QS report timing ?

From: Paddy in the Paddies


I have 2 questions about QS reports.

The 1st comes from a comment by DEPpro which has been recommended by forum members. Is a QS report only of value if it's done at settlement ? DEPpro claims in a response to my enquiry that after settlement is too late.
Actually they "assumed" I was too late, simply because I didn't mention it in my first enquiry. Guess who's the ASS ? I may go into more detail about their ill thought out response pending an apology and/or explanation from them.

My 2nd question concerns the life of dep. schedules. It seems that some QS produce schedules for the life of the items, while others only do 5 year reports. The math is the same, so why stop at 5 years ?


Patosan
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reply: 1
From: Lotana Von Amor


Hi Paddy,

You ask why some QSs do 5 years only? My guess is to potentially generate more business for themselves.

You also ask about timing - it is never too late. I recently ordered a QS report for an old unit in Sydney (over 30 years old). Then lodged amendments to my tax returns for the last 4 years specifying the following reason: "Quantity Surveyor report unveiled a number of depreciable items that i was unaware of, therefore depreciation deductions for these years were underclaimed." Result - a cheque for over $3600 (taxable income reduced by$7400). I paid $360 for the report (tax deductible). This is 2000% return on investment (before tax)! Taking into account that the were 3 months between me paying for the report and receiving the cheque, this is 8000% annualised return on investment!!!

Say cheese!

Lotana
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reply: 1.1
From: Dale Gatherum-Goss


HI Paddy

No, there are no time restraints on a QS report. Some QS often only prepare a report for a short number of ears because an accountant will enter the information into a computer programme that will continue the calculations anyway.

Well done, Lotana!!! That is brilliant news and thank you for sharing your success.

Dale
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top