• This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 8 months ago by .
  • Creator
    Topic
  • #72920
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

      NSW Building Commissioner David Chandler has “pulled a very large rabbit out of a very small hat” in wrangling a deal for owners in the blighted Masco
      [See the full post at: Chandler works his ‘magic’ on Mascot Towers]

      The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
    Viewing 2 replies - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • #72942
      TonyC
      Flatchatter

        It’s a beautiful rabbit, but not if you are an investor. Investors are being treated as second-class citizens. I know of one investor who has received a sales contract from the NSW Government to sell for the price of … $158,000. She owes $700,000 on her mortgage, and regrettably, will not be able to accept the offer. Not unnaturally, the mortgagee will not agree to the sale. Nor will the investor, who would be heading for bankruptcy if she did. I hear on the grapevine that owner occupiers with similar apartments are being offered $650,000. If investors were treated the same as owner occupiers, it would indeed be a beautiful rabbit for them.

        #72946
        Jimmy-T
        Keymaster
        Chat-starter

          I know of one investor who has received a sales contract from the NSW Government to sell for the price of … $158,000. She owes $700,000 on her mortgage, and regrettably, will not be able to accept the offer.

          It’s not good but I think it’s better than investors being completely excluded from the deal, as they were originally. Mr Chandler’s view is that property investors – those who buy in purely as an investment – are basically the same as people who buy stocks and shares.  You put your money down with no guarantee that it won’t be going into a bubble that could burst.
          The difference for property investors is that they get negative gearing if things go horribly wrong, as they have in this case.  It’s not great; it’s not even good for some, but it’s the best anyone has come up with so far.  If the property was worth much more in real terms, investors would be falling over themselves to be part of the rescue plan.

          Sounds like some creative accounting might help.

          The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
        Viewing 2 replies - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
        • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.