Good evening all, just like to vent my spleen (once again), over the high horse attitude of the SA govt representative regarding wrapping on the box recently. (I forgot what show it was on)
His basic argument was that if you were to wrap (or even vendor finance) a house in SA, then the wrappee could take you to court, the court would find the contract null and void (as they are specifically illegal under STATE law), and that the wrapper would have to refund all of the payments to the wrappee.
But, it got me to thinking. A general concept in australian law is that if there is a state law, and a federal law that are in disaggreement, then the federal law will always take precedence and “override” the state law.
A case in point. A pornographer in qld recently was taken to court over the selling of xxxx movies, which were specifically banned under qld state law. In his defence, he specifically and repeatedly referred to the federal laws, virtually admitting to breaking a state law. (ps I do not know how this case turned out-but would be very interested to know)
A more obvious case. The NT govt decided to legalise and legitamise euthanasia under certain circumstances. Little johnny howard didn’t like this thought, so introduces a FEDERAL law overriding and immediately “trumping” and nullifying the state law.
So, (and there is a bright spark who can see the next paragraph coming, is there not?) if there is a specific SA state law outlawing IC (just on property), and there is a federal law allowing it (which I am unsure if there is one or not), then the fed law would override the state one, and wrapping in SA would therefore be totally legal.
Of course, one would have to mount a massive legal defence in the federal or high court, and I would not like to be the one!
BTW, i have no houses or intention of ever doing them in SA, but thought this might stimulate debate.
Hi,
Inventive title… but I’ve moved your post to this forum as it is better situated here.
Back to Yr 12 Legal Studies… I thought the constitution failed to grant power to make laws pertaining to property to the federal government.
<<steve does some research>>
ooooh, look what I found, http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/general/constitution/par5cha1.htm – it’s the section of the constitution spelling out what rights the Federal Parliament has. See Mr Rhodes (my Yr 12 legal teacher), I did learn something!
As such, the SA government can pretty much do as it pleases in respect to its property laws.
In summing up, it’s the Constitution,
it’s Mabo, it’s justice, it’s law, it’s the vibe and — No, that’s it. … [
]Cheers,
Steve McKnight
**********
Remember that success comes from doing things differently.
**********Steve McKnight | PropertyInvesting.com Pty Ltd | CEO
https://www.propertyinvesting.comSuccess comes from doing things differently
The powers of the Federal parliament are in section 51 of the Constutition.
A state government can make laws for the “peace order and good governance” of the state
A more obvious case. The NT govt decided to legalise and legitamise euthanasia under certain circumstances. Little johnny howard didn’t like this thought, so introduces a FEDERAL law overriding and immediately “trumping” and nullifying the state law.NT is a TERRITORY and not a state hence why the federal government could overturn the euthanasia laws. It would not have been able to interfere had NT been a legitimate state.
Fibejebe.How sad that we debate legal laws instead of moral laws. How sad that so many people look for a legal way to do something immoral. Study morality instead of legality and the wrapping debate would be over.
Do good (if you can).
Bec
Yeah, those ‘evil’ wrappers are helping people own their first home.
Rebecca,
You can debate the morals, but what you don’t seem to see is that the majority of the forum here don’t agree with your take on things, and when they do try to engage you in making their point known, you start hurling abuse which needs to be moderated.
So, as I see it, you have added little to the discussion of late other than name calling and criticism that is anthing but constructive.
Please, if you can’t find something to advance the discussion then refrain from posting.
The art to winning people over to your cause is not to hit them with a sledgehammer.
Regards,
Steve McKnight
**********
Remember that success comes from doing things differently.
**********Steve McKnight | PropertyInvesting.com Pty Ltd | CEO
https://www.propertyinvesting.comSuccess comes from doing things differently
I must say I am not a fan of wraps. I feel it is taking advantage of people who are not too smart, charging them huge interest and overpricing the property to start with. If someone can not get finance then a wraper should not set them up to fail only to take the house back of them and leave them worse than they started.Yes it makes money for the wrapper but is of little benefit to the wrapee, or the community as the property generally ggets rundown when it people are evicted. I am with Beck with the high moral ground!
BrendanI have given three options on properties in Brisbane and all the future purchasers have thanked me a number of times for giving them the chance to purchase a property they had no hope of.
I don’t think we are here to debate moralistic issues.
Spider
It doesn’t matter what ocean we are talking about wether it be the Pacific or Indian Ocean, the wrap ocean, sales or shares ocean. Where SHARKS see prey they will enter the waters and feed off them. It doesn’t mean everything of every body is doing the same. Morals lie within the individual. I believe people can obtain that win/win in wraps with the right morals in place, but not by the sharks.
I personally believe I am a very good judge of character and believe that Steve is genuine about seeking win/win for all concerned, as are many others. But yes others will take advantage of others less fortunate like those in the law balling thread that say gain from others misfortune. I would like to think before I low ball I would look at the big picture. If they are selling and in financial dire straights, I would like to think as long as I know I can make a profit, I would pay as much as I could to help them also. But wouldn’t have a problem low balling some one I know has had 100% cg in the last 6 months.
That’s just my 2 cents worth.
Too many people judge other people they don’t know on what their experiences maybe with other people! As Steve says, WE DON’T KNOW WHAT WE DON’T KNOW! That is the problem.
Information and education is the key to success.
Regards Bear
Bear,
Well said!!
Fibejebe.Thanks Fibs
Not every one in every business is the same with the same code of conduct.
Regards Bear
Brendan
You’ve made some very big generalisations in your post, most of which are not always correct.
“I feel it is taking advantage of people who are not too smart”
I certainly don’t plan to suggest to any of my buyers that they’re not too smart, I hardly think they’d be impressed. Sorry, but I think this common suggestion that somehow people only buy into a wrap because they’re not smart enough to know better is incredibly condescending.
“charging them huge interest”
Says who? Most of my buyers are paying around 9%, and that was with basically 100% finance. I’d like to see one of the non-conforming lenders offer a rate under 10% in that scenario (which they never would, because they don’t lend 100% to any borrowers with “issues”)
“overpricing the property to start with”
Again, says who? Using Rick Otton’s strategy, the idea is to buy the property under market value and onsell it fairly close to market value. I certainly don’t mark up my properties by huge margins, mostly they’re no more than $10k above fair market value – which allows for the fact that it costs me around $10k to buy the property in the first place.
“If someone can not get finance then a wraper should not set them up to fail only to take the house back of them and leave them worse than they started.”
This is a common fallacy, that because someone can’t get finance, they’re a bad financial risk. Sorry, but this is rubbish in my experience. Peopel can’t get finance for a multitude of reasons, most of my buyers have been knocked back because of credit issues, lack of deposit, cash based income, permanent casuals etc etc. They often earn quite good money, it’s just not the sort of money that banks and other financial institutions recognise as valid income.
I also don’t EVER go into a wrap hoping it will fall over – if anything I go too far the other way, doing everything I can to make a wrap work. Out of all my buyers I have one guy who’s had some job issues, and has missed far too many payments – but he’s still in the house, and we’re working on a way for him to continue on.
Brendan, I appreciate that you want to protect people, but at least if you’re going to start making accusations about where the wrap process is unfair, don’t repeat the ridiculous generalisations floated around in the media without basis in fact for most wrap deals. Yes, some people do some crappy things when it comes to wraps, just like they do in most businesses. But that doesn’t mean that everybody operates the same way.Keep smiling
FelicityBear,
Very true, and that is why it’s not correct to tar all people in an industry with a single brush………
Scott
]
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
