Divorce, scenarios?

...Get a caveat for starters.

***sorry for the hijack - One quick query on caveats...

Hey Terry /or anyone really,

There was a conveyancer that I no longer use in Melbourne who had strongly recommended I lodge a caveat on the property I was purchasing at the time to protect my interest. The advice of my accountant was it was unnecessary when discussed at tax time. In a second purchase with her, I didn't lodge one much to her disappointment (and in her written response). Is there any real value in lodging one in this scenario? Was it more her dodgy practice? Thanks
 
Will stop an unauthorized dealing (sale/refinance). Different scenario then a buy from a third party. Here -missing ID documents and the acrimonious nature of the split indicate a real possibility of an unauthorized dealing/ forgery. A Caveat will slow things up a bit I expect.
 
In addition to much of the advice provided in the above posts, the theft of one's passport is a serious matter and presents an ongoing genuine risk to the security of your friend's assets.

Sure.. IF there is fraud proved, compensation can be paid upon a conviction. However, that is a long long way off. There are also genuine significant limitations on the amount of compensation that can be awarded arising from a criminal matter.

The bottom line is your friend needs to retain possession of that passport as a priority.. I agree with the caveat in the interim for abundant caution.

This theft should be reported to the police forthwith. It would be a walk up start. This would essentially resolve much of this matter.
 
***sorry for the hijack - One quick query on caveats...

Hey Terry /or anyone really,

There was a conveyancer that I no longer use in Melbourne who had strongly recommended I lodge a caveat on the property I was purchasing at the time to protect my interest. The advice of my accountant was it was unnecessary when discussed at tax time. In a second purchase with her, I didn't lodge one much to her disappointment (and in her written response). Is there any real value in lodging one in this scenario? Was it more her dodgy practice? Thanks

Caveats have nothing to do with tax, so your accountant's comments are strange! They are not qualified to advise on this and their insurance wouldn't have covered this mistake.

You should consider lodging a caveat on exchange of contracts as you will have an interest in the property - but not legal title until settlement. So if someone else, such as a creditor, gets in before you settle they could have priority. See Black v Garnock. The risk is short term, but real, however chances of something happening is small.
 
But surely getting that 200k loan against the property requires two signatures too?

Yes - but who is to say that the wife can't fake the signature, and supply identification docs (stolen).

I know, in around a decade of buying and selling, our previous mortgage broker only actually met hubby once - even tho lots of the purchases were in his name only.

I've never physically met my current broker - nor my conveyancer for that matter.

Taking out a loan is definitely not impossible
 
There was a conveyancer that I no longer use in Melbourne who had strongly recommended I lodge a caveat on the property I was purchasing at the time to protect my interest.

It's actually good advice. Only costs $80 or so and you will lower the chance of a bad situation happening to pretty much 0%.
 
Get your friend to contact the bank as a priority. Advise them to freeze all accounts, and freeze all transactions.
Get the name of the person they speak to, then follow up in writing.

If any money leaves the account fraudulently, the bank wont have a leg to stand on. Just be aware though that if they go down this path, its a bit of a nightmare to unravel. However, the bank wont allow anyone to transact on either the property, or the accounts so your friends money and house will be safe.

If he wanted to be nasty he could call the cops and advise that his passport has been stolen by his estranged wife. Passport theft is a federal offence if Im not mistaken, and carries with it pretty harsh penalties.

Blacky
 
Just to clarify - from the OP's posts it seems the wife is the friend needing protection and the husband has cleared off, while some of the advice seems to presuppose it's the wife who has cleared off leaving the husband with no ID and at risk. Some of the confusion in the 1st page of this thread is based on this misunderstanding.

I hope the situation has calmed down now.
 
Back
Top