Key Takeaway points
- The Property Law Act 2023 (Qld) shifted responsibility onto sellers, who must give buyers a disclosure statement and certificates before they sign a contract. A year on, our property team is still seeing sellers adjust to how much information the scheme requires them to disclose.
- Twelve months in, cost and timing remain the biggest sources of friction. Buyers and sellers are both paying for searches, delays are common while certificates are obtained, and body corporates are under pressure to meet their new disclosure requirements efficiently.
Buying or selling property in Queensland now comes with a longer checklist and, often, a bigger bill. A year on from the commencement of the seller disclosure regime, our property team is fielding the same questions from clients again and again: what has to be disclosed, who pays for it, and what happens if something is missed. The Property Law Act 2023 (Qld) replaced the State’s old buyer beware approach with a mandatory seller disclosure scheme. Here is what we are seeing on the ground twelve months in, and what buyers, sellers and their advisers should know.
A year on, the practical question is no longer whether the seller disclosure regime was a significant change. It is whether the regime has delivered enough clarity and buyer protection to justify the extra cost, delay and compliance risk now built into Queensland conveyancing.
What the scheme requires
The seller disclosure scheme requires sellers to provide a seller disclosure statement and prescribed certificates to a buyer before they sign a contract for the sale of a lot. The statement is intended to disclose encumbrances, land use and planning notices, environmental and heritage listings, building and other notices, and rates and tenancy information.
The intent is clear: move away from Queensland’s old buyer beware approach and make sellers more accountable for accurately disclosing what they are selling. This helps buyers make more informed decisions, but it is not a substitute for a buyer’s own due diligence. The statement does not require disclosure of the property’s condition or natural hazards affecting it, and buyers still need to rely on their own investigations to confirm the information provided is complete and accurate.
If the statement is not complete and accurate when it is given, the buyer may be entitled to terminate the contract at any time before settlement. That risk sits squarely with the seller. The Act does not operate retrospectively and limited exceptions apply to certain sales.
What we are seeing a year on
Twelve months in, ambiguity remains, costs have increased and compliance risk is a live issue for our clients. Many sellers preparing their own statements are still uncertain about how much information the scheme actually requires, and we are seeing both under-disclosure and over-disclosure as a result. Over-disclosure has its own cost: burying buyers in irrelevant material that takes both sides time and money to review.
We recommend sellers engage appropriately qualified parties to prepare their disclosure statements. This reduces risk but does not remove it entirely. A seller who fails to tell their provider about something relevant that cannot be found by search still carries responsibility, even though their liability for a third party’s materially incorrect statement is, in most circumstances, limited to termination of the contract.
Two frustrations come up consistently in our conversations with clients: the cost of the searches required for the disclosure statement, with buyers often paying again to confirm the same information, and the time it takes to prepare a statement, particularly where a buyer changes their mind before the statement is finalised.
Body corporates have felt this most acutely. Early delays in obtaining certificates have eased, but body corporate managers continue to raise concerns that the legislated fees for producing these certificates do not reflect the actual cost or risk involved.
Where this leaves buyers and sellers
Significant reform is rarely smooth in its first year, and this has been no exception. With time, many early issues have been resolved and better understood across the industry. Cost, disclosure and conveyancing risks remain live concerns, but as buyers, sellers and their advisers gain more practical experience with the regime, a more settled understanding of its requirements, and how to meet them efficiently, is starting to emerge.
Our Property team is here to help if you have questions about seller disclosure in Queensland and how it affects you or your clients.
