Article from the Financial Review today:
http://afr.com/articles/2003/07/23/1058853136424.html
astroboy.
http://afr.com/articles/2003/07/23/1058853136424.html
astroboy.
Last edited:
Lenders tighten policy - AFR
- Thread starter astroboy
- Start date
Yep. Heard the same from a reputable broker 3 - 4 months ago. <EOM>
For those that have read this far and were wondering. <EOM> = End of Message.
For those that have read this far and were wondering. <EOM> = End of Message.
Lenders
I have to agree ..I just had some info on a site in sydney's west (not cbd)
That was just declined for finance.
The site was $2mil to buy ,,,da approved for 20 units.. Valuation by bank at 8mil ,Funds needed at 4 mil 50% LVR
And declined..I think some of the banks are getting to hard on some developers.
Yeh yeh I know the CBD district is out of control but the outer suburbs!!!?????? I can not see their logic? With these sites & low LVR..
Ocean view
I have to agree ..I just had some info on a site in sydney's west (not cbd)
That was just declined for finance.
The site was $2mil to buy ,,,da approved for 20 units.. Valuation by bank at 8mil ,Funds needed at 4 mil 50% LVR
And declined..I think some of the banks are getting to hard on some developers.
Yeh yeh I know the CBD district is out of control but the outer suburbs!!!?????? I can not see their logic? With these sites & low LVR..
Ocean view
AFR Articles..... Friday 25 July
Article on p. 3 - "ALP Reviews bank loan rules"
The shadow Treasurer (Latham) is examining prudential guidelines and the potential to smooth out property cycles.
Article on p. 9 - "Debt burden hosed down".
A Reserch Paper released by the RBA yesterday has found that those households most highly leveraged are most able to handle the debt.
Interesting (for all sorts of reasons).
MB
Article on p. 3 - "ALP Reviews bank loan rules"
The shadow Treasurer (Latham) is examining prudential guidelines and the potential to smooth out property cycles.
Article on p. 9 - "Debt burden hosed down".
A Reserch Paper released by the RBA yesterday has found that those households most highly leveraged are most able to handle the debt.
Interesting (for all sorts of reasons).
MB
I have always voted Labor.
Not anymore.
Regulating banks on lending rules is only one of the nasties Mr Latham has up his sleeve. His desires also include abolishing neg gearing (he obviously did not learn past lessons) and abolition of CGT exemption for PPOR.
It is hard to invent anything more idiotic than circling like vulture around Property Investment when so many Australians have entered the game lately.
Not anymore.
Regulating banks on lending rules is only one of the nasties Mr Latham has up his sleeve. His desires also include abolishing neg gearing (he obviously did not learn past lessons) and abolition of CGT exemption for PPOR.
It is hard to invent anything more idiotic than circling like vulture around Property Investment when so many Australians have entered the game lately.
I'm with you. I have always been a Labour supporter but I am leaning heavily toward Liberal nowadays.
Political suicide for the labour party to deny Australians a chance for financial freedom esp when the govt are not intending to provide for us in our retirement.
Just my opinion
Nat
Political suicide for the labour party to deny Australians a chance for financial freedom esp when the govt are not intending to provide for us in our retirement.
Just my opinion
Nat
The article says:
Banks were also tightening the screws through tougher valuations, he said, instructed to find the "worst-case scenario fire sale and to discount it".
This is why I don't like leaving it up to the banks to order the valuation. I think it's wrong that valuers can be conservative when the valuation is for finance purposes.
How can they justify giving a lower valuation (when instructed by the bank) as to the one you would get had you instructed the val?
Banks were also tightening the screws through tougher valuations, he said, instructed to find the "worst-case scenario fire sale and to discount it".
This is why I don't like leaving it up to the banks to order the valuation. I think it's wrong that valuers can be conservative when the valuation is for finance purposes.
How can they justify giving a lower valuation (when instructed by the bank) as to the one you would get had you instructed the val?
Interesting point... that could almost be classified as "price fixing".
Hi All,
In response to Multi and Natmarie73, upon reaching voting age I also voted labor until I realised that generally the liberal party try to do what is right for the country at large. Sometimes it appears that they favour business to much, but in the end the policies that favours business, favour all of us as more business = more jobs = more money flowing through the economy.
In my experience, labor will create unfunded, flim-flam policies that appeal to people that don't ask what the implications of these policies are. In the end, the wealthy (or those on the path to wealth) will investigate and find ways to get the best financial/social result for their family out of these policies while the victims who voted for them end up copping the higher taxes/reduced services to pay for it.
As an example, take stamp duty charged on the transfer of land. At the moment, all the state labor governments are raising it as quickly as they politically can. They think that they are really sticking it to wealthy as only the wealthy buy property....do they realise that the wealthy will usually buy quality property and hold it for the long term....
Question: if I buy a property under a trust and never sell it, how many times do I pay stamp duty on the transfer of land during the life of the trust?
Answer: mate, you will get me once...but then my family has untaxed capital gain for as long as the trust is operational....I may be dead but the trust will live on
Question: if I buy a ppor and then continually upgrade by buying and selling as my income and equity rise, how many times will I pay stamp duty on the transfer of land until I'm dead?
Answer: every single time
Glenn
In response to Multi and Natmarie73, upon reaching voting age I also voted labor until I realised that generally the liberal party try to do what is right for the country at large. Sometimes it appears that they favour business to much, but in the end the policies that favours business, favour all of us as more business = more jobs = more money flowing through the economy.
In my experience, labor will create unfunded, flim-flam policies that appeal to people that don't ask what the implications of these policies are. In the end, the wealthy (or those on the path to wealth) will investigate and find ways to get the best financial/social result for their family out of these policies while the victims who voted for them end up copping the higher taxes/reduced services to pay for it.
As an example, take stamp duty charged on the transfer of land. At the moment, all the state labor governments are raising it as quickly as they politically can. They think that they are really sticking it to wealthy as only the wealthy buy property....do they realise that the wealthy will usually buy quality property and hold it for the long term....
Question: if I buy a property under a trust and never sell it, how many times do I pay stamp duty on the transfer of land during the life of the trust?
Answer: mate, you will get me once...but then my family has untaxed capital gain for as long as the trust is operational....I may be dead but the trust will live on
Question: if I buy a ppor and then continually upgrade by buying and selling as my income and equity rise, how many times will I pay stamp duty on the transfer of land until I'm dead?
Answer: every single time
Glenn
