for NSW re stamp duty, look at s 54(3)http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/da199793/s54.html(3) Duty of $50 is chargeable in respect of a transfer of dutiable property to a person other than a special trustee as a consequence of the retirement of a trustee or the appointment of a new trustee, if the Chief Commissioner is…[Read more]

Better get advice from a lawyer, rather than a banker.Changing trustees is not a simple matter if there are properties and loans involved. As the bank guy if you will have to reapply for the loan again – which i think you will because the legal ownership has changed. This will put you back into square one.Then look into the stamp duty issues -…[Read more]

You can actually ring up lawcentral to get help with how to fill in the forms etc but they can't give you legal advice..May i ask what you need the trust for? ie purchasing property or business? etcSome things to consider:If you will be purchasing property have you considered the implications of getting a loan? Guarantees – could be that all the…[Read more]

Looks like you maybe forming the trust by yourself. This can be unwise if you don't know what you are doing. If mistakes are made it can be extremely costly to rectify them.Without seeing the whole thing I am not sure if the above is correct or incorrect.

yep. its not 12.5 units each for the unit holders of trust 4. BEcause they are both trustees the own the 25 units on behalf of all the beneficairies of that trust.

No. a caveat will prevent further dealings. It would need to be removed and lodged again. 1st mortgages will have priority over caveats.

Trustees are the legal owners of the trust property so the trustee's name should go on title and all legal documents. If there are 2 trustees then both names should go on the documents.

Seniors can still get loans if they are working – mostly self employed i guess.Maybe we could all use our parents/grandparents to buy our properties and then set up testamentary trusts.

crj wrote:
Unless it is expressly contained in the agency agreement that the agent can settle personal injury claims, I do not think the agent would have either implied or ostensible authority to settle a potential claim for personal injuries

yes, i would think so too.

I think in most agreements when you appoint a property agent you are appointing them to act on your behalf in relation to the property – ie they can enter contracts, make decisions etc. This is the meaning of  the term ' agent'.

There are a lot of issues to consider. At least you are making a profit, so its not all bad.

I think that QLD is the only State which charges more stamp duty for investors – all the others it is the same for owner occupiers and investors. I think if you are an investor in QLD it works out more than it would in NSW.

I think you would qualify because you had entered into the contract more than 12 months prior to selling.

unless you used other security you would have to pay LMI if you borrowed more than 80%.If it was me I would probably limit the loan to 80% – no sense in paying LMI unless you think you can make a greater return on the remaining 10 to 15% (max loan 90 to 95%)

The lender has to think what will happen if you default and they have to sell the lot. So they often ask the valuers to value it in one hit, ie if it had to be sold to one buyer. This usually results in around a 10% lower val.Also people are prone to err on the side of giving themselves a higher estimate. Make sure you have plenty of leaway as…[Read more]

2.4mil x 65% = 1.56mil = max loan size.But are you sure the vals will come in? They are likely to value all in one line, so may come in lower than expected

yep, Lewis would know.

This is a complex area of law. Landlords can be sued and do get sued all the time.see Muir v Hume  [2003] QSC 191 http://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2003/QSC03-191.pdf where the tenant tripped and hurt her back and got awarded something like $1mil.Sam's case is different because he was not notified of the problem. The question is was his…[Read more]

That used to be the case in Vic, but I had heard they changed the rules. Are you sure about that Matt?

yes, recycling is better than wasting.