[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

April 7, 2011 - 5:50 am

Thanks so much for all that Dan42!!!

Dan42 wrote:

not_so_lucky wrote:

If person A and person B each own 50% of the property. Once the property is sold it is split into 3 between person A, B and C.

Will person C have to pay tax on their share of the money they've received, even though their name was not on the title of the property?

No, the tax is payable by the owners of the property, which in this case is A and B. A and B can do whatever they like with the proceeds – as long as they pay whatever tax is due!

So they don't have to pay tax on inheritance or anything like that?

Dan42 wrote:

not_so_lucky wrote:

Also, if the house was built by owner builders 7 years ago, and they no longer have the receipts, how will they work out the value of the property (when they go to work out the profit)?

Hmmm. Firstly, you would (I hope) have a settlement statement for the purchase of the land? This forms part of the cost. Do you have any records of what was paid? This could be an issue, because you don't have any proof of the cost. You could try and see if your suppliers have any records, but seeing as though it's 7 years ago, I doubt it.

[/quote]

We've got a settlement statement, but  not receipts. We also did a lot of the work ourselves.
I thought they get valuetors to work out the estimate. So basically, anything we did ourselves and/or don't have receipts for will not count as a "cost" or whatever the proper term is?

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 21, 2010 - 1:46 am

actually, the one I thought was it isn't. because it doesn't have a field for the interest rate %
:S

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 21, 2010 - 1:43 am

found it. it's 15 year amortization!!!
this is amazing. thanks so much for that!!!

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 21, 2010 - 1:40 am

Thanks so much for that duckster.
Which one of the 7 options should I select?

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 20, 2010 - 7:11 am

LOL. Thanks for that Terry!

I was interested in salary sacrificing benefits for low income earners working for Cheritable organisations.

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 20, 2010 - 5:22 am

Thank you Terry

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 20, 2010 - 5:22 am

Thanks so much for that.

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 13, 2010 - 5:33 am

Thanks so much for that. I must have ticked something wrong when filling out my tax return. Will go over it tonight again. Luckily I hadn't submitted it yet

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 12, 2010 - 12:39 pm

Thanks for that Mr5o1.
Does that mean I should not have been charged $560 for Medicare surcharge?

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 2, 2010 - 12:27 am

The thing is, the supplier admitted most of the faults and did not try to deny anything. Does this count at all?

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 2, 2010 - 12:26 am

Now, some of the defects our steel frame installer picked up within the time frame allowed, so we should at least be covered for those items, right?
The thing is, it would have been impossible to go through, measure and count the thousands of items and little pieces. There is simply not enough room to lay everything out and check
A lot of the defects we could not see until we got to the installation stage of those particular items.

Does this mean we don't have a case? Since it took us more than 7/14 days to discover the defects????

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

July 2, 2010 - 12:23 am

I have just gone through the contract again and … from what I can see the supplier has got himself covered

Delivery Of Goods
The failure of the Supplier to deliver shall not entitle either party to treat this contract as repudiated.
15.9 The Supplier shall not be liable for any loss or damage whatever due to failure by the Supplier to deliver the
Goods (or any of them) promptly or at all, where due to circumstances beyond the control of the Supplier.

Risk
The Client acknowledges that prior to installation of the Goods that it is the Client and/or his agent’s
responsibility to check the measurements of the area for installation to ensure the Goods are compliant with the
original measurements. Failure to comply with this clause by the Client shall indemnify the Supplier from any
extra costs in rectifying the Goods. On written agreement between the Supplier and the Client any rectification
of the Goods shall be deemed to be a variation of the original quotation and will be detailed separately as per
clause 14.2.

Defects
The Client shall inspect the Goods on delivery and shall within seven (7) days of delivery (time being of the
essence) notify the Supplier of any alleged defect, shortage in quantity, damage or failure to comply with the
description or quote. The Client shall afford the Supplier an opportunity to inspect the Goods within a
reasonable time following delivery if the Client believes the Goods are defective in any way. If the Client shall
fail to comply with these provisions the Goods shall be presumed to be free from any defect or damage. For
defective Goods, which the Supplier has agreed in writing that the Client is entitled to reject, the Supplier’s
liability is limited to either (at the Supplier’s discretion) replacing the Goods or repairing the Goods except where
the Client has acquired Goods as a consumer within the meaning of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (CWlth) or
the Fair Trading Acts of the relevant state or territories of Australia, and is therefore also entitled to, at the
consumer’s discretion either a refund of the purchase price of the Goods, or repair of the Goods, or replacement
of the Goods.

Warranty
Subject to the conditions of warranty set out in clause 21.2 the Supplier warrants that if any defect in any
workmanship of the Supplier becomes apparent and is reported to the Supplier within fourteen (14) days of the
date of delivery (time being of the essence) then the Supplier will either (at the Supplier’s sole discretion)
replace or remedy the workmanship.

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

June 29, 2010 - 11:48 am

Scott No Mates wrote:

A few basic questions that need to be answered:

Is this supply covered by Home Warranty Insurance (NSW or Qld)? If yes, then it is an office of fair trading issue
Was the supplier advised of the defects?
Was the supplier given the opportunity to rectify the faults?
Did they attempt any restitution or offer any solutions?
Were the defects purely the supplier's fault or was it due to incorrect plans (supplied by yourself) or incorrect shop drawings (drawn by the supplier but checked by yourself) or incorrect construction of the sub-structure/slab/footings (by the owner-builder)?

Thanks for that Scott.
I have Owner Builder Insurance. It says here it covers the main risks encountered during the building process, including fire, storm, impact, wind and water damage, malicious damage and theft. It also provides cover for Public Liability.
The first 2 times we discovered the defects we informed the supplier. After a lot of troubles they accepted that it was their fault and sent us the correct materials a few months later. Due to the time taken with the first two issues, we couldn't afford any further delays and so decided to source the materials locally.
Yes, the defects and missing materials were purelly the supplier's fault.

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

June 29, 2010 - 4:57 am

Re: the corporation is liable to compensate the consumer or that other person for the loss or damage and the consumer or that other person may recover the amount of the compensation by action against the corporation in a court of competent jurisdiction.

Does this mean that I should be able to claim rent for delays we've had?

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

June 29, 2010 - 4:55 am

Found this thanks to Terry!

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/tpa1974149/s74d.html

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

June 28, 2010 - 8:01 am

Scott No Mates wrote:

You've lost me totally on this one, hs the supplier has stuffed up or have they failed to supply all of the components which you have paid for however you are out of pocket by having to pay a local suppier to resupply the missing pieces or have you been hit with additional charges by your installer to re-establish several times due to the lack of co-ordination on site (shared responsibility)?

That is correct. The supplier failed to supply all of the components which I have paid for and am out of pocket by having to pay a local suppier to resupply the missing pieces. In addition to failing to supply all the componets they sent a LOT of incorrect compoents (eg incorrect trusses etc) which had to be taken appart and new and correct ones made up – which is where the additional $7,500 labour bill came from.

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

June 27, 2010 - 12:39 am

pinkboy wrote:

I would keep in mind that for the sake of $750, not having any proof of purchase if a. a warrenty claim is required or b. an injury was sustained whilst working on the job or c. an accident happend from a structural shortfall etc, then I suggest you look at your situation a little closer.

pinkboy

The installer will still provide me with a receipt, it will just state that I paid him $7,500, but it will not state that I paid gst (if I choose to go down this path). Also, I have already paid a large sum of money to the installer (and paid gst).

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

June 27, 2010 - 12:28 am

Sorry about the confusion. The supplier and installer are two separate companies. The supplier was paid in full 6 months ago and it was all with gst, so no problem there. It is the installer who is offering to accept the third payment in cash (basically anything on top of his original quote which came up as a result of the stuffups with the materials provided). We have been extremely happy with the installer (not supplier) and the first two payments were paid to him WITH gst.

I hope to be compensated for the full amount of all the extra materials we've had to purchase as well as the additional labour costs, but in case we don't I am thinking it would be nice to save $750…

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

May 13, 2010 - 6:16 am

Terryw wrote:

Banks generally allow spouses on the same loan even when they are not on title. But non-spouses they don't like. (Spouse includes defacto).

You want to borrow money to finish off a project – seems to be a good reason to me.

Thanks for that. Why is it they don't like non-spouses? My non-spouse is already on the first loan (as in the one that we got agains the block of land). Would this make any difference?

[not_so_luckyMember@not_so_luckyJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 121]

May 13, 2010 - 5:47 am

Thanks Terry

Terryw wrote:

Since your mum is an owner of the property the loan must be in your name and hers – or maybe your name only with a guarantee from your mum.

I would much rather My name only with a guarantee from my mum. What about adding my partner's name to the loan. Would this be a problem?

Terryw wrote:

Lenders are also very fussy about giving money out without knowing the full reason and, sometimes even controlling the payment of the funds. "investment purposes" won't make it anymore – it used to be ok.

What would be the best thing to say in my case? Should I just say the truth?