Underground Power - Kick in the guts

[WilliamB]

Hi gang,

Not sure if anyone has come across this before, but I just settled on a property of recently sold in Ashfield, WA and was quite surprised to find 1,600 bucks worth of Underground Power costs reducing the amount I was to receive. I double confirmed with my settlement agent, and am told this is correct.

The underground power was introduced in March 2012, and since then rate payers have been paying an extra 800 per annum for the UG power costs. Now I am not too concerned by this, but when I come to sell the property, why should I have to pay the balance owing on the property? Why shouldn't the new owner continue to pay the balance on their rates?

Has anyone had something like this happen before? If not, HEADS UP!

Bloody annoyed that's for sure.

 

[Aaron_C]

It sounds no different to unpaid council rates or land tax. This will form part of the adjustments at settlement as upon a new transfer the new title has to be free of any encumbrances like government charges.

 

[Spades]

Hi WilliamB,

I came across something similar where mains water and sewerage were connected to props on the street.

Backlog payments were incorporated into the bill in small increments to offset the upgrade.

In this case,the vendor is responsible up to settlement for anything outstanding.

I would have funked that it's your responsibility after the settlement.

Cheers Spades.

 

[INVSTOR]

I wasn't aware of that! Something to keep in mind with other properties in suburbs that are considering changing to underground! Gets expensive when you have a couple of properties upgrading!

 

[Spades]

I wasn't aware of that! Something to keep in mind with other properties in suburbs that are considering changing to underground! Gets expensive when you have a couple of properties upgrading!

Imo,the upside is it will add value to your props

 

[westminster]

Hi gang,

Not sure if anyone has come across this before, but I just settled on a property of recently sold in Ashfield, WA and was quite surprised to find 1,600 bucks worth of Underground Power costs reducing the amount I was to receive. I double confirmed with my settlement agent, and am told this is correct.

The underground power was introduced in March 2012, and since then rate payers have been paying an extra 800 per annum for the UG power costs. Now I am not too concerned by this, but when I come to sell the property, why should I have to pay the balance owing on the property? Why shouldn't the new owner continue to pay the balance on their rates?

Has anyone had something like this happen before? If not, HEADS UP!

Bloody annoyed that's for sure.

I am purchasing a property like this and I need to check but the scenario is similar - the seller has to pay out the remainder of the Council 'loan' at settlement.

The new owner doesn't need to pay for it as the current owner has received all the benefits of work being completed - ie the increase in value to the land by the power being put underground. The new owner has paid the 'value' of the dwelling/land which incorporates that work being done.

To limit the duress placed on the owners (now sellers) the Councils paid for the work and charged it back in installments - this is a 'loan' of sorts between the council and the owner. If the owner sells then they need to clear that debt to the Council.

 

[WilliamB]

Westminster. It was a bit of a surprise, but makes absolute sense when put that way!

Still. Bums on seats!

Cheers,