Public Property Sale Results: What to Record Before Comparing

Create one evidence card for every result

A public result becomes useful evidence only when its identity and limitations travel with it. Start a separate card for each property. Record the full address as published, the original source, the date you extracted the record, the stated result date, the sale method, the exact status and the price only if it is publicly reported. If a figure came from a later update, preserve both the update date and the earlier status so the timeline is clear.

Add the geographic boundary, property category and the purpose of the comparison. A result collected for a suburb market summary may not be suitable as a direct comparable for an appraisal. Land Use Victoria's property sales statistics provide dated historical information, while Consumer Affairs Victoria identifies public property-data sources. These sources help establish where information came from; they do not confirm every marketing detail, explain the parties' motivations or make one sale equivalent to another.

• Source, URL or record reference and extraction date.
• Address, result date, method and exact status.
• Published price, or 'withheld' or 'unknown' where appropriate.
• Property type and verified attributes relevant to the comparison.
• Reason for including the result and its main limitation.

Use exact outcome labels and separate the dates

Sold at auction, sold before, sold after, private sale, passed in, withdrawn, postponed and unreported describe different events. Do not collapse them into a generic sold or not sold field. For an auction result, distinguish the advertised auction date from the contract date if both are known. For historical data, distinguish the transaction or contract period from the date the record was published or extracted. A clean date sequence prevents a later sale from being presented as an auction-day outcome.

If the public source gives only a partial description, reproduce no more than it supports. Do not infer that a passed-in property remained unsold, that a withdrawn campaign failed, or that a result was unconditional. A signed contract and a settled transaction are also different stages. Where contract conditions or settlement status are not published, mark them unknown. The comparison should become more cautious when the outcome record is incomplete, not more imaginative.

Verify the property attributes that drive relevance

Photographs and old advertisements can help identify accommodation, presentation and visible features, but they should not be treated as legal records. Record only attributes that can be supported: property type, land area where reliably stated, bedrooms, bathrooms, parking, title or owners corporation context where verified, condition at the time of sale, and any material works supported by records. Note whether each attribute came from a public record, marketing material or another identified source.

Do not infer a legal bedroom, boundary, easement, planning approval, subdivision potential or exact renovation scope from an image. A Planning Property Report can identify mapped zones and overlays for an address, but it is not a title opinion, permit search or feasibility study. When a legal or planning difference matters to the comparison, obtain current property-specific information through the appropriate official record and have the relevant professional interpret it. Unknown attributes should stay unknown.

Compare buyer use and property structure, not distance alone

The nearest sale is not automatically the most comparable. A house on its own title may attract a different buyer group from a townhouse with common property. A renovated family home may compete differently from an original dwelling on similar land. Street position, access, orientation, parking, accommodation and presentation can change how buyers assess the property. The comparison card should explain the likely relevance of each difference without pretending there is a fixed adjustment formula.

Use a short hierarchy. First ask whether the result represents a similar property type and buyer use. Then consider location and timing. Finally, record material differences that could affect buyer comparison. A more distant but structurally similar sale may be more informative than the next-door sale if the latter has a different title, condition or accommodation. The purpose is not to force every result into the evidence set; it is to explain why each result deserves more or less weight.

Treat withheld prices and missing observations as unknown

A withheld result is not permission to estimate the price from an asking range, gossip or an unrelated data field. Record the price as withheld and retain the known status and dates. If a later official or verifiable public record supplies the amount, add it with the new source and extraction date. Do not overwrite the original snapshot without preserving when the change occurred. This makes the evidence trail auditable and avoids presenting a reconstructed figure as published fact.

Missing results also affect aggregated comparisons. If a set contains only reported prices, say so and record the number of known and unknown observations. Do not calculate an apparent average or median and describe it as covering all sales when some prices are absent. The same discipline applies to missing land size, condition or title information. A transparent smaller comparison set is more useful than a larger table filled with unsupported assumptions.

Build a comparison grid without inventing adjustments

Place the subject property in the first column and the most relevant public results beside it. Use rows for date, method, status, property type, land, accommodation, parking, title context, condition and any verified differentiating feature. Label each cell with a source or unknown. Then add a plain-language relevance note for every sale: closely comparable, useful context only, or excluded, together with the reason. This grid makes judgement visible without implying mathematical precision the evidence cannot support.

Avoid automatic dollar adjustments for an extra room, a larger site or renovation quality unless a qualified valuation method and evidence support that work. An estate agent's appraisal can explain how comparable evidence informs an estimated selling price, but it remains an informed estimate, not a formal valuation or guarantee. If a formal valuation is needed for lending, tax, litigation or another purpose, Land Use Victoria explains the role of qualified valuers; the seller should obtain advice appropriate to that purpose.

• Same buyer use and property structure.
• Similar location and contract or result period.
• Verified material attributes and condition.
• Exact result status and known price information.
• Explicit differences, unknowns and reason for the weight assigned.

Keep a dated evidence trail through the appraisal

Public records can be corrected, supplemented or received after the first search. Save the extraction date and review the strongest comparables immediately before the appraisal is finalised and again if the campaign starts later. Record which results were added, removed or reclassified and why. A current evidence trail is more valuable than a static list copied forward from an older proposal without checking whether the market or source record has changed.

Finish the comparison with two statements: what the evidence supports and what it cannot answer. The results may help frame a current estimated selling price and buyer comparison set. They cannot predict the future sale price, reveal every term of a private contract or replace inspection of the subject home. This page is an evidence checklist, not property-specific advice. Discuss the current home and its genuinely comparable sales in an in-person appraisal.