Forum Replies Created
Always good for a laugh F…
On the last line of your last post, I believe after the word ‘all’, you need to insert the words “have the”.
Wow Rob – that’s pretty strong stuff…
The question was a pretty general crystal ball gazing / pondering exercise.
I wonder about the two following aspects to your reply ;
1. Why do you believe your crystal ball is any more accurate than anyone else’s ??
2. What do you base such strong opinions upon, how many decades have you been investing for, and how many $ MM’s of dollars do you have at risk in the property market ??To speak with such conviction on so many varied and intricate subjects, you must of been in the game 50 years and have 60 or 70 MM exposure. surely. I’m astonished really…
I admire your feeble optimism flogging this ‘dead horse’ when pitted against such unprecedented, united, overwhelmingly massive financial forces.
An old horse trainer once told me “The race is not always won by the strongest or fastest, but that’s the way to bet…”
The IFHL is metaphorically a knackered old nag with 3 hooves already inside the glue factory.[biggrin]
Lead on Horatio !!!!
I’ve only ever remarked once about Derivex – or any other organisation that may pop up from time to time extolling the virtues of IFHL.
My comment then was that organisations collectively worth ~ $ 1 Trillion, yes with a T, namely the big four banks plus the also rans in the industry who have it sown up…simply will not allow some pip squeak operator to start up here and cut their lifeblood revenues – regardless of the idea or concept.
$ 1 Trillion is just too much money and buys too much politic influence – which filters down to the authorities who then act on their behalf.
I believe the ASIC agenda or workflow order would of been “Shut it down ASAP…and make sure it or something similar never raises it’s ugly head again”. Of course, that’s not what the public would have been told…but that would’ve been the direct order from the Chairmen of the big four to our lil’ mate Johnny. All done in the nicest possible way of course over a tipple of Brandy and a fine Cuban at their fave Club.
In summary – serious money was threatened, they acted quickly to protect said serious money, and as a result of that action, I’m sure it won’t be threatened ever again. The issue is dead.
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Kay,
To use a dreadful American expression – I’ve gone and “figured”…
I think the scoop with older money is that they have had time to get used to it, what it can do and what it can’t…they are just more accustomed to it…and so don’t carry on like pork chops when it comes to wealth.
Another thing about old money, they’ve likely inherited a good portion of it, and so haven’t scratched and struggled all the way to elevate themselves out of the mire. Very rare for inheritees to either hang onto it or increase the wealth handed to them, as they haven’t done the hard yards necessary to accumulate it in the first place. You learn lessons along the way that help you preserve it when you do eventually get it.
I suppose the bragging from “new wealth” comes from the fact that they have sacrificed and struggled for many years, forgoing many enjoyable things to get where they have got. I think it would be common in human nature to want to shout from the rooftops that they have “arrived” – or reached their individual goal.
If you’ve been struggling every day for the past 15 years to achieve something, sacrificing heaps, and with steely determination you eventually arrive, it would be a rare person indeed, to simply sit down quietly by yourself with a cup of tea and silently pat yourself on the back….surely, you’d be bursting at the seams to unload your success with someone who had a sympathetic ear.
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
‘Reality is seldom captured by glib, obtuse one liners from supposedly successful life-coaches’ ……..Dazzling
Billy,
The info you seek about stamp duty rates for title transfer within WA is located in many places.
Your first port of call should be the State Revenue Office (they have a website, but I am not clever enough to know how to link it into here.
reiwa.com also has the rates on their website…with a calculator so you can play around with figures to your hearts content. Once again the IT gurus may be able to link it in for you…or you could actually search for it yourself.
A word of warning, don’t be clever or sneaky with the SRO trying to sell your partners portion for a discount – they are right onto that as it reduces Mr Ripper’s take – you’ll need to prove the current market value.
Take the hit on the duty payable, it’ll be well worth in the long run.
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Zyleth,
By your own admission you are on above average wages. I think you are tackling your overall game from the wrong end.
_________________________________________________It appears like your “offense game” – bringing money in – it just fine…congratulations. I think improving this side of your financial game has limited upside, what with being good at it already, and things being taxed so heavily before it actually reaches your hand.
__________________________________________________
No, I think the real problem resides in your “defensive game” – letting the cash out. This is where it gets super tough, and where most of the population stumble.
It involves many people, and therefore you have many obstacles ;
1. Different social standing expectations – keeping up with this nonsense will send the wealthiest people down the gurgler.
2. Subtle pressure from wive’s friends…nuf said – everyone knows what I mean.
3. Not so subtle pressure from media bombardment – pouring cash into the Kerry’s and Rupert’s pockets – they love it.
4. Compromising with partners who do not share your ambition to invest. This can be a massive handbrake…insurmountable for many.What exactly are you prepared to sacrifice to attain your goal – which you haven’t outlined ??
Have a chat with a few wily old grumpy Scotsmen and women – frugality is the cornerstone of many a wealthy person’s fortune.
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Hi Brett,
We’ve done this loop twice in the past. Regardless of the cost, in the long term it has been well worth it. We did it for asset protection – winking and nodding – had nothing to do with improving the cashflow substantially…
It was in WA so cannot answer specifically for Qld.
1. OK.
2. ???
3. Probably not – but you might be up for rego fees on a new mortgage (a pittance, it’s the State Govt stamp duty on title transfer that is the bulk of the expense – the Mexicans are lucky hey !!), but over time this is well worth incurring.
4. The only thing that affects the strategy is you and your partner changing plans a couple of years down the track.Worked well for us…and of course the State Revenue office loved it…the ATO has since missed out on their little bit, but they’ll survive I’m sure.
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Missy79,
I’m totally confused by your post.
Firstly, unless the wording on the contract is very unusual, the normal Building Report clause is a “walk or delete” clause. If the Buyers are not happy with what they find…they walk…if they are satisfied…the clause is deleted from the contract. Normally, nowhere does it say they can come back and haggle with the vendor to repair the identified items.
Secondly, it doesn’t matter at all what the actual features or defects were…once again, it’s a ‘walk or delete’ decision point for the Buyer solely. The vendor does not need to get involved at all.
Thirdly, I think you are tad confused…why on earth would the vendor agree to a whole bunch of expenses (see point 1), and then in addition to that take all of those expenses off the purchase price ?? I think you have your Buyer hat on….I read somewhere up the top the thread was initiated by a vendor asking for help ??
Overall, the building clause, unless specifically stated in the wording, gives the buyer and vendor no such leverage to negotiate and horse trade on dollars. It is a definitive turning point in the contract that is the sole decision of the Buyer;
1. Do we walk and tear up the contract, or
2. Do we delete the clause from the contract and move forward to settlement.In any case, there is usually a time frame, such that the clause automatically lapses and the Buyer loses the benefit of walking if they sit on their hands.
In regards to this particular clause, at no stage during the contract does the vendor have to lift a finger…
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Hi Nathan,
Sounds to me like you’ve got pretty OK neighbours. If they were prepared to call you and discuss the situation, and then agree to run around and get quotes…that can’t be too bad – surely. I don’t understand why you didn’t grab their phone number then ??
Maybe they are just on a different timeframe to what you are on. They might be from the country…that’d explain heaps. You’ve put yourself under time…and hence money pressure, by agreeing to action the fence issue with your incoming tenant without involving the neighbour.
Frankly, you’ve gone out on a bit of a limb by promising that, and now you’re having difficulty convincing your neighbour to comply with your personal commitment – maybe you weren’t in a position to give that commitment unless you were prepared to stump up 100% of the cost of the fence…and hence be in control of the action.
Just because the neighbours aren’t dancing to your self imposed commitment – that’s not their fault.
I suggest in the future before you alone commit to an action that involves agreement and expense from you and a second party, you agree upfront in writing with that second party…before commiting to that action to a third party.
I’m told that fences are the number one issue on which neighbours fight over…it’s called lack of complete control. It’s very common when dealing with things like human beings.
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Lisa,
The answer depends entirely on what the exact wording on the sales contract says.
Typically for res. property, it’ll say something like “The Buyer reserves the right to conduct a building inspection at his expense within 14 days blah blah….and then some action based on the findings…usually if the Buyer isn’t happy has the opportunity to walk.”
If the wording doesn’t specifically say that you have to rectify any problem…then you don’t have to. This is probably the case.
In the above instance, I’d tear up the report and say ;
“The building inspector and yourselves are exactly correct, that’s why we agreed to the Contract Price being what it is. We knew about those defects and figured the price accordingly. If they weren’t there, the price would of been $ 5,000-00 higher…”
It puts the ball right back into the Buyers lap, with them having to ask themselves the standard question….
“Despite all of the downsides identified, do we still want to go ahead ?”
With them going this far down the track with the purchase, I believe you’ll have them for breakfast.
My recommendation – sit tight, do nothing, definitely don’t sign anything…and tell the Buyer “You don’t give a rats **** what the report says…the price is the price and that’s it pal…take it or leave it”
Be tough with them, or they’ll walk all over you…whatever you do – never sign bits of paper drawn up by the Buyer…bad bad move…if that’s the case they are controlling the show…and that ain’t good for your hip pocket.
Let us know what happens…
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Dropping a clause in the offer about placing the onus on the vendor to clean up the hovel, that’s all well and good…we went down that path…and it was the very first thing scratched out by the vendors on the counter offer. Messy people will not clean up mess.
You can load the offer with as many fantastic tips and “out” clauses that you pick up from books and seminars as you want. People are not morons when it comes to usually their biggest ‘pay day’…ie. proceeds from selling a property. They’ll scratch out everything that is detrimental to them before converting the offer into a contract. What they ultimately want to see is ;
1. Unconditional
2. Cash
3. As high a price as possible (i.e. painful to buyer)As always…it comes down to the buyer asking themselves the question…are we going to go ahead with this or walk away ??
We have gone through this question every time we’ve purchased…with messy places it’s far better to get a low price, and spend the difference cleaning it up yourself…your blood pressure stays low and you get a great workout whilst you clean it up. Best part is – you’re in control and not fighting with, or waiting on slothful people.
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Rob – no I’m not.
Richard – no sorry…I gather you would value my free help or free direction commensurately with what you paid for it.
Not being from NZ, I presume snow bunnies are not a splinter faction from the mongrel mob.
These mongrel mob types would be absolutely flat out back in Oz…what an extremely valuable service they provide…far better (time and money wise) than fluffing around with courts / lawyers / bailiffs / orders / police / lying tenants etc etc etc….
Having been thru the painful court process…looking back with 20/20 hindsight – which path should you have chosen from a $ and frustration viewpoint ??
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Elodie – so what did you do ??
I agree with APerry.
No it’s not difficult.
Hiya Richard and Rob,
Richard – you were correct on the Bank but woefully inaccurate on the other details. As posted previously…the one to which you refer…I have absolutely no intention in posting real banking documents onto a public website. Never have – never will.
If that sounds familiar to you and/or is a source of frustration – tough – I have no need or desire to prove anything to you or any other poster. If you don’t believe me…that’s great !!
I’m not trying to sell / promote / prove or distribute anything to you or anyone else. I have no wish to direct a whole bunch of investors towards my Banker – hell – I’d get reduced service if that was the case.
I don’t know why Rob believes people don’t shop around for the best deal just because they stay with the one institution ?? Despite it being none of anyone’s business, we shopped around extensively with both the direct approach and many brokers…I know it blows your bubble but none were able to compete…simple as that !!
Has it ever occurred that the Bank you are currently with, may provide the best “product” – love that word…it’s called money fellas…Banks don’t make products…
Have fun…a dying breed indeed.
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
Hi Jason,
I have previously worked overseas full time, and currently work overseas but rotate back to Oz on a regular basis.
In the past the losses generated on -CF props are simply lumped into the “Loss Carried Forward” pot, and when you are back in Oz and earning a taxable income, these are simply offset against that income. Works nicely…I consider it to be the ‘double bonus’.
Anyway – that’s what my accountant formally submits on my behalf. I’ve spent alot of money checking all of this out – so I’d suggest you do the same if at all unsure. Your ‘resident status’ has alot to do with what you can claim…and that’s a whole different ball of wax altogether.
Cheers,
Dazzling
“No point having a cake if you can’t eat it.”
