Hi Ziv,

Not sure if u r still active over here …. but which Aussie lenders lend for Japan properties?
What are the Aust asset securities for? The equity/deposit part or the entire purchase costs of
the property in Japan? What is the max LVR?

Any possibility yet for using Aust equities/cash as deposit and borrow in Japan to buy properties
there? What is max LVR?

Thanks,
FXD

Hi Merv,

Have you got any further with after attending the seminar, ie reaching out to their
finance broker, accountant etc ?

If so, mind sharing your opinion on them?

Thanks,
FXD

Sorry to hear about such annoying experience.

Although I don’t have a solution to offer, I have personally experienced such situation but being
the opposite to your case ie two neighbours fences encroaching into my property.

Due to the circumstance being that I was doing a multi-unit development at that time and the local
council planning rules dictate that developer is responsible to put up new fence if existing one is
damage as a result. Therefore, I negotiated with one of the neighbours to re-align the new fence
according to the surveyed title boundary line. The other neighbour is more aggressive and refused to
cooperate so I figured that it’s not worth my while.

I see this kind of unnecessary dispute the result of failed responsibility of local council really.
Try to encroach your fence line into public park and see what reaction you get from the council. To me
it’s double standard how it handles such situation.

If local council can lay down the rules for fence height for example, then by right they can quite
easily go one step further to lay down the rules for fence and boundary line to prevent situation of
fence encroaching over boundary line.

After all, council is being paid hefty rates that only go up year after year and all it takes is
introduce compliance check similar to that for issuing of certificate of occupancy only after criteria
are all ticked off fine.

It just comes down to lazy and failed local council who doesn’t want extra responsibility but only the
rates.

But please do share your resolution if you come to one.

Rgds,
FXD

Interesting discussions.

For some very successful boomers who started their investing journey 30 plus years ago, they will
adamantly advise going for growth first before cash flow and that makes perfect sense in that context.

I personally feel that there should be 4 different quadrants of environments or contexts every investor
should learn to navigate, ie:

– negative cashflow, negative equity. This is probably where most people will start out on their own
without any knowledge, experience, education or guidance. The associated costs like stamp duty will
set one back 5.5% as negative equity immediately in Victoria.
– negative cashflow, positive equity. This is probably the most common transition for investors lured to
negative gearing and able to hold on to the IP for few years with rising market. Just a progression
from the previous quadrant. It’s also the the one most people struggle to break out of due to lack of
cashflow.
– positive cashflow, negative equity. Mining town maybe?
– positive cashflow, positive equity. Holly grail for most investors want to be and many boomers
are quite comfortably retiring here already I suspect.

When I first started out, there was really not much choice or option known to me to strategically
position myself into a more desirable quadrant due to lack of knowledge, experience and guidance.
It became a starting position by default not by choice.

Wish someone would have explained the above concepts to me when first started out and provided the right
advice and guidance on how to handle each and navigate as quickly as possible to the most desirable end
goal. It should be like an All Weather (borrowig Ray Dalio’s hedge fund strategy here) approach for
all four contexts.

Now, I am leaning more towards the CF (first) camp and then worry about growth later as I keep running
into brick wall with servicing of new debts!!!

Rgds,
FXD

Terryw wrote:

If the lender asks you would need to disclose personal guarantees given so the lender would then assess you on the full debt of the 3 trusts. If they don’t ask about personal guarantees then you would be assessed on your personal debt and the debt for the borrower in quesiton.

Hi Terry,
Will I be right to assume if all 3 trusts (in OP’s example) take out lease doc loans, then there will not
be personal guarantees required by lenders?

Thanks,
FXD

• This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by  fxdaemon.

Hi Corey,

Just out of curiosity about the deal you mentioned above.

Did the borrowing, purchase and cashflow achieve an improved servicing overall for your client so that
he/she can continue investing more easily in the future?

Thanks,
FXD