Could I be sued for defamation of character?

Respectable Members

Some fifty years ago, when the word 'vintage-watch' was exclusively reserved for the top-end Patek Philippe pocket and wrist-watches, I started collecting wrist-watches, then termed as 'used' or 'second-hand'. Today, an old watch of any brand-name is described as a 'vintage-watch'.

There were no literature, books or forums to guide me, unlike today, and I would pick up just any brand-name, as long as the dial and case of a watch look appealing to me. I knew nothing about movement or caliber number, a watch houses - even until today. I always gave preference to buying solid gold watches, not because of their gold content but because I tried to save them from the furnace of the gold-smiths, when the price of gold shot sky-high. The stainless-steel ones were safe and left untouched.

Even though, I held respectable jobs and I was well-paid, at times I had to beg and borrow money, in order to salvage some of the massive solid gold watches, surprisingly including Patek Philippe, Rolex and Omega watches, too. I had a countless number of these watches, some with and others without their factory-original bracelets.

Just for example, I can still remember, some time in 1982 a used Patek Philippe Moon-phase model reference 3448, with leather-band, was on offer for S$15 000.00 (approximately US$7 500.00, then) and there was no one interested in it. I borrowed some money to buy it, from one of the casual-dealers, who acquired the watch from a rich tin-miner, across the cause-way. All round me, I could hear friends saying, 'You die. How much only is the value of the gold content? You have been cheated by the dealer.' I could not careless, even though in truth, I realized not many people knew, Patek Philippe stands in a world of its own, leaving Audemars Piguet, Rolex, Omega and Longines, miles behind.

Just before leaving for Australia in 1986, an order I placed for a brand-new Patek Philippe Moon-phase model reference 3450Q, with leather-band, arrived. It came with a special plexi exhibition back plus its original 18k solid gold back-cover. It was only S$28 000.00 (approximately US$14 000.00, then). Since I had no money left on me and I was about to leave my mother-land, nobody wanted to lend me any money.

I approached my family-lawyer and he was shocked to learn of a watch with such a price-tag. He showed me a S$10.00 Casio watch on his wrist. On top of the unbelievably high price for a watch, he admitted he had never came across a watch, bearing the name of Patek Philippe but if Rolex or Omega, yes he knew about them. I forced him to trust me and just buy the watch and he would never regret. He gave me the cash and I put into my bank account and issued Patek Philippe Showroom and Service Center, a cheque for the full amount. I picked up the watch and straight-away surrendered it to my family-lawyer friend.

Each time, I revisited my mother-land, I discovered he did not wear the watch, since it is too big for his wrist. From 1986 till today, this watch is still hiding in his bank safe-deposit box. Of course, over the years he began to learn more about watches and he swore, he will never part with the Patek Philippe, I sold to him. He took a gamble and he won.

Here in Australia, I was doing very well and I added more broods to my collections, till a real estate agent, working for one of the most established and one of the oldest real estate agencies in Australia, tried to rob me, when I wanted to sell my home, due to poor business. I could not meet the monthly home-loan service. Instead of selling my home at an auction, he tried to sell the property to a 'phantom-buyer', at virtually land-value.

One by one of my beloved watches had to be sold to friends, with the promise I would buy them back, once my home was sold. For six months, this real estate agent had only one buyer - the phantom-buyer and no one else. I decided to give it to another agent and the new agent got me a buyer with a higher price but somehow or rather, the 1st agent had already built a good rapport with an asset realization officer of the finance company. The finance company realization officer refused to allow me to sell my property to the buyer who offered me a better price. I was given an ultimatum to sell the house to the phantom-buyer and use the 1st agent or he would execute a court judgement order against me and seize the property. I refused to accede to his request and a judgement was entered against me, forcing me to sell my property to the phantom-buyer through the 1st agent. Otherwise, a sheriff would come down to evict me, without further notice.

Somehow or rather, on the 11th hour, I managed to get the house refinanced albeit a at very high interest rate because, at one time when I told the first agent, if he could not get me a buyer with a descent price, I would refinance. Hardly a week after that, the finance company black-listed me with Baycorps. Ironically, the finance company did not black-list me and gave me time to sell, so as to pay-off the loan I had with them. There was no reason to black-list me, since I informed them that I would sell-off my home. For seven months, they did not black-list me, since I had the option to refinance and pay-off.

When giving to the agent my property to be auctioned, he asked me to sign two contracts, one fully filled-up and another in blank. The first contract showed his true appraisal of my home value, while the second set of contract was totally left blank with only my signatures on it. After I managed to refinance, I was willing to let sleeping dogs lie but the real estate agency demanded I pay for the auction advertising campaign costs. I refused and brought the matter to the office of Fair Trading and later heard by the Tribunal. During the Tribunal hearing, I brought to the attention of the member, the real estate agent falsified the auction agency contract. The real estate agent swore on oath, only one set of contract was ever issued. I have documentary evidence, two sets were signed by me.

Since I have been trampled, there is no money left for me to sue the agent and his real estate agency, I am now contemplating on selling the story, just to remind others to be wary, when dealing with some of the unscrupulous agents, mentioning his name and the agency name. Can he sue me for defamation, even though I have documentary evidence and circumstancial evidence that the agent did team-up with the asset realization officer of the finance company to rob me of my home, by forcing me to sell my property to a phantom-buyer, even though I had a buyer with a higher offer and also, I had a document that the agent's boss agreed to my selling the property to the buyer with a higher price. Please advise.

Thank-you.

Seems to me that if it's the truth there's no legal ground to sue you, but I'm no lawyer and nowadays truth is secondary to money.

Respectable dsio

Thanks for your response.

As for the office of Fair Trading, I made an application with them, refusing to pay the real estate agency their claim for the auction campaign advertising costs, amounting to more than $8 000.00, since the auction agency contract was 'falsified' and flawed. However, my application was dismissed and their order was that I had to pay the real estate agent their full claim for the costs incurred during the auction campaign. Ironically, despite the order was in their favor and the fact the real estate agency was, before the Tribunal hearing, chasing me like a grey-hound after a rabbit, till today seven years after, they do not have the guts to send me any letter of demand.

The Tribunal member was confused, when I brought up the issue of double contracts signed by me, and he told me, the numbers on the top right hand corner of both the contracts, which I alleged to be different, showed the same number, XXX. I told him that number is for the form type or form reference number and not a serial number. Again, he appeared confused.

During the Tribunal hearing, the office of Fair Trading noted my allegations that I was asked to sign two contracts by the agent, one fully signed and another in blank and the OFT promised to ask the relevant body to investigate. The real estate agent disputed my allegations and swore on oath, he only asked me to sign only one set of contract. I showed to the member of the Tribunal, the evidence of the two contracts that I signed.

Anyway, what does it show? Despite the Tribunal member's order that the real estate agency could demand the costs of advertising incurred, yet they did not. I smell something a little uncomfortable, regarding the order made against me.

After some while, I asked for the report of their investigations and they said they could not give it to me the investigations report, since if I made the report public, which they have no control over it, it will adversely affect the business of the real estate agency. Surely my allegations are proven to be true, otherwise the agency business will not be adversely affected and why am I not allowed access to it, since I am the complainant?

I do not think, I will want to take up this issue with other relevant agencies. I will only be wasting their time.

Thank-you.

Respectable Member ulackfocus


Thanks for your your response.

Yes agree, truth is secondary to money. I will want him to sue me, so that the matter will go to Court and all documents will then become public property and the world at large will be wary, when they have dealings with some of the sly, callous and unscrupulous real estate agents.

I have lost everything, including all the precious vintage-watches, collected over the years, as well as, my home. Both my sons' education was compromised and the family had to endure sleepless nights and full of uncertainties. I have been stung and trampled and I want others to be wary and not take things for granted, when dealing with unethical elements.

One thing I know, the Courts in Australia are just and extremely fair, in all their dealings. Australia is not a third world-country.

Thank-you.

Respectable Member dsio

Thanks for coming back to me and your interest about where I come from.

I come from a small island-city, very close to the equator and there is no daylight saving, there.

It is a paradise, when we talk about watches. You can find all the top-end watches, there. However, a few of the watches may be bad or ugly, just like the real estate agents here, though our real estate industry is regulated. The crooked ones may still find a loop-hole to rob.

It is Singapore.

Thank-you.

Sorry I can not offer any help on your predicament, its a very sad story. I hope good will overcome. But if you show as much vision and tenacity as you did buying those Patek Philippe watches in the 80's i'm sure the courts will see the truth.

Respectable Member Steve

Thanks for your response and also, highlighting my 'vision and tenacity'. I shall apply these attributes against this perpetrator. I cannot just sit down and say, 'Thank you, Mr Real Estate Agent' for making me lose all my irreplacable vintage-watches and losing my beloved home too, as well as, causing predicament to the whole family.

It was a pre-planned exploitation on a helpless vendor.

Most of the unscrupulous agents are aware, once they have trampled someone, the victim cannot afford to feed the family and there is a remote chance the victim is able to engage a competent lawyer to look into the matter. For them, it is gamble worth taking.

The office of Fair Trading acknowledged that I had to sell, in view of my financial difficulties. Having to sell and having to be robbed, are two different animals, altogether.

Anyway, despite my application for refusing to pay the auction advertising costs was dismissed by the OFT, the order is a blessing in disguise. The fact the defendant was allowed to demand the costs from me and did not exercise it, tells a story.

Prior to the Tribunal hearing, I was privileged to inspect the real estate agency's file and vice-versa. I was reluctant to take advantage of the offer. My wife pressured me to do so and I did, on the eleventh hour. In the file, I discovered several very important documents that I had never seen before.

One of the more important discovered documents, sent to my solicitor by the unscrupulous agent's boss, dated December 7 (presumably in the morning), shows the boss agreed that my home be sold to the buyer who gave me the higher offer (plus an option to lease-back on a long-term basis), introduced to me by the other agent. Co-incidentally this same buyer was present during the auction open-house inspection, arranged by the unscrupulous agent. As a result, the asset realization officer of the finance company, sent an email to my solicitor on December 5, expressing consent to the sale and the commission be shared equally among the two real estate agencies. Both these documents, the email to my solicitor sent by the asset realization officer and the document sent by the unscrupulous real estate agent's boss to my solicitor, were never brought to my attention.

In the early afternoon of December 7, the unscrupulous agent rang me up and said that his buyer (I suspect, 'phantom') was willing to match the offer made by the other buyer. He asked me, which buyer would I choose to sell my property to and also, which agent would I use, he or the other agent. When my answers did not meet his approval, despite my telling him I would give to him 100% commission, since I would get an option to lease-back offered by the other buyer. This telephone conversation was covered by an email, I sent to my solicitor.

A few hours after that, the asset realization officer executed a Court order to repossess my home. He back-flipped on his earlier decision of December 5.

On December 8, the asset realization officer sent an email to my solicitor, specifically spelling out, among others, the following.

The property be sold to the 'phantom-buyer' (and not to the other buyer, despite the higher offer) and only the unscrupulous agent is authorized to sell my property, while no other agents would be recognized.

I had to give my consent to the above, within 24 hours and if I did not accede to his demand, the house will be repossessed and I had to move out by December 22 and surrender the property to the finance company or I would be evicted by the sheriff.

The asset realization officer stressed that he would not allow me to lease-back my home, once it is sold.

The are lots of bluffs in the whole scenario.

Thank-you.

Respectable Members

I have just emailed my solicitor, asking him for advice and please let me know, what you think of it.


Hi Mr David
I intend constructing a Website, exposing the perpetrators to the world at large, with one aim in mind. It is not retribution but I want to be compensated for my loss and the family's sufferings, since 2005 to date. Apart from this, if the wrong-doers go unpunished, very likely they will prey on other grieving vendors with their dubious tricks.
Instead of introducing a Website and at once, telling the world what the perpetrators had done this and that to me, why not we just initially introduce a Website with pseudonyms, highlighting the important events that had taken place.
For example:
(With a catchy introduction that will make people want to know, who the actual culprits are.)
Pseudonyms used in the following.

Coincidence 1

The real estate agent Peter was made aware that I was offered $1.4m by another real estate agent, Sam. The offer was declined. Later another agent got us an offer of $1.2m, after he casually advertised twice on the Saturday issue of 'The Sydney Morning Herald'. This offer was declined, too.

I told Peter, I wanted my property to be sold for $1.6m. He then appraised the property at $1.5m. He filled up an agency agreement and asked me to sign on the front and back pages. Just before he left, he asked me to sign another contract with nothing written on it, on the front and back pages, too. I remember his saying, 'to make my boss happy' and off he went.

Unknown to me, Peter had his reason for appraising our property at $1.5 million. He has already pre-planned and engineered a scheme, before the agency agreement was even signed. Deliberately he appraised my property at $1.5m, so that the figure '5' could easily be amended to look like '3', which he did down the track and admitted to the Tribunal Member during the Hearing.

He swore on oath at the Tribunal Hearing, there was one contract ever issued and signed by me. He profusely refuted my allegations that I was asked to sign two contracts, one fully filled-up and another in blank.

Coincidence 2

Despite a relatively short period of the 'open-house' inviting potential buyers to inspect the property, there were 79 lots of people coming down to inspect our property and 11 contracts were issued. Ironically, Peter reported to us, the interest on the property was below expectation.

Of pertinence, there were two offers, one from Mr X for $1.15m and another from Mr Y for $1.2m, despite the fact Peter appraised our property for $1.5m.

Needless to say, prior to giving him the property to be put to auction, he was made aware that we had already declined an offer of $1.4m and $1.2m from two real estate agents. Peter assured me, at an auction with a little bit of luck, he could get for me more than $1.6m, which I wanted. On a good day however, our property could be sold at the auction for $1.8m or more, he reiterated.

Some while before the auction night, Peter pressured us to sell our property to Mr Y for $1.2m with a 5% deposit and a delayed settlement. I asked him to speak to my lenders, whether or not they would agree to a delayed settlement, apart from the fact I told him, I would not sell our property for $1.2m, definitely. He advised me, it would be a waste of time, going to the auction and we should just sell to Mr Y.

On the auction night, the auction was sabotaged and there was not even one bid.

Coincidence 3

After the auction was over, we asked Peter to open the house for private inspections and he did. Only when asked, he said there was no interested party at all and he suggested, we should just sell it to Mr Y, unless we wanted to see our property repossessed by our lenders with whom, we have defaulted the monthly installments. However, our lenders were kind enough to allow us to take our time to sell our property and subsequently repay them the full amount of the home-loan plus the arrears.

Hardly a week after the auction, again Peter pressurized me to sell to Mr Y. I put my foot down and told him blankly, if he could not get us another buyer, we could always refinance and pay-off our lenders. He told us, we would not be able to, since we have defaulted for more than three months and we would have already been black-listed by our lenders.

I was not aware, whether or not we were black-listed, since we had made arrangement with our lenders and that we would not service the monthly repayment. Once the house was sold, we would re-pay out loan plus the arrears. our lenders acceded to our request and gave us time to look for a buyer.

Hardly a week after I informed Peter that if he could not get us a buyer, we could always refinance, we were black-listed by our lenders.

Surprisingly, for nine months after default, we were not black-listed by our lenders. After informing Peter that we could always refinance and pay-off our lenders, we were black-listed, hardly a few days after.

Coincidence 4

Peter came back to inform me that Mr Y was willing to increase his offer from $1.2m to $1.25m and since I told him that at $1.2m, our solicitor had said, we could not even settle, Peter informed me, our lenders were willing to write-off all our arrears, pay-off the agent's commission, pay-off our arrears with the council and also, take care of our 2nd mortgagee. However all this will happen, if we agreed to move out of the house, prior to settlement. I told him, we would not want that condition - moving out of the house. We would sell and take all the perks. After settlement only, we would move out.

A few days after the offer and the perks were refused, since I refused to move out, prior to settlement, we received a Statement of Claim from the NSW Supreme Court, lodged by our lenders, demanding that we repay our loan plus arrears. We were given 28 days to file a defense.

Coincidence 5

Since Peter had only one buyer in Mr Y for $1.25m, we decided to enlist another agent and gave to the new agent Paul, an exclusive agency. We informed the agent, in view of the urgency, we were willing to sell for $1.45m. Peter was then informed and he threw tantrum.

Hardly three or four days after that, our solicitor rang up and said our lenders wanted to send a valuer to value our property. Furthermore, Peter wanted to be present to show the valuer around.
Peter influenced the valuer to value our property low, so that the asset realization officer of our lenders would allow the property to be sold. Unknowing to us, with the low valuation, our lenders will be able to force us to sell the property to Mr Y at $1.2m. Later we realized, when our property was valued low, it gave the lenders the opportunity to seize our home, since there would be no more equity left.

Coincidence 6

Paul got us a buyer Mr X for 1.3m and our lenders approved the sale. Paul gave Peter a conjunction and he signed it. Peter's boss agreed the commission be divided between the two agencies of 50% each. I was not made aware of the progress of the sale.

Later on the same day, Peter rang me to say, his buyer Mr Y was willing to increase his offer from $1.25m to $1.3m to match Mr X's offer. I profusely refused to accept Peter's demand that I sell to Mr Y.

Hardly a few hours after this telephone call, the asset realization officer of our lenders, obtained a Court order to repossess our property. He back-flipped on his earlier decision, allowing the property to be sold to Mr X and the commission be shared between the two agencies. The officer contacted our solicitor, informing her, the sale had to go to Mr Y instead and I was not allowed to deal with other agents, except Peter.

We expect the culprit or someone from his office may come across this Website. Hopefully, this unscrupulous real estate agent and his agency will know that we are going to expose the culprits to the world at large, via the internet. We shall then see what their reaction is going to be.
We may also select and later add some important answers/lies uttered by the perpetrator, from the transcription of the Tribunal Hearing. Every week, we will add the story bit by bit or describe in detail Coincidence 1 and the next Coincidence 2, and so forth, till we come to the Tribunal Hearing transcription.
Please let me know, what you think.
Regards to you and your team.
Thanks and regards.