartment building managed by a syndic or by an architect. However, the protection is different, the BIV regrets that you have not gone further and that in the bill you have not developed a uniform regulatory framework for all professions that manage or mediate real estate. You have missed that opportunity.

You have also failed to review the access to the appeal and open the appeal. This is a serious criticism, Mr. Minister. I would therefore like to see that you, to the extent possible, try to follow.

The BIV also complains that you did not use the bill to expand access and to open the profession to anyone who achieves a certain level of diploma, provided that a competence test and an individual training path. You continue to swear by an endless list of diplomas. We find that regrettable.

Our political group will therefore not approve the draft, but in order to emphasize the importance of some of the good points you realized with your draft law, I will abstain at the vote.

The draft law has several objectives. As you explain very well in the motivation, it must serve to make more effective the means of combating the indelicacies of a minority of real estate agents. Indeed, the sector was plagued by the behavior of some of them who had manifestly abused the situation and thus had forged a negative image of this professional environment. But it is also important to address other points contained in your project.

It first offers the possibility of exercising this profession under the cover of a company. It is often forgotten that this is one of the only sectors where this was previously impossible. In addition, it allows the implementation of a 2006 European Directive opening this profession to citizens of the European Union.

The project meets the wishes of my group. It provides the Institute with the means to control unlawful behavior. In this regard, I note that it will be up to the King, therefore the Government, to determine the conditions for the appointment of legal advisors and how they will be dismissed. Because the method used to remove them is sometimes as important as how to name them. We will pay attention to this aspect of things. The text was supplemented by an amendment covering insurance-indelicacy. In this regard, I remind you that I had insisted in the commission on the fact that the exercise of the profession of syndic was not the appendage of real estate agents. Therefore, there was the risk of resulting in the following situations: if a real estate agency performed the function of syndic, it would be covered by its professional order; whereas if someone exercised a profession admitted to perform this function, the insurance-indélicatesse did not apply. Therefore, these different cases should be uniformized.

It is important – and this is what is at the heart of this bill – to ensure the transparency of this sector, which is in full evolution. Because co-ownership has profoundly changed over the last twenty years. The text meets this goal. Therefore, I can tell you that I will vote on the draft and the amendment that we have adopted in the committee.

I think there is nothing to add. It is clear that this project does not split the IPI. Some regret it and it is so bad for them. This is not the objective of this project, nor is it intended to create primary protectionism with regard to other professions that carry out the activity of real estate agent.

In this project, a number of steps are taken to subject every individual who performs acts of real estate agent, even under a different status, to the same ethical rules. I would like to thank the members of Parliament who understood the project and who will support it. In addition, I would like to thank the others too.

Mrs. Minister, the parliamentarians who will vote against later do that not because they have not understood your draft. The reason is elsewhere and you know that well enough.