Desperate situation..please help
- Thread starter Andrew2708
- Start date
@ d.t.
What advice is poor? Getting advice from a legal professional, or that his Qld. properties may not have bottomed yet?
What advice is poor? Getting advice from a legal professional, or that his Qld. properties may not have bottomed yet?
Even if OP can find an adviser of his who stated something like that, there would probably be disclaimers eg past historical performance is no guarantee of future performance.
Even if there was an adviser who had made a statement that a court in several years recognises as a representation, it would probably be necessary to show OP relied on that representation in making the decision to invest.
Next would that adviser have deep enough pockets/insurance to pay all the claims.
Several years down the track OP might or might not get a favourable enforceable judgment.
In the meantime OP needs to come up with a strategy for the next few years whttp://news.optuszoo.com.au/2015/03/15/the-aussie-towns-destroyed-by-china/here it is likely that a lot of other owners in the area will be forced sellers.
Even if there was an adviser who had made a statement that a court in several years recognises as a representation, it would probably be necessary to show OP relied on that representation in making the decision to invest.
Next would that adviser have deep enough pockets/insurance to pay all the claims.
Several years down the track OP might or might not get a favourable enforceable judgment.
In the meantime OP needs to come up with a strategy for the next few years whttp://news.optuszoo.com.au/2015/03/15/the-aussie-towns-destroyed-by-china/here it is likely that a lot of other owners in the area will be forced sellers.
@ jrc
yep i would agree with most of that but the bank's valuation of the properties may be a good starting point for negotiating a writedown of the outstanding principle on the loans, the bank may be receptive to this as the alternative may be to accept nothing at all. The banks should have had a better understanding of the risks involved than their client and have clearly mispriced the value of the Qld Properties. As far as the Mortgage broker goes if David can show that the loan or the broker was predatory either by an e-mail or even some advertising on the broker's behalf then a see no reason why he would not have to take a hair cut as well!! and since you provided me with a link, I'll give you one too! Here's what's happening in the Pilbara; http://www.pdc.wa.gov.au/publications/ check out the housing and land snapshots
yep i would agree with most of that but the bank's valuation of the properties may be a good starting point for negotiating a writedown of the outstanding principle on the loans, the bank
It is very important to blame everyone but yourself.
I think there is a vast difference between a broker 'pushing' an elderly person into buying something they cannot afford but the OP is an investor with 3 properties and over $1m invested. Level of sophistication is vastly difference and it makes me angry to see anyone suggesting the OP should pursue everyone else to pay for his unfortunately unsuccessful investment choices.
This ultimately only makes it harder for everyone to borrow in the future and leads to lots more red tape.
Full agree!. Do we really want to be even more of a nanny state. No one looks to pay extra when things are going well but when things turn some want to blame everyone else.
Like those stories on a current affair, "how was i supposed to pay the loan back on my income" well you asked to borrow it and signed the contract what was your plan!
Try and blame the mortgage broker?
A mortgage brokers role is to understand a clients needs and ensure they can comfortably make the required payments at an assessment rate under NCCP laws. They should never put a person into a loan they cannot afford but since when were they a BA as well?
To suggest the broker must also now have a sound knowledge of every suburb in Australia to ensure their clients "know what they are getting into" makes no sense. A broker realistically I think should not even make investment advice outside the scope of lending. If a client wishes to buy old, new in Sydney or Ayres Rock then that is their discretion. How much more accountable would they be if they said "don't buy there" and the value quadruples. Could you imagine a broker a few years ago advising a client not to buy in Sydney.
The OP is a seasoned investor, it is likely he would have more sophistication than many brokers and he gambled and lost.
What's next can I go into the casino, drop my life savings and look to blame crown for sending me an email, or maybe I'll have a crack at the sparkies for making the lights so enticing.
A mortgage brokers role is to understand a clients needs and ensure they can comfortably make the required payments at an assessment rate under NCCP laws. They should never put a person into a loan they cannot afford but since when were they a BA as well?
To suggest the broker must also now have a sound knowledge of every suburb in Australia to ensure their clients "know what they are getting into" makes no sense. A broker realistically I think should not even make investment advice outside the scope of lending. If a client wishes to buy old, new in Sydney or Ayres Rock then that is their discretion. How much more accountable would they be if they said "don't buy there" and the value quadruples. Could you imagine a broker a few years ago advising a client not to buy in Sydney.
The OP is a seasoned investor, it is likely he would have more sophistication than many brokers and he gambled and lost.
What's next can I go into the casino, drop my life savings and look to blame crown for sending me an email, or maybe I'll have a crack at the sparkies for making the lights so enticing.
@ MRO If the broker has complied with all his obligation listed here; https://www.fbaa.com.au/code_of_conduct/responsibilities as well as "Comply with the provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974, Corporations Act 2001, Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 and all state and territory Fair Trading Acts or Finance Broker specific legislation and any amendments thereto." then there should not be a problem for the mortgage broker it is still well worthwhile getting all relevant documents pertaining to the purchase of the properties as there may or may not be fraud by other parties ie the broker or the bank.
I would suggest that it would have been prudent for the Broker to have outlined the risks associated with this transaction, in writing, so as to protect the broker an added this as an addendum to the loan documents
"This ultimately only makes it harder for everyone to borrow in the future and leads to lots more red tape." Surely raising lending standards and good regulation can only be in everyone's interest?
I would suggest that it would have been prudent for the Broker to have outlined the risks associated with this transaction, in writing, so as to protect the broker an added this as an addendum to the loan documents
"This ultimately only makes it harder for everyone to borrow in the future and leads to lots more red tape." Surely raising lending standards and good regulation can only be in everyone's interest?
@ NPD I Too agree; "Take responsibility for your own actions, as ultimately it's your decision you make when you sign the dotted line." That goes for all Parties; The Applicant, The Broker, and the Finance Institution, and when any party has been negligent of fraudulent then they should pay the price as prescribed by the law.
Northerner, two words: personal responsibility. Why are you so quick to assume there's been fraud? Isn't it more likely that the OP simply made a mistake and didn't adequately assess the risk involved in his purchase?
It's unfortunate that you seem to be encouraging 'ambulance chasing' rather than taking ownership of ones decisions and choices.
Incidentally, this thread came up in an article on Property Observer:
http://www.propertyobserver.com.au/forward-planning/advice-and-hot-topics/41189-dizzy-buying-turns-to-disaster-with-violent-repricing-for-queensland-investment-purchases-david-collyer.html?utm_source=Property+Observer+List&utm_campaign=3b8725e4fb-18_March_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a523fbfccb-3b8725e4fb-245308613
Edit: ambulance chasing is not the right term. Can't think of the right one, so greedy, litigious morons will have to do.
It's unfortunate that you seem to be encouraging 'ambulance chasing' rather than taking ownership of ones decisions and choices.
Incidentally, this thread came up in an article on Property Observer:
http://www.propertyobserver.com.au/forward-planning/advice-and-hot-topics/41189-dizzy-buying-turns-to-disaster-with-violent-repricing-for-queensland-investment-purchases-david-collyer.html?utm_source=Property+Observer+List&utm_campaign=3b8725e4fb-18_March_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_a523fbfccb-3b8725e4fb-245308613
Edit: ambulance chasing is not the right term. Can't think of the right one, so greedy, litigious morons will have to do.
Last edited:
@ ALBANGA
"A mortgage brokers role is to understand a clients needs and ensure they can comfortably make the required payments at an assessment rate under NCCP laws. They should never put a person into a loan they cannot afford but since when were they a BA as well?" This basically means to assess the risks involved in the transaction, and clearly, in this case it was not assessed properly.
"A broker realistically I think should not even make investment advice outside the scope of lending." What are you suggesting? that the entire scope of the broker's role is to fill in a few forms?
"How much more accountable would they be if they said "don't buy there" and the value quadruples. Could you imagine a broker a few years ago advising a client not to buy in Sydney." If the Broker has explained the risks involved in the transaction in a clear and transparent way then there should be no risk to the Broker
"To suggest the broker must also now have a sound knowledge of every suburb in Australia to ensure their clients "know what they are getting into" makes no sense."
If the broker doesn't understand the transaction risks how can they act in the best interests of their client?
"A mortgage brokers role is to understand a clients needs and ensure they can comfortably make the required payments at an assessment rate under NCCP laws. They should never put a person into a loan they cannot afford but since when were they a BA as well?" This basically means to assess the risks involved in the transaction, and clearly, in this case it was not assessed properly.
"A broker realistically I think should not even make investment advice outside the scope of lending." What are you suggesting? that the entire scope of the broker's role is to fill in a few forms?
"How much more accountable would they be if they said "don't buy there" and the value quadruples. Could you imagine a broker a few years ago advising a client not to buy in Sydney." If the Broker has explained the risks involved in the transaction in a clear and transparent way then there should be no risk to the Broker
"To suggest the broker must also now have a sound knowledge of every suburb in Australia to ensure their clients "know what they are getting into" makes no sense."
If the broker doesn't understand the transaction risks how can they act in the best interests of their client?
@ of the vultures
"Northerner, two words: personal responsibility. Why are you so quick to assume there's been fraud?" This guy seems to have a lot of debt with very little equity, even the Sydney house he quotes doesn't seem to be solely his, what I an suggesting is that he should get legal advice FIRST! Also there seems to be a lot of people advocating responsibility for the purchaser but none for the credit providers, I am sure the credit provider also have responsibilities also. the denial of responsibility shown in the last few posts may be indicative of a poor culture in some parts of the industry
"Northerner, two words: personal responsibility. Why are you so quick to assume there's been fraud?" This guy seems to have a lot of debt with very little equity, even the Sydney house he quotes doesn't seem to be solely his, what I an suggesting is that he should get legal advice FIRST! Also there seems to be a lot of people advocating responsibility for the purchaser but none for the credit providers, I am sure the credit provider
D.T. ALL parties should take responsibility for their actions! including credit providers, taking trailing commissions may be an indicator of that.
including consumers of any industry.
That's just it Northerner, there is nothing here to suggest this. The situation is that the OP is in some financial strife due to, in hindsight, a poor choice of IP. There is no suggestion that the broker, bank, legal team, whoever did anything that was not appropriate at the time. Not sure why you are trying to lay blame elsewhere when it was the OP who had the final decision making ability, regardless of any 'advice' he may or may not have received.
I have a dog of a property on my hands right now, which I will probably have to sell at a slight loss as I don't see things improving any time soon. Sure, I could try and find blame somewhere else, but I'd rather admit that I f***ed up and move on. Nobody forced me to buy it.
@ D.T. We agree!
@ Of The Vultures
I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I'm suggesting that he get legal advice to see if he has been a victim of fraud or even a lack of duty of care to see what recourse he may have to other parties to the transaction, I would suggest that he perhaps should/may not have qualified for the loan if he is in as much trouble as he says he is. There may be fraud involved or there may not be, the best person to advise him would be a lawyer practicing in consumer credit law.
For yourself accepting a small loss sounds like a minor inconvenience for you and I sincerely hope that's all it is. But for Andrew it sounds like he may be in a position he may never recover from that will also impact his relationship with the rest of his family.
I'm not blaming anyone for anything, I'm suggesting that he get legal advice to see if he has been a victim of fraud or even a lack of duty of care to see what recourse he may have to other parties to the transaction, I would suggest that he perhaps should/may not have qualified for the loan if he is in as much trouble as he says he is. There may be fraud involved or there may not be, the best person to advise him would be a lawyer practicing in consumer credit law.
For yourself accepting a small loss sounds like a minor inconvenience for you and I sincerely hope that's all it is. But for Andrew it sounds like he may be in a position he may never recover from that will also impact his relationship with the rest of his family.
@ wylie
"Seriously, I've NEVER had a banker, a broker or anybody advise, question, recommend or care less about what I'm buying." Why would you deal with that sort of person/organization? Why is your broker paid a commission? Is that indicative of a poor culture?
"Seriously, I've NEVER had a banker, a broker or anybody advise, question, recommend or care less about what I'm buying." Why would you deal with that sort of person/organization? Why is your broker paid a commission? Is that indicative of a poor culture?
