Forum Replies Created
Well that just means that any easements or covenants on the land that are different to those on the vendors statement will make the contract voidable. The clause is not necissary and is implied by law anyway.
And for those who are intersted in some general information, here is another link:
http://www.creativerealestatesolutions.com.au/cgi-bin/page.cgi?id=112
John has spoken at a few of the Adelaide investor meetings and seems to be very knowledgeable in many areas. I know a few people who have worked with him recently and say that he is currently a little overwhelmed with too many projects and maxed out finance. As a result, there have been many unfinished JV and renovation projects as well as money owing. This was a few months ago and he may have caught up with payments and finished what he started but I really don't know. As Steve suggestions a thorough due diligence is a must!
One of the best policies around for landlords insurance is teri scheer. The reason why I like it is because they dont expect you to use the bond money in claims for damage. The bond is there for you to claim for other things if you wish to.
You can only insure properties through TS if it is professionally managed. The pitfalls are that the policies are one size fits all, they are one price for all properties (around $250 for landlords insurance), so they tend to be cost effective for higher end properties but too expensive for lower end policies.
If you are in SA, I would be happy to send you out some information on TS policies.
The other thing to look out for is that agencies that recomend TS are paid a referral fee (or kickback) from TS some of them (like us), will discount their clients policies by the amount paid in referral fees, ie they pass the payment to the client and don't keep it, some disclose it and keep the payment and some agencies don't even disclose that they are paid a referral fee. The thing that concerns me about that is you have to question whether the agent (or pm) is recomending TS insurance because it is best for your type of property or whether they just want the payment from TS and don't care what policy you use!
I would just give her a rent increase form with a letter stating "either accept it or leave". Infact, I would have negotiated an extra $20 per week for the new kitchen before even a cent was put into the house, as well as signing a fixed term lease for an additional year, you need to use tenants demands as a negotiation tool to increase rent. As for the palm trees, too bad! They were there when she inspected the house.
Where you stand at the moment, just put the ball in her court don't ask! The rent IS GOING UP IN A MONTH! If you do not pay the new rent, you will be in rent arrears, you have a month to move out if you don't like the increase! It's as simple as that!!!
Properties are far harder to sell when there are tenants present. If they have a fixed term lease you may also risk limiting yourself to selling to investors, this means that the sale price may be lower. It is far better to dip into the whole pool of available buyers than restricting yourself to a niche market of investors. The other thing to consider is it may be difficult to find tenants given that you will be selling it in such a short time.
Pursefattener wrote:What's wrong with starting your own superfund though Xenia ? Where you invest your own money in your own asset classes making your own money and making your own mistakes ??
I don't work in a job either . But now that I,m 40 I,m more and more concerned about asset protection is case I get sued or something goes wrong with my business . At present I have assets in two different discretionary trusts , A private company , my own name , My wifes name , a partnership between me and the wife and a separate partnership in NZ . I don't have any super as such at present but when I sell my business up I will be getting some legal advice . What do you reckon ?
From my understanding and I have to admit it is limited, owning properties inside a superfund limits your borrowing capacity, you can't use equity to buy more properties, to me that just kills the whole concept of leverage which is a key ingredient to investing.
All our properties and businesses are owned by discretionary trusts too, we can leverage equity and keep growing without any restrictions so I really don't see any benefit of using a structure that is more restrictive than a trust!
We can also buy and sell shares any time we cant without the complexities of a superfund, I really really do not understand it's benefits AT ALL!!!!
Hi Emil,
Rick Otten has lot's of publications and courses on this!
In saying that, the concept is very simple, the vendor accepts 80% of the purchase price during settlement say within 6 weeks, the remaining 20% is owed to them, the title of the property transferes at settlement and they take out a second mortgage against the title for the money owning. Interest payable on the 20% is negotiable so is the term of the loan and the repayments.
The risks are that the vendor may not ever get the 20% if you go bankrupt only if there is sufficient funds left over after the first mortgage is paid out. They would only do this deal if they are making a sufficient profit on the property on the 80% that they are taking and viewing anything else as an added bonus.
I have sold properties on this concept (mainly for clients), but have never purchased them. I would suspect that the majority of vendors (or their agents) would not have a clue on what you are talking about so you would need to spend some time on your marketing skills and "vendor education" so that you could swing the odds in your favour!
All the best!
I agree with Marc, super is nothing more than an insult to everyone's intelligence! I don't work in a job (I have been out of the rat race for a long time now
) so I don't have one and feel that I can take care of my own needs without the government telling me where and how I should invest. Also, I'd like to choose my own retirement age thanks!Dale Gatherum Goss in Melbourne would have to be one of the best. He is also a successfull entreprenuer and very capable of thinking outside the box. If you want an insight into how he thinks, read wealth sabotage and trust majic. If you start with him, he may be able to direct you to other "team members"
Does it really matter what the terminology is classified as? If it makes sense to rent out 3 rooms then do it? Why not do this withr your PROR then buy another investment property where you rent out the whole house and offset losses against your income?
Sounds like a trip to your accountants office may be worth while!
I'm a little confused, are you buying or selling a property using vendor finance?
PS, Terri scheer insurance is great value for higher priced properties but overpriced for cheaper properties. You may need to shop arround if you have a cheaper end of the market property. if you have a property manager, ask them if they recieve a kickback from terri scheer, they give kickbacks or "referal fees" to most real estate agents. We discount our client's policies by the amount we recieved as a referral fee (give back to clients), if agent's do recieve a referal fee and don't pass it on to you, then you need to be careful about whether they are referring the policy because it is right for your property or because they want the referral???
You need building insurance and public liability at the least. Some people also take out landlord's insurance. If you have a pm, one of the best policies for landlords insurance is terri scheer!
Not really sure what you are after but the prosper group in NSW have a publication that is worth a read. They are also property managers and buyers agents!
contact [email protected] and please tell him that Xenia sent you
This is just my own investing style which may or may not suit you. We never pay off loans but instead use savings and generated equity to buy as many properties as we possibly can. I started at 19 and was financially independent at 33 on 9 properties (I don't believe that could have been possible if we were paying off loans!). Nothing is payed off, but properties purchased for $95,000 in the 1990's are now worth $350,000 plus so the debt to equity ratio has been reduced just by market movements.
We are now doing more property "trading" than buying for the long term, we are looking at small development projects, quick renos and subdivisions.
Hope this helps.
I strongly believe in the powerful principles of the secret! But I did not like the "movie"!!! Why do people need to be entertained about everything? Holiwoodising and glorofying a powerful principle and especially putting it on the idiot box and promoting it on sensationalised programs only increases the chances that it will be taken out or content or taken literally or turned into some crazy religion!
All religions are based on similar principles but do people who follow them really understand what they are following? If they did, they wouldn't cause wars over differences in values and beliefs!
WOW!!!
I really don't know Kim, but that really sounds excessive. How many agents have you tried for an appraisal? Is there anything payable if they don't sell?
Here's a useful one for an investment property (if you are getting it at market value).
Subject to your property manager gaining access to the property before settlement for the purpose of showing the property to prospective tenants.
The reason I would suggest adding it as a clause is because it increases your chances of having it rented at or near settlement date and decreases vacancy rates.
The chances of a selling agent allowing a property manager through a property before settlement without the above clause inserted into the purchase contract is ZERO!! We have tried with many properties many times! Once the contract is signed, it is a done deal for the agent and they don't want to be bothered with it anymore!!!!
Again, if the property was purchased significantly under market value and especially if it is owner occupied until settlement, any clauses will restrict the offer being accepted!!!
LOL!!!
I don't think there is a "standard" list of conditions that everyone should use, it depends on the house, the amount you are getting it for and your own situation.
If it is a cash offer, you don't need a finance clause, if it is a development site, you don't need a building, pest inspection clause but may need a subject to council approval clause.
It may be subject to selling another house, if you really are that is!
If you are offering a price significantly below the asking price you increase your chances of having it accepted by providing an unconditional offer! We have had some success in the past with even going as far as waving the cooling off period and settling in 10 days to "sweeten the deal" (Possible with cash offers).
For development sites with significant profits built in, you may want to offer a little above the asking price but with an extensive due diligence clause that will alow you time to submit plans to council!
It all depends on what you want and what you are using the property for!!!
) so I don't have one and feel that I can take care of my own needs without the government telling me where and how I should invest. Also, I'd like to choose my own retirement age thanks!
