Forum Replies Created
Hi everyone
Thanks for your various responses.
Firstly I think that most of thebad things that tend to happen in our society because the culprits know that the victims will 'rationalise' the decision to pursue them against time and economic factors and will generally decide its not worth their while. They know that even though they could get punished, its almost guaranteed they won't. And what does that lead to? A society where the bad people can do whatever the hell they want because the good people take the choice to stand back and let it go. So off they go and repeat the behaviour again and again, and raise kids who will do the same as they see their parent(s) get away with it. The problem will simply compound.
I accept that our management was lacking in some respects and we have learnt the lesson. However I still do not accept that PM add much value to the process, I simply cannot be convinced of this, and as I say I have dealt with 4 different agents in different parts of Perth over the past years and the experience is always mediocre to say the least. I cannot see how someone being paid a low salary to manage numerous properties of various strangers is going to have the time or personal interest to be proactively involved.
I will look into LL insurance. As I say I have been advised by a colleague who has the insurance that the only useful element is the liability, and that to make a successful claim for damages or lost rent is almost impossible. I'd be interested in anyone elses input to this?
Thanks for your reply. I have had mediocre experiences with PM's. I have a few rental properties (6) and self manage 4 of them with agents managing 2. To be honest, I spend as much time on the agent-managed properties chasing up the PM's – plus the few times the PM managed units have come up for rent they have been vacant for around a month – my own managed units have never had vacant periods!! So I personally dont see a PM as part of a solution, I am only using them because I am not near these properties. This property is partly owned with my parents who live near by so we didnt see the need for a PM.
Of course the tenant was lovely when she moved in 3 years ago, The damage was spread over the tenancy (alot of it hidden under furniture etc) but she always assured me she would repair on moving out. I have several messages from her from the over past 3 weeks where she assures me she has allowed a full week to clean and make repairs – I confirmed this with her again on Monday! Then yesterday my parents went to double check, as agreed, and found a dump with her nowhere to be seen. One thing I can be thankful for is that she has paid her rent up to date (which was another reason why I trusted her as I assumed if she was going to play the system she would have started by not paying rent!)
I dont have LL insurance. I've been told it is so tricky to get anything out of the policy in the event of a scenario like this that it is not worth pursuing. Is this correct?
Thanks. Your comment re the purchaser's financier concerns me – they have obviously made their lending criteria much stricter than it was, and I imagine this may mean they would also not look kindly on vendor's finance. Does anyone have experience of banks who do/dont like vendor's finance? Also, is it possible to leave it off the offer document altogether – ie I just lend the vendor the 5% in a separate agreement, which he presents to the bank as part of his deposit, much like anyone who borrows off family or friends to buy a house would?
How is such a sale structured? Is this legal in WA?
Thanks!
Thanks for the response. I'm guessing the vendor finance would be unsecured (as the bank would want the property as security?)? How risky is this?
Thankyou all for your advise. We have always obtained finance with the one bank so that we could borrow off the equity for future purposes – I was lead to believe banks won’t lend you money using equity on property that is financed by another bank. Also that by having all lending with one bank we get a discounted interest rate.
I am always amazed by articles in API which feature low income individuals or couples who manage to build up $1m portfolio’s, it blows my mind how they get financing for this. In my experience banks seem to take a highly conservative approach with servicability – it is like they make the assumption that all properties will be unrented and your income is half of what it actually is.
I’d be interested to know how people get the banks to finance the acqusition of greater than 10 properties! Myself and my husband are qualified proffessionals, with combined annual gross income in excess of $400k, we have net equity in our properties of around $1 million (7 properties) and the bank still kicks up a fuss every time we put in an application! I also know other proffessionals who are in a similar position to us who have trouble with banks as well! In our experience, once you have more than 5-7 properties they really seem hesitant to lend, despite excellent incomes and equity.
So i’d like to know how these people have have masses of property manage to get the finance for them.Also be aware that many banks require a 50% cash deposit for mining town properties – you might get good cashflow from them, but you have to give up a decent chunk of your own cash first!
I am interested in Geraldton property, however my knowledge of the different localities in this area is limited. Could anyone give me a heads up as to the ‘bad areas’ and the ‘good areas’ – eg, where people like to live – areas attracting good quality tenants and buyers, vs areas to avoid?
I started at a Big 4 in 2000 and qualified in early 2003. In my opinion age makes no difference, in fact I think having a few years under your belt will be to your benefit. Myself and the people I started with in 2000 were all aged 20 and had not worked before, having all gone straight to uni from highschool. I look back and think there was a certain level of immaturity to us all for the first 2 years as we were all somewhat still in uni-mode and still getting used to work life, whereas I saw the people who came in as grads but were older than 20/21 got on with the managers/partners better, took their work more seriously, and consequently got promoted quicker!
Hello
I qualified as a CA in 2003 and am currently working in London, where a CA qualification is very highly regarded. The CA program is alot more difficult, but that adds to its prestige, and also ensures you develop skills in core areas which is why employers tend to appreciate candidates who have completed their CA. Although I didnt enjoy the challenge of studying CA whilst working, coming out of it I feel greatly advantaged from the knowledge obtained in studying the units. My view, shared with my colleagues (also accountants) is that the CA qualification is superior to the CPA, and this has certainly been something I have noticed is shared by employers in the UK.
Cheers
C
