Forum Replies Created
brokering is not always about what is cheapest as you know, most brokers want their clients to be satisfied with the ‘overall’ product – Simon, unfortunately the experience described in the initial post is reflective of NAB customers i have worked with – i’m simply sharing experiences which i think is conducive to this forum, unless of course you have a mortgage on this…(pardon the pun)
i’ll restate and add to my post, ‘its a bad day when i can’t better a NAB deal based on product, service or cost to my client’.
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
FW your post
The problem with cross collateralising, brahms, is that if you want to sell off one property, you usually then have to pay more fees to get your loan redone, …
quite true, an alternative way to view this would be that the initial loan was effected at a discount as opposed to setting up two separate loans (LOC against existing property to effect 20% plus costs and 80% inv loan) to facilitate the same purchase (cake and eat it too!!!)
imho my clients complain of a serious hot and cold relationship with NAB.
Lucifer, couldn’t agree more, its a bad day when i can’t better a NAB deal.
again, Alf, why or what exactly is your grief with x coll? what is the problem?
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
alf, NAB will cross collateralise your cat if they can – its their policy. its your choice to stay – you haven’t said why xcoll is a bad thing for you, plenty of xcoll properties out there that have no problems what so ever – whats the real problem?
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
Well done Patrick, love to hear the car story going on the fridge story.
I’ve never been a fan of lay-by until i realised it is ‘off’ credit report (and doesn’t incur interest). so for items which you would normally save for and purchase, it is ideal particularly when you an item on sale or significantly reduced.
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
IMHO size matters, the bigger the better. i would be cautious of those offering 100% – i’m not convinced they will be around as long as you are – and then you have the hassle and risk of what happens then.
PM or email if you wish to discuss further off line.cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
for your record MA, we don’t have problems in Qld with our ‘subject to’ contracts. the complete process from signing the contract conditional on ‘subject to….’ and settlement is 30 days.
and as the purchaser and vendor have agreed to the terms and conditions of contract (subject to or not) there is no gazumping. unlike nsw – where you have to commonly wait 14 days to have a contract exchange in which no formal binding commitment is made, then a further 42 days to settlement (just what is done in this timeframe who knows, but whatever it is, it aint done quickly).
the nsw system is controlled by the nsw law society – for obvious commercial reasons.
basically yes, for instance you may refinance up to 80% on an investment property when the actual debt may only be 65%-the surplus you wish to park for future inv use, ie. deposit plus costs on next ip purchase. Either as an LOC or left in the loan to ‘redraw’ as required.
once the money is there, what you do with it is up to you as a consenting adult…. (‘no particular reason’ is probably not what i’d suggest as precise wording – rather ‘future investment or effecting cosmetic refurbishment etc etc.’)
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
if alf is refinancing one assumes it is to a different lender than the current. hence transfer of stamps (this was the impression i got from his first post)
if alf is simply looking to re val and reduce exposure on paper to effect stand alone facilities, then this is a simple variation of existing – with the catch that he started with one loan only, and now has two – and seeing this has occured he is possibly liable for a new round of stamps.
james,
i’m finding no probs with vals as the market evidence is plentiful, databases have caught up, and prices have flattened out.
i’ve also had some bank request additional info re ‘cash out’ purposes or line of credit applications for open policy lending – 12 months ago this wasn’t required.
PMI mortgage insurance has capped ‘cash outs’ to $150k, previously these where considerably higher. So yes, some policies have had categorically tightenned, others may be ‘re’ applying existing policy.
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
alf, never assume you can transfer your stamp duty, either in part or in full.
state policy and lender policy may not allow full or even part transfer of stamps.
you have to determine this thru your broker or bank, and your solicitor.
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
hi jo, thats great, i’ve always used whereis.com but i think this one is better. amazing what you find on the net…. cheers brahms
If a purchaser was unwilling or unable to pay mortgage insurance and had no deposit, the last thing i’d be doing is handing over the title and retaining a second mortgage.
Most vendors don’t like finance clauses let alone not accessing their money, I’d feel this is a very unattractive offer to the vast majority of sellers.
MA
my particular dislike (not exclusive to jenman) is more to do with how he puts others down to promote himself and his ‘system’. if the ‘system’ is so good it should support itself with quality organic growth.
his business platform is built on negativities.
pumpkin
if you buy for $200 000 and sell it under 12 months from the date of contract, for say $300 000 – then you will pay cgt on the full $100 000 (100%)of capital gains. If you held the property for more than 12 months, and the same purchase and sale figures apply, then you only pay cgt on $50 000 (which is then 50%).
How it works out with your personal income, well, i’ll leave that to you, the basic structure is above.
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
irregular is only a problem when it restricts what can be built on it. there was a 2.3m (or thereabouts) wide laneway for sale or sold in sydney recently, now that is restrictive, yours i’d think not so at all.
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
not very promising is it? is the property in a metro area? is the property in qld? i see your in qld, this forum can get conflicting info due to differing state proceedures
you’ll be able to settle in 7 working days in qld so long as their finance doesn’t include a refinance of another lender.
i hope this doesn’t go belly up for you, but i too have concerns with the purchasers finance if it is taking this long – we are having very few timing issues in qld these days with most finance conditional 30 day contracts meeting settlement with days to spare (unlike 6 months ago)
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
the article states this group purchased 30 properties for an average of $20772 and re sold them for an average of $48433.
i didn’t see any mention of the time frame nor does it state the current value of the property. these omissions may distort the reality (the property may be worth $75000 today!!).
kay, at what time in history has paying twice the market value for a product not been classed as stupid (or uneducated if this is a more palatible word – pls no definitions required as i have a dictionary)
my main concern is the legislative or common law implications rather than an unfortunate and unconscionable event.
cheers brahms
a true win win outcome…
gross stupidity wins twice
the real victim is commerce – and now its legislated that profit can be too much….
i’m not condoning the sharks in any way shape or form – but i do believe in an economy that allows trade and profit at whatever the sustainable level may be.
also, as the purchase was in 2001, does anyone know what sort of appreciation has occurred in the meantime? (town was Warrackna….something or another, sorry, have no idea were this place is)
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
so long as income is fully verifed, generally,you won’t be restricted – if you are planning to self certify or use low doc options, yes, some lenders will only consider applications from individuals – so some choices will be removed.
i don’t know how you could ‘sell’ the structure any other way than it is – the entitiy is the entity – if i’ve missed something i’ll be corrected i’m sure
cheers brahms
market is certainly no longer frantic, however at auction yesterday – property sold very well for 5-6% above my humble expectations (and the expectations of a valuer mate who lived next door to the auction property)
had clients successfuly purchase at auction last weekend, they were highest bidder on another property the weekend before where we had 5 parties bidding.
this strong activity indicates the market isn’t dead for auctions, am convinced however that the lofty vendor expectations are being laughed at and totally ignored by the buying market.
my examples have been in the 350 – 450k purchase price area – i think the pressure is definately on for higher value properties
brendon your example was probably well above this pricing bracket being 3.5k’s from city/city views etc?
a couple of valuers i spoke to during the week feel that some areas have come off 5 – 10%, and in all cases these were secondary locations.
is there more pressure on the higher end of the market?
cheers
brahms
If you don’t ask, the answer is no!!
