Hey PK,

I think that’s a bit unfair. Everyone that’s replied to the thread has pretty much stated that the flyscreens in themselves are not a big deal.

The much larger issue in principle about who pays for what and who is responsible for what warrants a healthy debate, surely…and adam’s question definitely asked about this, even to the point of asking for directions to legislation to beat the hapless Landlord around the ears with.

The flyscreens – in themselves – are irrelevant…except of course the tenants lying there getting bitten every night, for the sake of saving a couple of bucks and a couple of hours. Makes no sense to me.

Hi Mike,

First off I respect your knowledge and experience in the property field. I believe I could learn alot from you. Please don’t take my comments as disrespecting you personally.

I’ve seen some self regulated, registered, licensed examples and the amount of shonks would probably be greater. I’m certainly not convinced it’s a good thing.

Self regulated commissions / associations / committees / foundations and any other big words ending in “ions” are usually just a little harder to scrutinise as the club or pack mentality gets going. The ones with vested interests who like controlling which way the rules are bent to their advantage are ALWAYS the ones who jump on board the bandwagon first and try and stand out as being squeaky clean.

No implications intended, but I’ve come across quite a few dodgy REA’s and Fin. advisers in my time who were all highly educated / decorated / qualified / licensed / authorised and approved. The walls were covered with self congratulatory certificates, which are absolutely fantastic to prove how wonderful and non-dodgy they really were, despite their appalling practices.

Grumpy 70 and 80 year old men with 60 years experience in property, with not a certificate in sight, would generally run rings around these younger pups dressed up in suits and ties with stamped and signed bits of paper coming out their wazoo.

Govt departments being what they are, cannot operate without flimsy bits of paper, and hence the proposed up and coming association will probably flourish.

Red tape and compliance fees will go thru the roof.

What’s my alternative you ask ?? How about consumers of these current property advisers actually stand on their own two feet, grab a bit of “I’m fully responsible for my own actions and decisions” and scrutinize everything they are told…no “trust me – I know” type stuff.

Most importantly, don’t keep running to consumer protection depts and lawyers when their complete lack of due diligence results in them taking a bath on some deal that was either totally inappropriate for their needs or way out of their league to start with (eg risk profile / scale).

Would you agree with any of the above points ??

I agree with all of the above comments. Most people have rented at some point in their life, so I don’t believe anyone has a monopoly on knowing tenant’s mindsets any better than anyone else.

The task is small, cheap, quick, quite irrelevant but gives enormous comfort to the people who actually get use out of them. All the more reason for adam et al to “Just do it”. If it’s good for the goose, it good for the gander.

My father would love to spend all day and a bit of his money running around doing this for his tenants. One such tenant loaded him up with about 6 or 7 of these minor tasks after breaking things during their 12 month tenancy. Like their lapdog on a string, he diligently did them all…only to have them write 2 letters of complaint to him about access (Tues at 3pm with 3 people home all lying around like sloths) and 2 weeks notification to repair something costing $ 120 (excess on insurance too high on minor item, hence useless as usual) that they destroyed.

At the end of the 12 months he tried to raise the rent from $ 300 p.w. to $ 310 p.w. (3.3% rise…whoopy !!) and they chucked a hissy fit and left, doing about $ 3,000 damage – bond $ 1,200…

He’s very slowly coming around to my way of thinking, of having nothing to do with low paying constantly whinging residential tenants who threaten to wreck the place or not pay rent when they don’t get their frivolous demands met.

Fortunately, this incident and the fact the RTA is heavily weighted against him, has sped up his transition to far more profitable endeavours.

As I said before…the whole deal is very minor in itself, but one of 99 straws. I’m in the process of dumping the whole bale, moving up without them as a burden is soooo exhilirating.

Yes brahms….I’m a scratchy record as you’ve said before, but what a tune…

Yes G7 it would affect us in a bad way.

Gee whizzy Luke…

A tad hot under the collar. I think there are a few people on this forum who are detailed orientated, and have every right to question. All part of due diligence I reckon. Elly’s original questions were appropriate, and Steve agreed with those queries….no problems there I hope.

A few people on the forum may question this…they have received some pretty dodgy advice…devil’s in the detail.

Wow – there’s probably even more people on the forum who wouldn’t agree with this one. I’d be in that pot.

I’m thinking with that time frame, if you really have made 300K, you must have made 600K before CGT, ‘cos the timeframe doesn’t qualify you for a discount (details again..) and I reckon to make 600K clear profit you guys in the Results programme must be doing 10 and 15MM deals to offload 0.6 profit so quickly.

Once again Luke, the devil is in the detail…have a chat to a Barrister and ask him to just skim over the top reading the exec. summary….she’ll dig down into the tiniest little detail looking to expose every conceivable advantage…as do great tax and investment people…details are where it’s all at…if you don’t like details you are in the wrong game my friend.

All the best…have the time of your life.

….but the Grasshoppers family were too poor to afford their own Leech, so they were assigned a Govt appointed Leech, who quickly latched on and bled her employer for everything she could get.

And the Grasshoppers looked on… and were well pleased.

And the Ant looked down from afar…and was well pleased he left.

And the moral of the story…in the end everyone was happy and no-one was hurt (except the dead Grasshopper)…and isn’t that the most important thing children ?? We know a song about that…don’t we children ??

When you say the house…surely you mean just the building ??

Obviously someone’s name will be on the title as the registered proprietor for the dirt, so that’s off limits….or it is to the best of my knowledge.

Spend $ 9.00 doing a title search for the owner of the dirt, give them a call and find out if they are happy for you to take their dilapidated rambling hovel. They’ll probably welcome you with open arms, as you are saving them all of the demolition costs…but then, what would you want with it ??

G’day bruham…well done on your successes to date. Are you leading the easy life now ??

Umm, the head is OK (many would say – yeah right !!), but really we don’t have that many. Certainly nothing like some folks on this forum.

Of late, the ones we have been purchasing have taken a bit of work, buying them in a distressed state and all of the haggling with Directors to sign them up has been arduous. Now that that phase is over, I expect there to be little to no work over the next 6 years with them.

The RIP’s of course are a constant and never ending pain, and if our loans structure wasn’t such a tangled web of X-coll, I’d drop the lot tomorrow. They are a necessary evil at this stage, but they are all earmarked to be shoved off to some investor who has far more time and money than us.

Good luck in the future.

Staggering…the article mentions only two instances ;

1. Vendors relying on REA’s for accurate valuations.
2. Buyers not inspecting the title when buying the title.

Is this chap unearthing anything new ??

No wonder we have all of these fair trading commissions set up to protect ‘consumers’ with lots of dollars and no sense.

Why is the buyer whinging to the agent or the vendor when he didn’t even look at the title ?? His parents and teachers must of done a wonderful job protecting him from everything whilst growing up and going to school.

Is anyone under the impression that REA’s actually research anything to do with the properties they sell ??

My experience is they simply stand there in their immaculately pressed suit and say “The property flows well and has lovely ambience”. But then I’m not impressed by the rags people wear when inspecting property. 10 years down the track, the suit isn’t standing there waving his arms about, but the faulty plumbing is.

You cannot be serious ??

1. Mortgage is 7%
2. Nett yield is 10%….IP is CF+ve
3. Nett yield is 3%….IP is CF-ve

I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree.