The Full Federal Court has found Quantum Housing Group guilty of engaging in an “unconscionable system of conduct” in its dealings with investors regarding the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS), in breach of the Australian Consumer Law.

In a statement released by the ACCC, it was revealed that Quantum pressured NRAS investors into dumping their existing property managers to engage someone they had a commercial link with. 

The ACCC stated that Quantum failed to tell investors that it had commercial links with the property managers it recommended.

The ACCC also alleged that Quantum’s sole director, Cheryl Howe, was knowingly concerned in this conduct. Quantum and Ms Howe subsequently admitted liability for both false or misleading representations and unconscionable conduct.

In June 2020, the court declared that Quantum had made false or misleading representations, but was not satisfied that its conduct was within the statutory notion of unconscionable conduct because it had not been demonstrated that the investors were at a disadvantage or had some vulnerability which had been exploited by Quantum.

“This is an extremely important decision for all Australian consumers and businesses,” ACCC chair Rod Sims said.

“The Full Court has made clear that for conduct to be held to be ‘unconscionable’ under the Australian Consumer Law and other similar laws, it is not necessary to establish that the business engaging in the conduct has exploited some disadvantage or vulnerability on the part of the consumers or small businesses affected, although this may often be the case.”

The judge ordered Quantum to pay $700,000 in penalties and Ms Howe to pay a penalty of $50,000 for being knowingly concerned in the false or misleading conduct. He also made an order banning her from managing a corporation for three years.

“The Full Court has confirmed that the correct approach to assessing statutory unconscionability is to focus on the conduct, and assess whether it is a sufficient departure from the norms of acceptable commercial behaviour as to be against conscience or to offend conscience,” Mr Sims said.

“Because this decision makes it clear that it is not necessary to demonstrate exploitation of vulnerability, it extends the reach of the statutory unconscionable conduct prohibition so that it will protect more consumers and small businesses against egregious conduct by corporations.”

About the author

Cameron is a journalist for Momentum Media's nestegg and Smart Property Investment. He enjoys giving Aussies practical financial tips and tricks to help grow their wealth and achieve financial independence. As a self-confessed finance nerd, Cameron enjoys chatting with industry experts and commentators to leverage their insights to grow your portfolio.

About the author

Cameron is a journalist for Momentum Media's nestegg and Smart Property Investment. He enjoys giving Aussies practical financial tips and tricks to help grow their wealth and achieve financial independence. As a self-confessed finance nerd, Cameron enjoys chatting with industry experts and commentators to leverage their insights to grow your portfolio.

Cameron is a journalist for Momentum Media's nestegg and Smart Property Investment. He enjoys giving Aussies practical financial tips and tricks to help grow their wealth and achieve financial independence. As a self-confessed finance nerd, Cameron enjoys chatting with industry experts and commentators to leverage their insights to grow your portfolio.

more on this topic

Property

Zagga's ninth anniversary sees focus on investor education in real estate private credit

In a significant milestone, Zagga, a key player in the Australian real estate sector, is celebrating its ninth anniversary with a renewed commitment to investor education. The company has grown ...Read more

Property

Australian property’s quiet pivot: resilience hides a new competitive map

Australia’s housing market remains sturdier than the macro noise suggests, but the sources of resilience have shifted. For operators, the profit pool is migrating from ‘volume at any price’ to ...Read more

Property

Gen Z’s 5% deposit rush: how policy‑driven demand is reshaping Australia’s housing value chain

A government-backed 5% deposit guarantee has triggered a surge in first-home buyer intent among Gen Z, pulling forward demand and resetting competition across banks, brokers and buildersRead more

Property

Cautious bidders, smarter sellers: a Queensland auction case study on repricing risk

Queensland’s auction market has hit a caution cycle as buyers price in higher borrowing costs, global uncertainty and cost-of-living pressure. Clearance softness is forcing agencies to re-engineer ...Read more

Property

Trust, technology and triage: what NSW’s ‘name and shame’ signals for real estate governance

NSW’s latest enforcement action on real estate trust accounts isn’t a one-off embarrassment; it’s a stress test of sector governance. With licences suspended and penalties applied, the message is ...Read more

Property

Vacancy is rising, demand is resilient: A case study in defending yield as Australia’s rental cycle rebalances

After a blistering run, Australia’s rental market is loosening at the edges. Vacancy is edging up off historic lows, rent inflation is set to moderate into 2026, yet underlying demand remains ...Read more

Property

Don’t lose the deposit: A case study in stopping real estate payment fraud — and the ROI for doing it

Deposit redirection scams are quietly eroding buyer savings and agency reputations in Australia’s property market. This case study unpacks how a mid-tier real estate group redesigned its settlement ...Read more

Property

The $12m threshold: Why portfolio value, not property count, now defines Australia’s investor elite

The old yardstick of six properties as shorthand for investment success has been overtaken by a harsher reality: in today’s market, elite status is defined by balance-sheet strength, not asset countRead more