The bank may do a desk top valuation so may not even go there.

I'd stay with St George (separate loans for each IP) until you reach $1Mill then move. 

If they are on expired leases you can put the rent up any amount you want. They MAY take you to tribunal but if it within market rent you shouldn't need to worry.
Some REA suggest the slow method but if it is so far under rent that's too much money to loae by doing it that way. Go to another agent if they suggest that.

Check out Real Estate.com to check current rents. If you really don't want them all to move out maybe raise them to just under market rent (say $180-190) then increase again in 3-6 months. You'll find that once they look on the net they'll relise they can't get anything at that price so they'll stay.  If one does move out you could use the opportunity to reno one and get even more rent.

OK Terry seems to have covered the finance side.

A $380K property will be pushing it. I prefer to borrow 80% as I don't like to have a high LVR but I'm a bit more conservative than others. Too old to risk losing everything.

I like to buy lower end properties as the yields are better thus costing less out of your pocket. Buy something you can add some equity to and usually raise the rent at the same time.

eg a property in the low to mid $200's will rent for $300pw, more sometimes.  A property for $380 will likely rent for $350-400pw (in my research in Sydney) so cost a bit out of pocket.

It's great that you are starting to educate yourself but there is a LOT more to learn. I would take a step back, read some books. There are loads of them at the library. That way you can learn what strategy may suit you. Everyone has different ways of buying property. There is no right or wrong way. It depends where you are coming from and what your end goal is. Some people love off the plan, others hate it. Some people would never buy units.

I buy houses by Paul Do covers different strategies even though I find him a bit negative (says you can't find CF+ houses etc).

Depends totally on demand. I have most unfurnished but one furnished. Haven't heard from them in years. Money goes in my bank. I'm happy.

Yeah sorry about that. I thought it sounded too low. I have worked the figures on 10 years.
So there would be $104K in the account. I haven't included adding extra because it's not easy to calculate the extra payments going into the mortgage or the fact that you could have used that extra money to buy a second investment property in that time with that money.

Yes I have assumed property doubles in 10 years as it's easier. Some don't, some more.
You are also forgetting that rents go up so the property becomes positive and pays itself off. Even though you have a debt it erodes over time even if you don't pay it off. I bought my first house for $60,000. Now imagine I never paid it off. Would I be happy having a $60K debt on a house that's now worth $300K. You bettya.

I have a property that I have owned for 2 years (in Sydney so not booming by any means), It has risen 48% in 2 years.
I also have not taken into account that you don't (well I don't) pay full price for property. The idea is to buy under market so you have instant equity. I have also just done a quick reno which increased my equity by $30K. So I can now draw out the money I put in and it owes me nothing. That property, by the way is now cash flow positive so it gives me money each week too. Even if it never goes up (which it will) as rents rise it will pay itself off. Then I can sit back and live off thje rent. No bank acvcount will do that.

Over time property rises more than inflation.
So on my (very basic) figures you would be ahead (if you sold).

Sell $600K minus CGT and selling costs $250K. That's $146K more than your account.

By just saving you will never keep up with property.

OK my opinion. Take it for what it's worth. The numbers are simplistic (as I said). You need to read more and educate yourself.

Ok. you are focusing on the interest but neglect to look at the money coming in.

 Just say you leave your $60K in the managed funds for 10 years. 8% (minus tax = 5.6%pa- assuming 30% tax rate).
So compounded you will have (after 10 years) $70,665.

Take that $60K and buy a house value $300K.  10% deposit + stamp duty etc.

OK you have a loan of $300K at say 7% interest. =$21K a year BUT rent will give you $18K   minus costs = $15k. So you lose $6K the first year (- tax and depreciation) should cost you $3K max in the first year BUT the rent goes up each year so after 3 years you should be cash flow neutral. So for the next 7 years the rent will more than pay your interest. The last 5 years you'll actually have money in your pocket AFTER you pay the interest.
 In the meantime your $300K property is now worth $600K (based on the assumption that property doubles every 10 years).

So instead of have $70,665 you now have $300K equity. Sure you lose some if you sell CGT but that';s still a hell of a lot more than $70K. Also you now have $20% of a property but in 10 years time you've only got just over 10% of a property making it impossible to get in to the market.

The above is very simplistic (I hope) but I think you'll get the idea.
 

Personally If I see something I want I know it will go quickly so I don't want to waste money paying for strata, solicitors time etc without anything in writing. I have backed out of one deal and lost .25% but I did my own strata search so only $50. I instructed the solicitor to not do anything until I gave the go ahead so no charges there.

If you can prove the damage was done between exchange and settlement you have a claim. But you can't look behind a fridge on settlement inspection and say Oh I didn't know there was a big hole in the wall.

Check with the leasing agent to see if they filled out a condition report and have done any inspections. They are entitled to fair wear and tear and should clean the carpet before leaving. If things are damaged you can make a claim against their bond.

Congratulations possumpal you are off to a great start but why aim so low?

I really do hope your "paying off your homeloan" is in the form of an offset account. It is a steady strategy but it won't let you retire. Wouldn't it be nice to have enough income so as not to work 40 hours a week to "put food on the table" when you could have passive income, take your kids to school, have time to spend with family etc.

Sorry to be blunt but I can't see why anyone would have a strategy to work for the rest of their life. Food is expensive and if you want to start a family, more so (not to mention teenagers who eat you out of house and home).

My stories not that exciting. Always liked property but no internet when I was your age. No confidence, knowledge or knowing anyone that had bought property so I did nothing. Fast forward 20 years. Paid off my house (didn't know any better). Bought one property (cross coll- didn't know any better). Then last 3 years buying many properties with opportunity to increase equity.

Finding different forums, reading heaps and getting a network of friends with likeminded goals was the BIGGEST contributing factopr to me making the move from  one property to many.

Yep, can be done.

First check to see what the charges are. That may not be the problem, although by the sounds of it they are not doing a good job. Have you done a strata search?
The owners set the fees.  Maybe the fees are high because they just did some major works and need to build up the sinking fund.

Get the right facts first before jumping the gun and trying to change everything.

There's a saying in management-= don't tear down the fences until you know why they were built.