Forum Replies Created
Hi Pauls05
I have posted on this issue before. Unless the bank is notified of any rebate or in fact any agreement to only pay $230,000 for the property, it is fraudulent. This is despite what other solicitors may or may not have told you.
I am a solicitor and normally I put a disclaimer on any legal comments I make on the forum but I am prepared to hang my hat on this one. Fraud.
Cheers
K
Have a look at the contract which will specify whether the risk is with the vendor or purchaser prior to settlement. It varies from state to state. In the NT the risk is with the vendor, but I know it is not the same in every state. There should be a heading in the contract called "Risk".
Cheers
K
Hi redleaves
In my experience, banks are reluctant to lend on them – they fall into the same category as serviced apartments.
One of the reasons I don't buy them is because I am not comfortable with how the retirees are treated. Most of these units require that the retirees pay a certain percentage of their pension (usually about 85%) as rent. This leaves them with about $50 per week for living expenses, while paying a quite hefty rent for the units. Horses for courses, and I have no problem with other people using them as an investment strategy, but I just wouldn't be able to sleep well at night knowing that a pensioner is paying off my mortgage and having hardly any money left over at the end to live.
Just my thoughts
K
Dparkes and Coriander
Why weren't your contracts subject to finance?
K
Hi TonyB
I would contact the vendor directly. Tell them you want to make an offer but haven't been provided with the s32 yet. If the vendors have given a s32 or the REA hasn't actually tried to get a s32 then there may be grounds to cut the REA out of the process entirely without paying a commission.
Cheers
K
I think that there is heaps of potential capital growth in Darwin, especially given the Inpex announcement. I recently posted on this topic. You would find that post if you did a search under my name.
I would however advise caution. There has been a sudden steep rise in prices since the announcement. I think that this is probably just a reflex since the announcement and is not necessarily borne out in the actual sale prices. I would do a sales history of any potential property. While property prices went gangbusters a few years ago for the last 12 – 18 months they haven't done much at all. There are some really nice units in the suburbs you mention as well as some very crusty units. If you are looking at a $350,000+ unit I would hope that that is relatively new. If it is an older unit then you are paying WAY too much.
I would also recommend actually going to Darwin to have a look around. A really nice unit can be right next to a horrible housing trust complex. You won't know that kind of information unless you see it for yourself.
I spent a couple of years up there and am reasonably familiar with the market. I also know a lot of the REA's up there. PM me if you have anything in mind and I'll see what I can find out.
Cheers
K
Despite all the claims that the FHOG has pushed up prices I have yet to see that translate into sales at inflated prices.
I have a house on the market that, at the time I started building, was worth $350,000, put on the market at $330,000, about 6 weeks ago dropped it to $300000 and still haven't had ONE offer on it, despite it being on the market for about 3 months.
Vendors can ask whatever price they want, but the truth is, the purchasers will determine what property is worth.
Cheers
K
Hi Administrator
I kind of see what you are saying. I am a lawyer myself. It just seems like that in the last six months or so, anything goes on this forum. You can advertise whatever you want; you can push whatever barrow you want; you can abuse whatever forumite you want. The forum never used to be like this. To quote Regurgitator "I like your old stuff better than your new stuff".
I have been a member of this site for about four years now and your "report abuse link" is the first time I have ever heard of it. Perhaps a "stickit" at the top of each section reminding forumites of their ability to have the increasingly blatant advertising removed immediately should be put up.
At the moment your selective censorship looks, to be quite honest, unprofessional.
Said with the best intentions
K
I am very confused about when a moderator steps in. It seems that when an organisation who is subject to negative feedback on this forum complains, then the posts are whipped off very quickly. However, when organisations very unsubtly pretend to be a satisfied customer raving about their services post on this site, those posts get left on.
Companies brazenly try to sell their wares on this site and those posts get left on. Woodysgirl is obviously involved in Parktrent and her post gets left on. (If she isn't then I offer my sincere apologies and assume that the moderators have checked and found that she isn't involved before leaving her post on this site).
Look, when a company pretends to be a satisfied customer posting on this site then that company opens itself up to criticism. If the moderators on this site were a bit more proactive they would find several threads far more 'defamatory" than this one. It seems the moderators only delete posts when the companies involved complain about them. If the moderators want to adhere to the terms and conditions that state that members should refrain from posting libellous content then they should take a more active role on this site and continually monitor and delete all the crap that appears on the forum these days.
It makes me cranky to get on this forum and see all the blatant self promotion by new forumites remaining on the forum while, when a company sets itself up for criticism by misrepresentation (pretenting it is a satisfied customer rather than disclosing that it is actually the owner/employee) responses get deleted very quickly.
Get your act together moderators. Either delete all the rubbish or leave it all on. Seeing the censorship on this site is getting tiresome.
Sheesh!
K
I'm with Joseph.
I have had several refunds from Genworth when I have sold before two years.
Cheers
K
I just had a look on realestate.com.au and it appears that there isn't much in the way of 2br units in Darwin under $250,000k. In that case if I was buying something I would ensure that it is subject to an independent valuation. Maybe I am wrong, but I can't help but wonder if prices have suddenly jumped up in the last few days pending the announcement.
Still good buying but make sure that anything you are thinking of buying hasn't suddenly had a 10s of thousands tacked onto the price. Ask around. Most agents will tell you if prices have suddenly hiked.
Cheers
K
Hi there
There is an excellent TAFE Property Investing course around. It costs about $3000 runs over a year and covers everything from economics, building for profit, renovating, legal issues etc. I think it is excellent value for money. Look in the API to see if there is one near you.
Cheers
K
There is an exception to the law that the agent must pass on every offer to the Vendor. If the vendor specifically states that they do not want to know about any offers under $xxx, then the agent is not required to pass any offers under $xxx to the agent.
Cheers
K
What sort of agreement was it to "replace" the beam? If it was written and the vendor didn't replace it then, as pointed out above, a condition of the (now amended) contract has not been fulfilled and you could rescind and get your deposit back. Was the contract unconditional at the time she agreed to replace the beam. To me it reads that you only agreed to pay the deposit after she said she would replace it.
As to whether the beam issue is "major" or not, without a definition of major in the contract, it will fall to the parties (or the court) to decide what is major. If you think it is major then you could probably rescind. It will then be up to the vendor to take you to court for non-performance. For that to happen, the court will have to find that the beam issue is not major.
How much is the house worth? Do you think it likely that the vendor will go to all the hassle of taking you to court?
Cheers
K
Hi again Puragading
Don't get bogged down in the legal technicalities of it all. The purchaser may well be able to bring a claim in the small claims court after settlement. I don't know. I just think it is strange that it wasn't mentioned at settlement.
Any issue of whether the purchaser is actually able to bring a small claim will be decided by the magistrate. All you have to do is defend the claim. Look at everything the purchaser wrote down and then give your response. Respond to each and every allegation using the same numbering system that the purchaser used in the statement.
Smalll claims is a jurisdiction where individuals lodge their own claims and defences. Lawyers are not allowed. This means that the magistrate will help you both out. Your defence is not meant to be as articulate and all encompassing as if a solicitor drafted it. Just tell your version of events and let the magistrate decide what each party was entitled to do and whether the purchaser is entitled to penalty interest.
Cheers
K
Hi newbi
In some states the purchaser can claim penalty interest if the vendor defaults. In other states it does not apply.
Purigading, based on what you have said, if the purchaser agreed to the amendment of the settlement date to 13 May and signed that amendment, they cannot then claim that it should have been the earlier date (7 May). If the purchaser thought that you were in breach of the contract by not allowing structural changes on 12 May, they should have alleged a breach of the contract by you and then refused to settle until you had amended that breach. They cannot then turn around and say that settlement should now be backdated to 7 May and then claim interest.
If the purchaser is claiming $1500, then obviously (unless your property is worth $7mil) they are claiming for something else as well. I think that you are missing something in the claim. There must be something more. The only other thing I can think of is that the purchaser is making a ridiculous claim.
In terms of defending the claim, just write basically what you have written in this post. If the purchaser is making a ridiculous claim, just point out that 7 days' penalty interest is not $1500.
Good luck
K
That would make your property worth about $7M. The purchaser must be claiming something other than just interest. What exactly are they claiming?
If settlement was on 13 May and the purchaser is saying that settlement should have been on 7 May, isn't this only 6 days interest the purchaser is after? If that is the case, how much interest are they claiming? Is it worth going to court (or defending)?
Cheers
K
Hi Richard
I think that, (until this post unfolded on the forum) their target audience was spot on. People who had money to invest but didn't have any knowledge of how the property market works. I am absolutely certain that Richard, who clearly knows what is going on property wise, would not be someone this company would be interested in.
Their target audience now? Anyone who doesn't do a search for information about them on the internet!
K
Hi Richard
This company seems to be getting itself in deeper and deeper. Inclined to share the emails at all?
K
