FHOG concept

[Lissy]

From: Felicity W.


I had an interesting concept passed by me yesterday regarding the FHOG.
The idea was that if you have a situation as a couple where one of you has bought a property before (say in a previous relationship) then what you do is buy the property in the eligible partner's name, secure the grant, and then a little bit down the track, add the name of the non-eligible party to the title.
It seemed a bit borderline to me, but I was curious to know what other people think of it. It was suggested as a way of helping wrap clients secure the FHOG.
Keep smiling
Felicity

 

[Property Invest]

Reply: 1
From: Property Investor


Felicity,

One particular scenario that was put to me where male partner has purchased properties in the past and is ineligible for FHOG. The female partner has never purchased a property before therefore eligible. If female partner purchases the property in her name and thus claims the FHOG. If they are married or in a de-facto relationship aren't they both owners of that property?

I would like everyone's thought on this.

Regards,
Mannie.

 

[DaleGG]

Reply: 1.1
From: Dale Gatherum-Goss


Hi Mannie

I may well be wrong on this, but, I vaguely recall reading that the law said if someone was married, the FHOG is not available if either partner has owned a home previously - regardless of who buys the home now.

Dale

 

[Lissy]

Reply: 1.1.1
From: Felicity W.


Finally found a list of Eligibility criteria...

ARE YOU ELIGIBLE?
To be eligible to receive the grant, an applicant and the applicant's partner must meet certain eligibility criteria.

An applicant or the applicant's partner must
be a natural person (not a company);
be an Australian citizen or a permanent resident;
not have owned a home before in Australia;
occupy the home as their principal place of residence within 12 months;
not have received the FHOG before; and
not have entered into a contract to purchase or build a home before 1 July 2000, or not commenced construction as an owner builder prior to that date.

So sounds like this concept is a bit dodgy.

Keep smiling
Felicity

 

[WebBoard]

Reply: 1.1.1.1
From: Robert Price


Ok, what does everyone reckon about this one?

A couple wish to purchase a home.
The Husband was married before and lived in a house owned by his then wife. He was not on the title.
If his current wife purchases a home solely in her own name then as I read the legislation she is eligible. The husband never owned a home, he just lived with his exwife who did.

 

[Glenn]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1
From: Glenn Mott


That sounds pretty fair to me Robert

Regards

Glenn Mott

-----Original Message-----
From: propertyforum Listmanager
[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, 16 August 2002 10:39 AM
Subject: FHOG concept


From: "Robert Price" <[email protected]>

Ok, what does everyone reckon about this one?

A couple wish to purchase a home.
The Husband was married before and lived in a house owned by his then wife.
He was not on the title.
If his current wife purchases a home solely in her own name then as I read
the legislation she is eligible. The husband never owned a home, he just
lived with his exwife who did.



To reply: mailto[email protected]
To start a new topic: mailto[email protected]
To login: http://bne003w.server-web.com/~wb013

 

[Property Invest]

Reply: 1.1.1.1.1.1
From: Property Investor


Hi everyone,
You guys are correct!
Let me give you two other scenarios:
1- A de-facto couple - The male partner has purchased a property before, the female partner has never.
They claim that they have separated and the female goes out and purchases a property and claims the FHOG. They get back together after a couple of months.
Would they have to return the FHOG?
Would it be pro-rata?

2- The same couple - The male partner has purchased a property investment before under his company name. This company has since been de-registered.
The female partner has never bought a property.
Could the FHOG be claimed?

Regards,
Mannie.