Hi Novski and Others,
The reasons why it is different in the USA to Oz is the difference of ownership of land and title.
In the USA, the purchaser buys the land and all on it and under it, therefore a mortgage attaches to the land. When the land is sold the mortgage and title attached to it go with it.
In Oz the purchaser buys the title to the land but does not own the land, what is under it or above it, only the title to the land. Therefore a mortgage attaches to the title and not the land.
In Oz, if a person is being pursued by the Bank for arrears money, they know it and know it for some time. The owner may then choose to sell prior to the bank exercising its foreclosure rights. It is better for the owner to retain control of the situation and do all possible to correct the problem than to allow it to fall into the hands of the Bank.
A “friendly” bank manager, or whoever, cannot release this information to the public without the knowledge and approval of the owner without breaking the law. So if you are now gaining this type of information, it may be considered unlawful, which implies that you are not beyond gaining some advantage which becomes the owners loss. Is this fair and reasonable or are the present laws more acceptable?
Why Novski now takes a swipe at the Real Estate Agent, suggesting that from this situation the Agent is gaining some kind of benefit is beyond me. Why do you think that they have a stranglehold and reap maximum benefits from this situation? And yet, you seem to suggest that a whisper in your ear at the right time might be OK.
The General Public and Real Estate Agents must all comply with the same laws as each other.
Regards
Ross