Replies Created | Forums | novice100

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

novice100
Participant
@novice100
Join Date: 2012
Post Count: 9
January 27, 2012 - 12:05 am
I have spoken with the agent who has indicated the following
1. He has confirmed that there is no current legal action happening. The steel corrosion issues have been reported to the builders within the warranty period and are being investigated. The strata meeting minutes refer to an agreement to hire lawyers IF the builders try to resist fixing the problem
2. The builders are reputable builders and are still around and still actively addressing all previous issues with the building
3. The vendor is willing to cordon off a sum of money (to be negotiated) in a trust to be held for 12 months (or a different period of time to be negotiated) which will be used to pay for any Special Levies that might be raised in that period relating to the steel corrosion issue
– this would cover me against paying any special levies
4. he says that the strata reports tends to exaggerate potential costs of problems in order to cover themselves from being liable if they underestimate costs
point 2 above seems to act as good compensation for the issues reported – does anyone think it is reasonable to proceed with this new clause and if so, how much money and for how long should be cordoned off?
novice100
Participant
@novice100
Join Date: 2012
Post Count: 9
January 26, 2012 - 11:31 am
Catalyst wrote:
If there are defects in the building I'd be more worried about lawsuits. If a person was injured the insurance may wipe the claim.
I know I've missed out on many "one off" deals only to find another the next week.
Wait to see what happens with the claims. Others will want to sell if the issues arrise and you'll get a bargain. Remember there are 100 in this block alone.
great comment especially the last one – i hadn't fully considered -it but if i wait a little while, someone else may want to sell at a big discount…..i will wait and maybe even consider doing some direct mailshots outlining the issues and offering to buy for $600k!
novice100
Participant
@novice100
Join Date: 2012
Post Count: 9
January 26, 2012 - 9:23 am
Pat007 wrote:
So your going to stick your mum, in what an engineers report lists as a very expensive potential fire trap?
i think your a little bit in love with the place.., i understand.
you may need to do some more looking around other places and cool off a bit im thinking
I'm not too worried about the fire aspect because there is a ground floor balcony window she would easily be able to escape from in case of a fire
i have withdrawn my offer now partly based on all the negative feedback I've had on the forum about the issue but i am still really really keen because the apartment suit my needs so well and there is not really anything comparable in the area
is there any way i can make it work??
novice100
Participant
@novice100
Join Date: 2012
Post Count: 9
January 26, 2012 - 9:20 am
Derek wrote:
The way I look at it is as follows;
The multilple building reports all identify signifciant issues – this to me, indciates lax workmanship in the whole project across a number of areas and now these defects in all areas are coming to light.
You haven't identified which state or how many storey are in the building. Be aware that in NSW (I assume the property is in NSW) properties with underground basements and/or more than four (? not sure about this but the number is very low) storeys any coverage is minimal at best.
On this basis alone I would walk away – but it is not my money.
i didn’t post the rest of the engineers report but it basically said that the building contruction and fitting and wear so far was of a higher than average standard – it was generally a very positive (and in-depth) report aside from the issues raised
would any one still buy this property but at a reduced price e.g $30k less??
novice100
Participant
@novice100
Join Date: 2012
Post Count: 9
January 26, 2012 - 8:58 am
the reason that i offered $670k is that the owner refused any lower and I want it because the apartment and complex are very nice and ideal for the 1st tenant who will be my Mum!
if the defects are going to be the liability of the original builder as it sounds like they should be then it shouldn’t concern me too much and if the liability is the owners, I can compensate for this by lowering the price i pay – is there anything wrong with this logic?
novice100
Participant
@novice100
Join Date: 2012
Post Count: 9
January 26, 2012 - 7:24 am
Also I forgot to mention that an identical unit in the complex sold for $650k in October 2011 so I presume this problem did not deter the buyers then (the report was written in July 2011 but the legal scion started in dec 2011)
novice100
Participant
@novice100
Join Date: 2012
Post Count: 9
January 26, 2012 - 7:22 am
But the steel problem is a building fault so the builders will probably end up paying for it. Also I Houghton that reducing my offer by $20k would compensate for the possibility if losing the legal case – does this seem reasonable?
novice100
Participant
@novice100
Join Date: 2012
Post Count: 9
January 26, 2012 - 6:26 am
i figure that if the legal case fell through and cost $2million as a worse case scenario that would only equate to $20k per unit – tax deducitble too – and that’s a worse case scenario only