Dear all,
This is just a courtesy post to warn others.
I bought a house at auction in a NSW country town from the Dept of Housing. Four days after the auction the house was extensively vandalised. The Dept refused to refund my deposit, even though the contract stated if cost of damage after auction prior to settlement is over 5% of the purchase price the contract rescinds. The estate agent for the vendor got a laughable quote for $2000, not even from a licensed builder; despite the police report and newspaper report stating the damage was around 5-10k.
I in turn obtained quotes from licensed builders which were around the 10k mark, not even allowing for vacancy while awaiting building repairs. Despite this neither Housing Dept nor estate agent would see reason and kept saying it was a binding contract and I had to go ahead with the purchase and be happy with the $2000 discount. I had not taken out insurance until settlement date as I believed the contract said that over 5% worth of damage would allow me to get out and have my deposit refunded.
I hired a lawyer and got my deposity back after 12 weeks of hassles.
So I can advise anyone wanting to buy a cheapie of housing dept, use a top notch solicitor.
When you ask the estate agent to board up the property (which I did twice but agent never boarded it, leading to vandalisation) put it in writing so that if they fail to do so you have proof later on.
And get top of the range property insurance from the day of auction, as these people do not stick to the contract they issue.
As a postscript a friend of mine who bought a property from Dept Housing the same day and settled succesfully just received a water bill. The bill is issued over a period which only includes the last 3 weeks when he actually owned it, the other months it belonged to Dept of Housing. On closer examination you can see the bill was issued months ago and sent to Dept of Housing, who have returned it and then the council has forwarded it to the new owner! Outstanding! So he can payt for all those other months too….So beware.ZJ, your friend mustn't have used a very efficient solicitor if they didn't discover outstanding water rates – I wouldb be putting the obligation back on the solicitor that he was negligent in not carrying out due diligence in the settlement of the property.
I'm not sure of the state which you are referring however 'building work' over a set amount (generally quite small ie $1000) must be undertaken by a licensed contractor. If the house was a good deal, I would have pushed the issue and had DOH undertake the repairs to 'my' satisfaction ie the condition at the time of purchase rather than recind the contract or accept a discount if the extent of the damage was greater than the quote provided.
Daer Scott,
I also wanted the place repaired using a licensed builder. I didn't want to let the house go. DOH just weren't interested in doing ANY repairs, responding to any phone calls/letters/quotes, using a licensed builder, or coming to a reasonable agreement.
I have never experienced such a situation of total apathy and slackness. My lawyer (who is a top property lawyer, highly respected) made daily phone calls, wrote letters twice a week, and every time was told the person in charge is on stress leave; then the next person in charge would be on maternity leave; then the next person would have resigned! He sent through a letter saying court action will be taken to resolve this matter (after 12 weeks of not getting anywhere), it was also not responded to, and it was later 'found' on the floor of the desk of yet another person on leave. The incompetency in this section is beyond belief. I would have been very happy to settle with the repairs done by a licensed builder, and yes, using a licensed builder was in the contract, but when we challenged them on that it was also not responded to. They were well aware that all I was asking for was reasonable compensation or a licensed builder but it appeared impossible for DOH.
I have since heard of another person in a similar scenario, they pushed for DOH to do the repairs. Later on when house got a tenant the tenant leant against the wall and fell through, the walls were made of painted over cardboard. The tenant sued landlord. When I talked to the builders in the town they said that DOH repairs are not trustworthy and not reliable. So situation was extremely frustrating, I had to go to the Mimister himself to get a response. I would recommend stay well away from DOH NSW.If all else fails, write to your local state MP – there is nothing worse than a dept getting a 'Ministerial' to answer. Oops, just read that but push it again anyway. The MP must provide you with a satisfactory answer (yes it goes to the dept head then the manager etc to give you some lame excuse but follow it up regardless).
In all of my dealings with DOH & other depts which 'own' property, there is an underlying obligation that the contractors that they use are licensed ie they don't want anything to come back and bite them on the bum. Cardboard in walls????? Might be a little hard to prove who fixed that one (maybe a tenant after putting their own fist through the wall).
I find this lack of co-operation at all levels unbelievable – if it is true, contact the opposition party MP for Housing, Dept of Fair Trading (with the proof of the quotes from DOH) and A Current Affair – it may actually be interesting.
Dear Scott,
If you read my first posting again you will see that I did get my deposit back after 12 weeks of hassles, hiring a lawyer and going to the Minister for Housing himself. The reason I posted it was to warn others on this website, as you so rightly say the lack of cooperation is unbelievable with DOH. I was a reasonable person, happy to come to a fair settlement after the internal walls were smashed and graffitied, the carpets were urinated on and windows smashed. However cooperation was something sadly lacking so anyone out there considering the same, hire a top solicitor, get top insurance, before you go near DOH. And sadly, the cardboard in the walls story did originate froma similar scenario, were the repairs on a vandalised after auction property prior to settlement were done by a handyman appointed by the vendor. I spend 12 weeks telling DOH that internally smashed walls cannot and should not be repaired by a glazier , which is what they wanted to do,but they seemd to think I was being unreasonable by insiting on a licensed builder. I'm glad I got my deposit back and no longer have to deal with these incompetent clowns:)Cheers ZJ, all the departments that I have dealt with over the years have had a greater level of integrity albeit a CYA attitude – haven't been as incompetent as those you have pointed out. BTW what state is it ?
I will know to avoid it.Dear Scott,
NSW! NSW Dept of Housing. Have you had any dealings with SA Housing Trust?I have had a few dealings with NSW DOH, (at their Liverpool & Ashfield admin offices). Both of their property groups seemed to be on the ball but quite stretched (had taken on responsibilities for other departments). Their works were done on the 'cheap' but always with licensed contractors – they have a panel of prequalified licensed contractors for their r&m works.
Sounds like something dodgy was definitely going on in this case.
SNM
I will know to avoid it.You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
