Lots of people don't insure their contents, either. If they want to take that risk, good on them - just don't go whining on TV that you lost everything and weren't insured, and start a charitable fund.(Does that **** anybody else off, or am I just heartless?
QUOTE]
I don't understand this at all.
I can't watch ACA when someone comes on that fits the bill......
Insurance should be the first thing they organise on contract signing. But you see them on ACA smoking and with beer cartons in the background with a few young kids running around and they reckon they have been hard done by.
Then they plead on TV that they don't know what to do and ask for help.
I can't stand this!!
F
Forget about trusts!
- Thread starter bianca
- Start date
Lots of people don't insure their contents, either. If they want to take that risk, good on them - just don't go whining on TV that you lost everything and weren't insured, and start a charitable fund.
I agree, those type do my head in. Also those on welfare that don't bother getting a job and complain about centrelink.
I agree, those type do my head in. Also those on welfare that don't bother getting a job and complain about centrelink.
Dohhh....
You are getting me angry now
F
Aww what did i do?
Sorry.....not you.
I know of a person who just tends to keep having babies to get assistance from centrelink.
She was 'up the duff' by 16, and she hasn't worked a day for an honest buck in her life.
Meanwhile, she smokes and is an alcoholic, and her poor kids have got to grow up with this.
Cheers,
F
Wow! That is not right.
Poor kids too, hopefully they will know right from wrong and not do this themselves.
Of course they will perpetuate it. You've seen it yourself.
Ah yes, but you never know, they could be the exemption.
Exception?
LMAO
Very interesting examples Ozprep. A couple of quick questions, what happens when they sue for that amount and everything is in a trust? What happens in regards to compensation for the victim if the judges ruling goes that way?Mark Shanahan, lost $2.6M for a stray golf ball that hit somebody in the head on Magnetic Island. He had a business and loads of assets, I believe, and lost the lot.
If they've sued the individuals, and the assets are in, for example, a discretionary trust, then those assets aren't available to satisfy the judgement. If it's not covered by insurance, then assets in your name, such as your car(s), PPOR (if applicable), shares, etc. I think some amount of household contents is exempt, but collectibles and other non-essentials are up for grabs. Either a settlement would be reached for some lesser amount after an audit of your possessions, eg the victim's lawyers would figure out you only own $100K worth of stuff and draw up an agreement that you settle for $100K, or you'd have to declare bankruptcy. But in any case, the assets in the Trust remain intact.
To add to Ozperp's explanations, I think it's important to note that if you have almost no assets available for judgment then the chances of someone bothering to sue you when they know there's no money they can get are quite slim. Generally lawyers and those looking to sue are rarely doing it "for the principle" and acheiving a financial result is very important to them. So think of it as a case of a strong offense is the best defence or a teaspoon of prevention is better than a pound of the cure.
For the record, I don't plan to limit the potential of my success by selling myself short at the beginning. As for whoever it was that said to start with a few small IPs and if you become a mogul then you can figure it out then I'd respond by saying that this is fuzzy logic that relies on a gut feeling without actually thinking the idea through step by step. I'll take Stephen Covey's advice and begin with the end in mind.
Covey ROCKS!! That's the best advice ever, yet easy to forget as we get bogged down with the daily details.
So people how come finance was not really discussed here with regard to Trusts. I remember reading on another forum that if you have a Trust set up it is generally harder to access finance. Is that True? As one of the broker said here that if structured correctly you can access more finance.
I am confused, anyone care to elaborate further.
I don't have a Trust only IP's and PPOR in my own name for now. But what about the future when you want to put them into a SMSF are there problems we are unaware of.
Cheers
I am confused, anyone care to elaborate further.
I don't have a Trust only IP's and PPOR in my own name for now. But what about the future when you want to put them into a SMSF are there problems we are unaware of.
Cheers
I think you will find it goes both ways. I am not a broker, however, I think that what was meant by that comment is that there are some (at least one that I know of) lenders that do not look at borrowings in a Trust when you are looking to get finance for properties in another entity. However, it can be somewhat harder to obtain finance for properties that are held in a Trust.
Having a trust can make things more flexibile and this can aid borrowings. e.g. if you were to buy in your name only and later tried to increase the loan but couldn't service there is not much you can do. But if you had a trust you could more easily add a person as a guarantor and use their income to help.
Having a trust can also hinder your borrowing ability too. eg. you may be sucessfully minimising tax by distributing to various family members and will therefore have a lower taxable income to demonstrate serviceability.
There are also some lenders that don't like trusts (eg Bankwest) and some loans with other lenders are not availble in company names. Especially Low Docs now.
I do not know of any lender that will not count loans that you have guaranteed for serviceability puposes. So setting up a new trust when you max out won't really work.
Having a trust can also hinder your borrowing ability too. eg. you may be sucessfully minimising tax by distributing to various family members and will therefore have a lower taxable income to demonstrate serviceability.
There are also some lenders that don't like trusts (eg Bankwest) and some loans with other lenders are not availble in company names. Especially Low Docs now.
I do not know of any lender that will not count loans that you have guaranteed for serviceability puposes. So setting up a new trust when you max out won't really work.
yes, metropole seminars with chan and naylor, and also steve mcknights, offshoots dean and elise parkers.
chan and naylor reckon they have the perfect trust, which they have specifically set up with the ato......
just my observations .
yorkie
