Wrap story in todays SMH

[perky29]

Our own M Gruber has an article in todays SMH to do with one his wrap properties .

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Dangers-of-lending-scheme-hit-home/2004/12/23/1103391900303.html

An excerpt from the article:

Michael Gruber sells "wrap finance", a new style of home loan sweeping Australia.

Mr Gruber controls a company called Dark Thoughts Pty Ltd. A fortnight ago he marched into the Straker family's living room, told the children to go outside and threatened costly legal proceedings if the parents did not sign an eviction agreement that week.

The Strakers' wrap agreement says they must give up their small property at Beresfield, near Newcastle, if they miss just one repayment - which they did this year after Michael Straker was retrenched from his factory management job and Julie Straker suffered serious illness.

The family is one of tens of thousands who resorted to the risky finance because they were desperate to enter the property market but unable to secure a bank loan.

Only when they fell behind on repayments did they understand what wrap finance really meant.

"It's just like a hire purchase arrangement when you buy a car," Mr Gruber told the Herald. "Title doesn't pass until the last payment has been made."

I will not post the whole article, but it deteriorates into another anti-wrap article.
Typical media anti-wrap rubbish if you ask me....
I wouldn't mind betting that Michael asked the family to get independent legal advice before going through with the wrap loan in the first place - but that is conveniently left out.

 

[Lissy]

My favourite paragraph for the award of "accurate reporting" is the following....

"The two "wrap gurus" in Australia are Rick Otton, who recently replaced Mr Gruber as president of the Vendor Finance Wraps Association, and Steve McNight, who on Friday promoted his "millionaire challenge" for the third time on Channel Seven's Today Tonight program."

Actually, Michael Gruber replaced Rick Otton in 2003, and in 2004 Michael Gruber also stepped aside as President. So neither of them hold that position!
And poor Steve - the guy's only had two bestselling property books, and they can't even spell his name right - it's Steve McKnight!

It makes me wonder about the accuracy of the other "facts" in the article.

 

[agent 86]

If a certain persons "real estate system" is sooo good, why does he need to constantly gain publicity by running down anothers legitimate business.
Poor buggers definately got mental problems.

A86

 

[likewow]

As i have stated previously I can think of much better ways to make a dollar.I also disagree with Michaels comparison of finance for a car and a house. A family with children dont live in a car.

As far as i can see, wrapping is taking advantgae of the bottom feeders of society. There is a good reason why people are refused finance through more mainstream lending channels.

And lets keep 'the certain person' out of this, it was a SMH article.

 

[see_change]

And lets keep 'the certain person' out of this, it was a SMH article.

Likewow , this is following on from a post on that persons web site a few days ago, links to which have been deleted from the forum.

If it wasn't for that post from a certain person , the SMH article wouldn't be there.

See Change

 

[likewow]

Likewow , this is following on from a post on that persons web site a few days ago, links to which have been deleted from the forum.

If it wasn't for that post from a certain person , the SMH article wouldn't be there.

See Change

Ok SC, I was trying to keep Sim from pulling the thread so we can have a discussion on wrapping without mentioning whats his name. And do you mean 'article' on his own website from a certain person rather than 'post'?

 

[see_change]

Likewow

Tried to pm you with details but it bounced. Can you enable pm's ?

See Change

 

[likewow]

Im not sure why it bounced....hmmm...maybe its full

 

[nat r]

There are plenty of legitimate ways to make money off those less finacially fortunate than your self....Wrapping is not one of them.

Any legitimate consumer finace is covered by UCC reagulation...if the borrower falls ill or suffers some other form of legitimate hardship then the lender has to show compassion and consideration

These regulations are a reflection of the fact that we live in a civilised 1st World country....if you feel that is it good business practice to kick familiies out of "wrapped" houses due to illness or injury then pity help you, because nobody else will.

 

[Sim]

With all the horror people express about wrappers evicting their wrappees - you fail to remember one important fact ... this is EXACTLY what the banks do to mortgagees when they fail to meet their repayments too.

Although I must admit that the banks don't exactly enjoy this kind of thing - in fact they seem to go to great lengths to avoid it ... not avoid evicting people when they can't pay - but rather avoid letting people get into that position in the first place !!!

The main reason the banks wouldn't lend to these people is because they thought the risk of having to evict them was too great. Evicting people is very bad for PR ... as you can see by the very bad media reporting about this issue.

But let's be perfectly clear about it ... if you don't pay your mortgage for whatever reason ... the bank WILL evict you from your house (and any other house they have security over that they need to sell to recover their money).

That's the risk the borrowers take - and it's the risk the lenders take too.

It's all about risk - to both parties.

 

[Sim]

if the borrower falls ill or suffers some other form of legitimate hardship then the lender has to show compassion and consideration

I think you'll find the media is not reporting the full story here - I'm pretty sure that the wrappees in this case were offered quite a bit of leniency. But like I said earlier - at the end of the day - after all the help offered, regardless of any UCC, if you still can't pay, you will be evicted by the banks as well.

 

[see_change]

There are plenty of legitimate ways to make money off those less finacially fortunate than your self....Wrapping is not one of them.

.

I'm not into wrapping but it is legal and legitimate in most of the states of Australia .

There are two sides to most stories and my understanding is that alternative versions of this story would give a slightly different slant to that portrayed in the SMH article.

See Change

 

[likewow]

I'm not into wrapping but it is legal and legitimate in most of the states of Australia .

There are two sides to most stories and my understanding is that alternative versions of this story would give a slightly different slant to that portrayed in the SMH article.

See Change

Can you enlighetn us further on the alternative versions?

 

[Rolf Latham]

Hiya


Never let the whole truth get in the way of a some good story.

Vilification of certain groups of our society is a criminal offence, yet the media can effectively malign who and what they want, because the little guy has no defence.

I dont know the full issues behind the story, all I know whats written in that story isnt the whole truth and because of privacy laws with regard to the borrower I cant comment any further, which is a real pity because it would show just how bent the SMH story is.

ta

rolf

 

[see_change]

Hiya


Never let the whole truth get in the way of a some good story.

Vilification of certain groups of our society is a criminal offence, yet the media can effectively malign who and what they want, because the little guy has no defence.

I dont know the full issues behind the story, all I know whats written in that story isnt the whole truth and because of privacy laws with regard to the borrower I cant comment any further, which is a real pity because it would show just how bent the SMH story is.

ta

rolf

Likewow , Ditto

See Change

 

[likewow]

The SMH most likely got the story from whatshisname and would use that as their source which according to you guys is inaccurate and possibly slenderous and defamtory. If thats the case why doesnt Michael take legal action against whatshisname and/or the SMH. Rolf, People win such cases all the time especially when their is business involved.

Beside all that, the question remains wrapping might be 'legal and legitimate' but is it ethical and moral to take advantage of the bottom feeders in society that cant find source finance elsewhere.

 

[nat r]

My call for 2005...The popular press will have a field day pouring out the stories of how some down-trodden family have been kicked out of a hovel by a tyranncal wrap providers.

Then there will be a major crack-down on wrapping that will force the cowboys out of the market. Anybody who wishes to stay will be forced to act in a regulated manner or face hefty penalties.

All of this is the typical path for industries where morals and professionalsim is at a shortage.

 

[see_change]

The SMH most likely got the story from whatshisname and would use that as their source which according to you guys is inaccurate and possibly slenderous and defamtory. .

I don't see anyone suggesting slander or defamation in thier posts out side you likewow. I see people chosing their words with care.

See Change

 

[Jacque]

With all the horror people express about wrappers evicting their wrappees - you fail to remember one important fact ... this is EXACTLY what the banks do to mortgagees when they fail to meet their repayments too.

Although I must admit that the banks don't exactly enjoy this kind of thing - in fact they seem to go to great lengths to avoid it ... not avoid evicting people when they can't pay - but rather avoid letting people get into that position in the first place !!!

The main reason the banks wouldn't lend to these people is because they thought the risk of having to evict them was too great. Evicting people is very bad for PR ... as you can see by the very bad media reporting about this issue.

But let's be perfectly clear about it ... if you don't pay your mortgage for whatever reason ... the bank WILL evict you from your house (and any other house they have security over that they need to sell to recover their money).

That's the risk the borrowers take - and it's the risk the lenders take too.

It's all about risk - to both parties.

So true. But it wouldn't be as sensational news reporting just to have CBA or ANZ evicting someone out of their home now, would it?
Much more fun (and it sells more newspapers) to take the opinion of some totally biased and misinformed "guru" in the RE industry (who shall remain nameless of course!) along with a few scant misguided facts and create a story that supports the poor battler yet again. Geez, I'm sick of these types of stories....

When are people going to start taking responsibility for themselves and their actions?
I know MG and, along with being a highly ethical and intelligent person, also know that he has worked extremely hard on both wraps and other businesses. His story, naturally, has only been partially told in this article and I take it with the usual grain of salt that I take most media items today.

 

[Rolf Latham]

Hi LW

I would disagree.

Im not good on generalisations, I cant find any information on the little guy having been consistently succesful in any legal action (including debt recovery) against any one or thing that has significant larger financial resources.

There are isolated occurences that I am aware of, more often though these are where a high profile legal person has done the work pro bono.

Can you recall any recent cases where a small business has been succesful ? I may be swayed here, but I cant recall any ?

ta
rolf