>>”…secondly negative gearing in it’s current form must go. I think it keeps prices at an artifically high level and rents at an artifically low level.<<

If people do not get a tax deduction then there will be a lot less rental properties available which in turn will lead to rent explosion.

A damned if you do and damned if you don’t situation.

Pisces133

>>It said experiences in other countries revealed that these loans have a higher default rate than conventional mortgages.<<

What are they talking about ???

Never mind other countries, surely the default rate in t-h-i-s country is well known so why isn’t that quoted ?

And a higher default rate so what ? Doesn’t the lender get compensated for that by charging a higher interest rate.

In any event, all loans are mortgage insured so the banks themselves (except the few who do the mortgage insuring inhouse) wouldn’t be affected.

Pisces133

Hi guys,

Westan, I see what you mean about long term and looking at history. I found out the hard way with my last prop. It served it’s purpose then, (although negatively geared) but would easily be worth double now for which I sold it, about 4 years ago.

I feel that many here are focusing purely on the positive cashflow aspect, while ignoring growth in the balance. What’s your opinion on the mix of both -ve and +ve ? As in, the +ve finance the -ve and the growth creates equity to refinance as the +ve’s approach neutral? OR .. does the tax payable on the +ve mean that a far greater number of +ve’s will be required to neutralise the negative?

I had also deliberated my current house. Sell/refinance/rent out/stay put. After perusing the collective thoughts, I have ruled out 2 options. As for Bill saying to sell, it’s not quite as straight forward as that. I argued with him on site that I should realise and prove the market, stick my money in the bank and await the next opportunity. Although we agree on the downward trend predicted, I see the costs in changing properties even over time, may in fact negate most of the gain. I’m fortunate to have a full time job, so I figure that I can buy again anyway when the timing appears.

Lynchy .. maaaaate .. why do you refer to buyers as “morons”? I guess as a moralistic person, you would not have taken on such a listing as the Docklands if you had the chance, would you? There happens to be one of your so described on this forum. Perhaps you could extrapolate your thoughts to him. From your thoughts expressed so succinctly, it would appear that it was just as well that a recently departed contributor helped him get the hell out of it.

Sunshine, what a name! .. says it all. If your property isn’t growing by the equivalent to your shortfall, it’s costing you to keep it. But if you are looking long term as Westan says, don’t you think it will appreciate by more than $60,000 plus costs in 10 years?

How did you get on with your dark corners?

Kind regards, Phil

Not so hasty guys.

This isn’t a storm so much as a light drizzle.

Yes, yes, yes, there will be good buys in time to come but only from the vendors who are forced to sell because of one reason or another. (driving agood buys will be things like people being involved in a divorce, having been transferred interstate, having already bought another property and now looking at two mortgages etc).

A bloodbath ? Highly unlikely. For the time being prices won’t be going up (I think most of us will agree on that at least) and, yes, one will be able to find some bargains here and there.

Some.

Don’t agree ? Well go and visit some open houses and see whether the (would be) buyers are still turning up in droves (I believe they are).

They just all seem to believe in being able to pick up a bargain.

For that to happen some water has to go under the bridge however and the economy to collapse.
The latter hardly seems imminent.

Me ? I am still ready to buy right now if the right property comes along.

However please note that I reserve the right to change my mind at anyone time [] []

Pisces133

Hi Steve,

Exactly. But are you saying to act on the signal at the high of a fall? Or rather the same as most have been saying for months: That is, Winter 2004 will see straw hats at bargain prices in comparison to the present?

Kind regards, Phil

>>will that give me more rent or just increase the value? or both.<<

Cornell, doing the place up will certainly make it easier to find a tenant if not producing more rent.

Pisces133

Hi Redwing,

I’m glad you are relaxed again, well done. One call and problem solved until May next year. So, if you have to give 30 days, are you going to offer it to him again at the end of April? If he declines, that gives you 30 days to find another tenant to minimise the vacancy period.

Hi Kkowalsk, I’d be more concerned about impact under a flight path as opposed to the noise. But your analogy isn’t too bad. As for landlords doing things out of the goodness of their heart, why the hell would you? That’s what a contract is for. An agreement. It’s business. Both parties know their respective responsibilities, so what’s the problem? Sure, the tenant has greater vacancy rights in regards to time. That’s because it takes time for a family to move. They also have the right to quiet enjoyment of the property. What of the investor who has taken a risk, provided a home and maintains the property?

Hi Anna, what was your cash on cash return for providing the dog to the tenant? LOL

Kind regards to all, Phil

I don’t qite understand where council comes into this ?

Who created the covenant ? If council made it a condition of approval for the original subdivision then you do need council’s consent to have it removed.

If whomever has the benefit of the covenant object o your request to remove it you can apply to the court about having it removed.

If it was lodged many years ago and as living conditions have drastically changed from then I would say you have every chance in the world of being successful in having it deleted.

However, I suggest consulting a solicitor if the party who originally created the covenant doesn’t see it your way.

Pisces133