Wrapping - What happens when I notify bank?

[Savanna100]

Reopening an old thread! but are the circumstances still the same today for wrapping.

Does anyone know of a good solicitor who can handle the paperwork to set up a wrap?

Is the new purchaser entitled to FHOG and stamp duty concessions like a normal purchaser?

as stated above try Anthony Cordato
http://www.businesslawyer.com.au/

 

[Token Funder]

you simply borrow the money and buy the house. you legally dont have to say anything about wrapping it and i never do. thats ok legally ... my very experienced wrapping solicitor told me. sure the bank people dont understand wraps and will say that so dont say anything to them. ..... then you get the rite solicitor to draw up a "terms contract" between you and your buyer and away you go. ... now your paying your mortgage to your happy bank and your buyer is paying a bit more to happy you. ... one day your buyer says hes got a bank loan .. he hands you the cash for your house and you pay your bank out as you normally would keeping the change for yourself. Wraps works great when you do it rite. there are great educators out there.

regards ... johnston

********.

Your "very experienced" solicitor needs to go back to school and read your loan contract (in that order).

Creating a wrap arrangement and, therefore, an equitable interest in the property, is a breach of your loan agreement and entitles the lender to require immediate repayment.

 

[reeco]

********.

... and entitles the lender to require immediate repayment.

Entitles is the key word here. Doesnt mean they will. They want your money and they all know its happens. If they were against it wholeheartidley they would hammer such people but they let it slide because they know in the end they can reem you majorily. They get to keep all your money and take the house. win win for them.

30 years is a longtime to be flirting with that clause and they know it. So theyve got that kill switch they can hit any time they want.

They turn a blind eye while trumpeting there moral high ground when in reality they "secretly" dont mind. Neither would i if i had that much power over someone.

I mean they pay me and i can kick them to the curb when ever the hell i please. Like all casinos. The house always wins

 

[Rolf Latham]

Hiya

TF is right

very very close to the wind...........obtaining financial advantage by not being upfront is likely fraud ?

Went through lots of these things about 8 years ago

ta
rolf

 

[Token Funder]

Entitles is the key word here. Doesnt mean they will. They want your money and they all know its happens. If they were against it wholeheartidley they would hammer such people but they let it slide because they know in the end they can reem you majorily. They get to keep all your money and take the house. win win for them.

30 years is a longtime to be flirting with that clause and they know it. So theyve got that kill switch they can hit any time they want.

They turn a blind eye while trumpeting there moral high ground when in reality they "secretly" dont mind. Neither would i if i had that much power over someone.

I mean they pay me and i can kick them to the curb when ever the hell i please. Like all casinos. The house always wins

Given in this instance "They" means people like me, I can tell you with a strong degree of confidence that "we" don't let it slide.

 

[reeco]

I ment the other "they" . . That's great that you have such high standards TT. You maybe 1 in many... You maybe 1 in a few. My money is that you are one of many... But it's the few we target Which as you can see is enough to create sideshow to main event. Each have there own audience all apart of the game unfortunately.

Remember such a thing isn't wrong. its just not in the contract. I broke a contract with my a lender recently to pay a loan on a certain date. 5k. I didn't and now I pay penalties. Was it wrong to not follow this provision in the contract to the letter? No. The banks love that you don't. They love having you on the hook for more coin (interest/admin fees/made up strange named fees etc) You cannot dispute that but I'd be curious to see you try.

So now I'm paying my penalties. like anyone else. And so will those who are "percieved" to be in conflict with there own contracts. Percerption being the key in this small rant

 

[cu@thetop]

Given in this instance "They" means people like me, I can tell you with a strong degree of confidence that "we" don't let it slide.

Bank would be silly to let an opportunity to refinance or up the security slide?

You got a wrappee in possession- you need insurance thru our brokerage arm, refinance (more application fees) ,more security as an investment loan etc. Don't want to? Thats cool pay us out but watch the penalties. Fixed interest loan? Sweet either way (retrieving cheap money if int rate low, payout penaly if int rate high- win/win for mr Bank/financier.)

 

[Token Funder]

Bank would be silly to let an opportunity to refinance or up the security slide?

You got a wrappee in possession- you need insurance thru our brokerage arm, refinance (more application fees) ,more security as an investment loan etc. Don't want to? Thats cool pay us out but watch the penalties. Fixed interest loan? Sweet either way (retrieving cheap money if int rate low, payout penaly if int rate high- win/win for mr Bank/financier.)

Nope. The minute there is a wrap you have a compromised security whereby should you be required to recover, the wrappee (sp?) claims an equitable interest in the property.

The longer it goes on, the more likely a court will find a competing interest exists.

So, better for the bank to force refinance or take it back outright early in the piece.

 

[cu@thetop]

Nope. The minute there is a wrap you have a compromised security whereby should you be required to recover, the wrappee (sp?) claims an equitable interest in the property.

The longer it goes on, the more likely a court will find a competing interest exists.

So, better for the bank to force refinance or take it back outright early in the piece.

I agree with all of this but at the end of the day the bank will still have registered mortgage (first one usually) so they are in a comfy position. I'm saying it is a good opportunity for the bank to unilaterally review the loan to see what more blood can be squeezed.
Someone did throw the gauntlet down as to having Vendor Financiers/wrappers explain how they legitimately got finance but I must have missed the replies............

 

[reeco]

Nope. The minute there is a wrap you have a compromised security whereby should you be required to recover, the wrappee (sp?) claims an equitable interest in the property.

The longer it goes on, the more likely a court will find a competing interest exists.

So, better for the bank to force refinance or take it back outright early in the piece.

hence the dont ask dont tell secret magical handshake that occurs over the wires TT you must acknowledge that this exist You dont have to agree with it of course. But a elephant in the room is exactly that

Court would always be on the side of any bank because said bank can "easily" say without any evidence required that they did not know. Which would be the truth In most cases.

Only a gambler would wrap. Those are some heavy odds in favour of the bank.

 

[Token Funder]

I agree with all of this but at the end of the day the bank will still have registered mortgage (first one usually) so they are in a comfy position. I'm saying it is a good opportunity for the bank to unilaterally review the loan to see what more blood can be squeezed.
Someone did throw the gauntlet down as to having Vendor Financiers/wrappers explain how they legitimately got finance but I must have missed the replies............

Your registered mortgage is little fun if you have competing claims for the title as a result of additional parties claiming an equitable interest. For a relatively recent and spectacular example (not a straight but creating the same legal issues around equitable interests), I give you Money For Living..

The reason the wrappers haven't replied is that usually they have to tell fibs or omit the details.

 

[cu@thetop]

Your registered mortgage is little fun if you have competing claims for the title as a result of additional parties claiming an equitable interest. For a relatively recent and spectacular example (not a straight but creating the same legal issues around equitable interests), I give you Money For Living..

The reason the wrappers haven't replied is that usually they have to tell fibs or omit the details.

Thanks for that link. Pretty well sums up one of many reasons I am not fond of wraps from a consumer point of view (great scam from the entrepeneur wrapper's pov though).
I'd be curious to see the outcome of those wrapees if there was court action. If the banks have been Kosher I believe the mortgage will stand and the worst is that the wrapee becomes (somehow) the registered proprietor of land still subject to the bank's mortgage.