The Investment Institute

[The_Husband]

Does anyone know what has happened to The Investment Institute (No not Henry Kaye, the other company with a similar name).

Nigel Kibel used to post regularly on the old forum. I haven't seen them post for a long time.

TH

 

[asy]

I still chat to Nigel every couple of weeks, he's still around...

If you are looking for him in particular drop me a line and I will put you in touch with him.

Paul is still there, I believe, but I am not sure what they are up to these days... I think they're still doing seminars, but I am not sure.

and as for Jon McKenney, well... he is at her majestey's pleasure for about another 3 years... (Totally unrelated to the Investment Institute)

hope this helps,

asy

 

[Investment_Inst]

The ORIGINAL Investment Institute is still filling halls,reception centres and auditoriums across Victoria.

Nigel Kibel is still presenting the seminars and the highly acclaimed property investment courses.

Paul Murphy is still one of the genuine industry leaders with the qualifications and the experience to go with it.

Paul has helped thousands of people achieve financial freedom through a his expertise in property investment, managed investments and risk management products.

The Investment Institute offers investment education and practical workshops that cater for beginners to advanced investors and are considered by many industry professionals to be the most informative and affordable investment options going around.

For further information email us directly
[email protected]

 

[Bill.L]

I'll bow to your wishes Sim, I won't say anything negative.

 

[Aceyducey]

Well this is another one I haven't heard of.

The site says National, but the poster said 'Victoria', which is unfortunately too far for us to travel for an intro seminar.

Is the Institute active outside of Vic?

Where do I find some blurbs from happy graduates (or some of the industry professionals who recommend it)?

Cheers,

Aceyducey
(Craig Thomler)

 

[Investment_Inst]

It seems that there is some confusion here

The Investment Institute is not in any way associated with the national investment institute.

We are aware of other companies who have registered company or trading names similar to ours but we have no control over this.

With regards to testimonials, there are hundreds of people who can attest to the value of our expertise directly relating to the performance of thier investment portfolio. We are happy for any prospective enrolments to contact our office to obtain details of satisfied graduates.

Unfortunately at this time we do not have an office in Sydney, however this may change in the future.

 

[Sim]

Yes people, please read some history on "The Investment Institute" before you assume anything (it should all be covered in the archives I hope) - they were there first, and have nothing to do with the "National Investment Institute" (aka Henry Kaye). Unfortunate naming association really.

 

[The_Husband]

Neil Jenman has a few things to say in his recent book about the investment institute.

 

[asy]

Surprise me, Hubby,

Jenman doesn't like them???

Ooooh... scary.....

II, better tell Paul to shut shop, Jenman is after him...

asy

 

[brains]

Asy,

you could not consider your self a member of the real estate industry if you did not dislike Neil Jenman. I think real estate agents should include it as a question in their job applications:

Q17: Do you disagree with Neil Jenman's philosophy of trying to clean up and legitimise the real estate industry?

Y N

Q18: Do you agree to criticise Neil Jenman at every opportunity
while working in the real estate industry?

Y N

In fact they should be the only two questions for applicants to the RE industry. Just answer yes to both and youre in.....

 

[Aceyducey]

There's still some confusion on my part - I was referring to the Investment Institute site at (www.theinvestmentinstitute.com.au).

It says in the first line;

"The Investment Institute is a national training college providing relevant quality education and knowledge in the area of investment"

I saw the word 'national' and assumed this meant the Institute was active outside of Vic.

Guess I will have to contact the institute next time I go to Melbourne.

Cheers,

Aceyducey

 

[asy]

Originally posted by brains
Asy,

you could not consider your self a member of the real estate industry if you did not dislike Neil Jenman. I think real estate agents should include it as a question in their job applications:

Q17: Do you disagree with Neil Jenman's philosophy of trying to clean up and legitimise the real estate industry?

Y N

Q18: Do you agree to criticise Neil Jenman at every opportunity
while working in the real estate industry?

Y N

In fact they should be the only two questions for applicants to the RE industry. Just answer yes to both and youre in.....

I guess the two questions for you would be:

Do you believe Jenman is the only 'clean' agent in the business?

and

Is Jenman actually DOING anything about his 'issues'?


Brains, I am constantly criticising anything unfair in the industry. I consider myself a 'clean' and 'legitimate' agent.

I also hope that I have helped people through this forum understand agents better, and also helped them with problems with their agent-dealings.

In addition to that I have given information and opinion on how to deal with all aspects of real estate, from looking for property to negotiating with agents.

Seriously, Brains, I don't like Jenman because he is all hot air. His staff are generally not happy (well, none of the ones I have spoken to have been happy, rather under much more pressure than you will find in a conventional office).

When Jenman does something REAL that will help, I will acknowledge it. For the meantime, I will keep watching, and criticising where I feel I need to.

asy

 

[brains]

Asy,

No one suggested for one minute that Jenman (or offices that use the Jenman system) are the only clean agents in the business.


And yes he is doing a lot, from running seminars to writing books and generally trying to educate people to the fact that lying, bullying and cheating shouldnt be the normal way that business is done. If thats not doing anything, i'll give it away.

Im not criticising you directly, but it seems that every single person involved in real estate (except for the ones involved in the Jenman system) criticise him ceaselessly.

I think they are worried that one day the industry will change and the gravy train will stop, but they dont realise the agents using the Jenman system are usually much more successful then non Jenman ones.

Below is a list of practices that Jenman is trying to change, and this is just for QLD.

Cooling-Off Periods
The real estate industry has convinced the Government that cooling-off periods should not apply to the method of selling real estate which contains the greatest levels of high pressure and bullying - auctions. The 'new' laws provide for a general cooling-off period for buyers, but exclude auctions and do not provide a cooling-off period for sellers. Astonishingly, there are monetary penalties on buyers who cool-off with agents allowed to pocket half the amount. This is one of many ways that real estate agents can profit from the losses of consumers in Queensland. Buyers at auction should not be less deserving of protection.

Auction Conduct
The worst of Australia's auction practices flourish in Queensland. Everything from vendor conditioning to false quoting of prices to sellers and buyers is going unpunished. The reprehensible practice of dummy bidding now masquerades under the name of "Vendor Bidding". The only people who should be allowed to bid on a property are buyers. To protect the interests of sellers, bidding at auctions can start at the reserve price. This would eliminate the need for any false bids. Agents harass and coerce both sellers and buyers at auctions. It should be illegal for agents to approach sellers or buyers during an auction.

False Quoting
Homesellers. Agents give false high quotes to homesellers about the likely selling price of their homes and are still entitled to commission when they sell the homes well below the prices quoted. Homesellers should be protected from deliberate false quoting as they are in other industries. Agents should not be entitled to commission if they deliberately entrap sellers into selling agreements by giving a false quote and then 'condition' the sellers down in price once they are locked-in to the selling agreement.

Homebuyers.
The widespread Queensland practice of "bait pricing" which is disguised under the name "price range" must be outlawed. It is one thing to give a 'price guide' but another to quote a price at which a property will never be sold, thus causing financial loss and heartbreak to thousands of buyers. Agents should be compelled to compensate lost fees and wasted expenses to buyers who have been quoted false prices.

Insider Trading
Agents or their relatives or representatives should never be allowed to buy real estate through their own real estate offices. Horrific cases of real estate insider trading occur in Queensland. The victims are often the elderly and the ill.

Legal Advice
One of the greatest weaknesses in the Queensland system is that real estate agents are allowed to draw up sale contracts. Queensland's system often results in consumers signing contracts, under pressure from agents, before these contracts have been checked by the independent solicitors who are denied the chance to protect their clients.

Investment Advice
The notorious investment scams are rising up from the setbacks of recent publicity. It is easy for crooks to find ways around weak laws. Just because less consumers are complaining does not mean they are not being ripped-off. It just means the new victims do not know they have been ripped-off, yet. All investment sales to consumers should only become binding once consumers have received mandatory independent legal advice.

Real Estate Institutes
The REIQ represents the interests of agents, not consumers.

 

[NigelW]

Brains,

as much as i hate to leap to the defence or RE agents (Asy excepted of course) I think you've got to try to strike a happy medium between consumer protection on the one hand and excessive government interference which stifles commerce on the other.

The government's job is not to protect people from making poor investment decisions. The Qld contract is now plastered with warnings to get independent advice. There is now a cooling off period in Qld as well as you mention. For goodness' sake you destroy half a forest in paperwork by the time you've signed up an offer in Qld these days!!!

But it doesn't matter what is done, there will always be a small number of people who are ripped off by fraudsters and a somewhat larger number of people who just make dumb investing decisions and then cry and whinge about it! The former deserve protection, the latter don't.

You can't legislate against stupidity. You can't protect people from themselves.

I suggest to you that people who think they might need a cooling off period should NOT be buying at auction! They obviously can't make a decision and stick to it and shouldn't be mixing it when they can't handle it. If they can't take the heat they should get outta the kitchen!

I honestly think cooling off periods are a bad idea. There are now more than enough warnings on the statutory documentation and the standard form contract is pretty darn user friendly and plain english compared to what it used to be. There is now a plethora of newspaper reports and general media coverage about the perils of property investing.

Caveat Emptor I say!

phew...that's enough polemic for one day...

cheers
N.

 

[Sim]

If you are going to impose cooling off periods on auctions you may as well ban auctions all together - if you go to the effort and expense of holding an auction, and then the winning bidder "cools off" the next day - do you have to do it all again in 6 weeks time ?

Or are they promoting something along the lines of runner up bidders having the chance to purchase at the final price if the winner cools off or something ? Easy to abuse that kind of system in my opinion - but then again I suppose no more easy to abuse than the current auction system is anyway ?

 

[brains]

Nigel.

Thanks for the lecture on government intervention vs. consumer protection.

I started a company 9 years ago which is very succesful today (self funded expansion btw) and am conversant with government interventionist policies, but not every one that buys real estate is a savvy property investor and society in general needs some level of protection.

Also, i have bought 5 properties in QLD and have seen the mountains of paper that go between here and there in the express post bags....i know its a lot, but QLD deserves draconian
protection with all the paperwork it involves with its record of real estate shams and rip offs.

 

[NigelW]

Originally posted by brains
Nigel.

Thanks for the lecture on government intervention vs. consumer protection.

I started a company 9 years ago which is very succesful today (self funded expansion btw) and am conversant with government interventionist policies, but not every one that buys real estate is a savvy property investor and society in general needs some level of protection.

Also, i have bought 5 properties in QLD and have seen the mountains of paper that go between here and there in the express post bags....i know its a lot, but QLD deserves draconian
protection with all the paperwork it involves with its record of real estate shams and rip offs.

I don't disagree that there needs to be a level of protection. I'm just not convinced that they've stuck the right balance. You get to a point where there's so much paper that people just don't read it! They just want to know where to sign. I've bought 4 places in Qld and made offers on probably close to 50 or 60, the volume of paperwork is just ridiculuous. I reckon the best approach would just be to have the big warning in 72 point font on the front of every contract which says:

"WARNING - This contract is a legal document and by signing it you will incur enforceable obligations. You should get legal and financial advice independent from the seller if you do not understand what obligations you are accepting by signing this contract!"

Sorry to preach to the converted regarding the evils of interventionist government!

I guess the way I look at it is this...if a person buy a pair of shoes for $200 from one store when another one around the corner has the same shoes for $100. Have they been ripped off? No, they just didn't shop around or do their homework. Perhaps they didn't have time to go around the corner, or didn't even know the shoes were available elsewhere, or perhaps they just liked the friendly shop assistants who told them how wonderful they looked in the shoes at the first store...

Many motivations drive people when buying. not all of them rational. People have to take a degree of responsibility for their actions. Surely the fact that houses cost a lot more than shoes should make even the most foolhardy person think twice about buying without shopping around a bit?

Cheers
N

 

[Sim]

People (the ignorant ones that is) still tend to spend more time choosing and checking out a $20K car than they do a $200K property.

 

[Aceyducey]

Oops - posted in the wrong thread