hmmm maybe I should employ Nathan to buy my next one!! 
House in Western Sydney for $110,000 reno $50k resell $240,000
- Thread starter Nathan
- Start date
Here are 2 x video updates of the property and renovation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQNdsv9bZBA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q9gygPpZNY
Nathan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQNdsv9bZBA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q9gygPpZNY
Nathan.
Some nice legal electrical work there. Not.
You obviously don't know the area going by your description of the buyers. I will ignore your ignorance.
The contract is a binding one. It states you must not rent it out. You could try it but you'd find you'd lose your money. If anyone could find a way around the contract Nathan would. Believe me he's tried.
Know it quite well thanks, live not far away. Own in surrounding suburbs. But thanks for your misplaced assumptions. Spent plenty of time looking around 2770, some places with good tenants, some with shockers, and seen all kinds of neighbourhoods and neighbours in the process.
Its a valid question - how is it enforced. No need to get on the personal attack. The investor act was tongue in cheek stereotyping.
In the past Nathan has stated he has had the owner occupier clause removed.
Nice safety boots, too, Nathan!
What I don't understand is, if you have to replace most of the roof trusses, rewire, replumb, flooring, resheet, and so on, why is it so much cheaper to do this than build a house from scratch?
Might want to look at your video editing... "Insert Title Text Here" doesn't come across that professional.
Good luck with the reno. Looking forward to seeing the finished product!
That was just a test to see if you watched it through to the end!
Know it quite well thanks, live not far away. Own in surrounding suburbs. But thanks for your misplaced assumptions. Spent plenty of time looking around 2770, some places with good tenants, some with shockers, and seen all kinds of neighbourhoods and neighbours in the process.
Its a valid question - how is it enforced.No one said it wasn't. It's a great question actually. Read a contract of one and see what the exact wording is. No need to get on the personal attack. No attack. Just stating I'll ignore the ignorance that I read in your post. The investor act was tongue in cheek stereotyping. And I'm supposed to guess that? Maybe use the available emoticons to remove doubt.
In the past Nathan has stated he has had the owner occupier clause removed.Really? Not that I'm aware of. Not that I know all Nathan's deals. I know he had his lawyers look at it. Maybe he meant he arranged for it to be removed prior to purchase. Sometimes if they don't sell then they are put on the open market. Nathan has a good relationship with the auctioning agents. Maybe they called him to let him know it was being removed. I'll ask him Tomorrow.
One 2 weeks ago was Owner Occupier but the clause was removed a week before the auction due to there being termites discovered.
