All Topics / Help Needed! / Strata report issue – Should I buy this investment property – advice please?

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Profile photo of novice100novice100
    Participant
    @novice100
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 9

    Hi All
    I'd be grateful for any advice please.

    I have had an offer of $670k accepted (but no contracts exchanged yet) on a 2bdrm unit in an upmarket complex in Sydney. I think i am paying a little over the market rate as it suits my personal/investment needs perfectly. it is unit in a 105 apartment complex. The site was originally a ceramics factory with steel frame but converted to an apartment complex, (retaining much of the original steel frame), in 2004

    The problem is that the strata report i requested identified the issues below (please see extracts from reports below).

    Would any of you still proceed with buying this property at the same price if the vendor will not accept less, if not what is the maximum you would pay or would you just walk away and forget it regardless of cost? I am not sure how serious these identified issues are?

    Is there anything else i should do?

    thanks for any help in advance!

    Excerpt from Strata report:

    Defects Claim
    In July 2011 report from consulting engineers, identified building defects in common property and various units. As the building was still under warranty at this time (the period is now expired), the defects were the builder’s responsibility to rectify under the warranty provisions of the Home Building Act, and a copy of the report was forwarded to them.

    The owners are currently making a claim for defect rectification against the builder (their second such claim) and have engaged Lawyers to act for them in relation to a Construction Defect Claim.

    The strata manager advised that no estimates have as yet been obtained for the rectification work, however he expects costs to be in excess of $1 million.
    This claim is still in its early stages and as the outcome is unknown, any eventual costs to owners are also unknown. If the owners are unsuccessful in the claim, a Special Levy may be required if they are obliged to fund the necessary work themselves.

    However, the deficiencies raised as a result of inspections by Fire Consultants, Paint and Coatings Consultants, and Acoustic Consultants cause much greater concern. If the defects these Consultants have detected in a small sample of units are replicated throughout the complex, the cost of rectification may well escalate to millions of dollars.

    Excerpt from engineers report:

    We understand that extensive corrosion to new and existing steel beams throughout the complex has been the subject of numerous past reports.
    Over large sections of existing steel or where new and old steel have been welded together, the incidence of corrosion appears to have manifested much earlier than one would expect using a Micaceous Iron Oxide system that should have received correct surface preparation and application.
    We note that Dr X (edited name) has been engaged to provide a detailed report on the issues of coatings failures to the structural steel at the subject building and when his Expert Report is complete it will attached in Appendix B.

    Appendix C
    Building Code Solutions Report of Inspections of Units dated February 2011
    A number of items of concern are noted in the report relating to possible non-compliance with fire separation of bounding walls between units and unprotected steel beams and roof purlins passing through these same bounding walls.
    Building Code Solutions Report of Inspections of Units dated June 2011
    All 3 units had the ceiling void above their bathroom inspected by viewing through a ceiling hatch. All 3 bathrooms displayed ventilation ducts penetrating bounding walls without fire dampers installed. This is a possible compromise of the fire rating of the bounding wall.

    Appendix D
    EMGA Acoustic Report dated 17 June 2011
    A sample of 6 units was tested for sound transmission and most failed the less stringent BCA 1996 requirements while all units tested failed the 2004 BCA requirements.

    The possible breaches and failures noted in the reports have the potential to escalate to a very significant claim if the same pattern of deficiency is proven to be replicated throughout the entire complex.

    We recommend that the Owners Corporation seek legal advice to determine if the sample of units which appear to show anomalies in their Fire Protection and Acoustic Rating is sufficient in number to substantiate a claim or if a broader sample of units should be inspected and tested to arrive at a definitive conclusion.

    Profile photo of CatalystCatalyst
    Participant
    @catalyst
    Join Date: 2008
    Post Count: 1,404

    You're kidding right? You're thinking of buying a property that "may" have to self fund $1million in faults. 

    And you're willing to overpay for the privilege.

    I'm surprised there aren't more for sale.

    Profile photo of novice100novice100
    Participant
    @novice100
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 9

    i figure that if the legal case fell through and cost $2million as a worse case scenario that would only equate to $20k per unit – tax deducitble too – and that’s a worse case scenario only

    Profile photo of DerekDerek
    Member
    @derek
    Join Date: 2004
    Post Count: 3,544
    Catalyst wrote:
    You're kidding right? You're thinking of buying a property that "may" have to self fund $1million in faults. 

    And that is only the defects.

    Check out the other identified issues and your getting one parcel of problems IMO.

    Profile photo of novice100novice100
    Participant
    @novice100
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 9

    But the steel problem is a building fault so the builders will probably end up paying for it. Also I Houghton that reducing my offer by $20k would compensate for the possibility if losing the legal case – does this seem reasonable?

    Profile photo of novice100novice100
    Participant
    @novice100
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 9

    Also I forgot to mention that an identical unit in the complex sold for $650k in October 2011 so I presume this problem did not deter the buyers then (the report was written in July 2011 but the legal scion started in dec 2011)

    Profile photo of DerekDerek
    Member
    @derek
    Join Date: 2004
    Post Count: 3,544

    The way I look at it is as follows;

    The multilple building reports all identify signifciant issues – this to me, indciates lax workmanship in the whole project across a number of areas and now these defects in all areas are coming to light.

    You haven't identified which state or how many storey are in the building. Be aware that in NSW (I assume the property is in NSW) properties with underground basements and/or more than four (? not sure about this but the number is very low) storeys any coverage is minimal at best.

    On this basis alone I would walk away – but it is not my money.

    Profile photo of bumskinsbumskins
    Participant
    @bumskins
    Join Date: 2010
    Post Count: 34

    It's not really just a question of cost, but the stigma which will now be attached to the building.

    This will likely mean future buyers being turned off.

    It could also affect future valuation's which could affect future purchases getting finance to buy your property.

    If there was a purchase for $650K last October, why are you offering $670K now? Is there evidence to show units have gone up in the area over that time? Are the units comparable?

    Profile photo of DerekDerek
    Member
    @derek
    Join Date: 2004
    Post Count: 3,544
    Derek wrote:
    The way I look at it is as follows;

    The multilple building reports all identify signifciant issues – this to me, indciates lax workmanship in the whole project across a number of areas and now these defects in all areas are coming to light.

    You haven't identified which state or how many storey are in the building. Be aware that in NSW (I assume the property is in NSW) properties with underground carparks and/or more than four (? not sure about this but the number is very low) storeys any coverage is minimal at best.

    On this basis alone I would walk away – but it is not my money.

    Oops type – basements should read carparks.

    Profile photo of novice100novice100
    Participant
    @novice100
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 9

    the reason that i offered $670k is that the owner refused any lower and I want it because the apartment and complex are very nice and ideal for the 1st tenant who will be my Mum!

    if the defects are going to be the liability of the original builder as it sounds like they should be then it shouldn’t concern me too much and if the liability is the owners, I can compensate for this by lowering the price i pay – is there anything wrong with this logic?

    Profile photo of Pat007Pat007
    Member
    @pat007
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 71

    So your going to stick your mum, in what an engineers report lists as a very expensive potential fire trap?

    i think your a little bit in love with the place.., i understand.

     you may need to do some more looking around other places  and cool off a bit im thinking

    Profile photo of novice100novice100
    Participant
    @novice100
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 9
    Derek wrote:
    The way I look at it is as follows;

    The multilple building reports all identify signifciant issues – this to me, indciates lax workmanship in the whole project across a number of areas and now these defects in all areas are coming to light.

    You haven't identified which state or how many storey are in the building. Be aware that in NSW (I assume the property is in NSW) properties with underground basements and/or more than four (? not sure about this but the number is very low) storeys any coverage is minimal at best.

    On this basis alone I would walk away – but it is not my money.

    i didn’t post the rest of the engineers report but it basically said that the building contruction and fitting and wear so far was of a higher than average standard – it was generally a very positive (and in-depth) report aside from the issues raised

    would any one still buy this property but at a reduced price e.g $30k less??

    Profile photo of novice100novice100
    Participant
    @novice100
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 9
    Pat007 wrote:
    So your going to stick your mum, in what an engineers report lists as a very expensive potential fire trap?

    i think your a little bit in love with the place.., i understand.

     you may need to do some more looking around other places  and cool off a bit im thinking

    I'm not too worried about the fire aspect because there is a ground floor balcony window she would easily be able to escape from in case of a fire

    i have withdrawn my offer now partly based on all the negative feedback I've had on the forum about the issue but i am still really really keen because the apartment suit my needs so well and there is not really anything comparable in the area

    is there any way i can make it work??

    Profile photo of CatalystCatalyst
    Participant
    @catalyst
    Join Date: 2008
    Post Count: 1,404

    If there are defects in the building I'd be more worried about lawsuits. If a person was injured the insurance may wipe the claim.

    Give it up. There are MILLIONS of other properties out there. A new one will come along soon.

    I know I've missed out on many "one off" deals only to find another the next week.

    Wait to see what happens with the claims. Others will want to sell if the issues arrise and you'll get a bargain. Remember there are 100 in this block alone.

    Profile photo of novice100novice100
    Participant
    @novice100
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 9
    Catalyst wrote:
    If there are defects in the building I'd be more worried about lawsuits. If a person was injured the insurance may wipe the claim.

    I know I've missed out on many "one off" deals only to find another the next week.

    Wait to see what happens with the claims. Others will want to sell if the issues arrise and you'll get a bargain. Remember there are 100 in this block alone.

    great comment especially the last one – i hadn't fully considered -it  but if i wait a little while, someone else may want to sell at a big discount…..i will wait and maybe even consider doing some direct mailshots outlining the issues and offering to buy for $600k!

    Profile photo of novice100novice100
    Participant
    @novice100
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 9

    I have spoken with the agent who has indicated the following

    1. He has confirmed that there is no current legal action happening. The steel corrosion issues have been reported to the builders within the warranty period and are being investigated. The strata meeting minutes refer to an agreement to hire lawyers IF the builders try to resist fixing the problem

    2. The builders are reputable builders and are still around and still actively addressing all previous issues with the building

    3. The vendor is willing to cordon off a sum of money (to be negotiated) in a trust to be held for 12 months (or a different period of time to be negotiated) which will be used to pay for any Special Levies that might be raised in that period relating to the steel corrosion issue
    – this would cover me against paying any special levies

    4. he says that the strata reports tends to exaggerate potential costs of problems in order to cover themselves from being liable if they underestimate costs

    point 2 above seems to act as good compensation for the issues reported – does anyone think it is reasonable to proceed with this new clause and if so, how much money and for how long should be cordoned off?

    Profile photo of CatalystCatalyst
    Participant
    @catalyst
    Join Date: 2008
    Post Count: 1,404
    novice100 wrote:
    Also I forgot to mention that an identical unit in the complex sold for $650k in October 2011 so I presume this problem did not deter the buyers then (the report was written in July 2011 but the legal scion started in dec 2011)

    Maybe that buyer had the same mentality as yourself. ie buy regardless of the unknown future of this property. 

    There are no guarantees when buying a property but I like to have as much information as possible. I would never buy something where I don't know if I will need to spend thousands of dollars the year after I buy it.

    As I said- wait until the owners get the bills then see who can afford the special levies (if any). Not everyone has $$$ laying around.

    Profile photo of wobblysquarewobblysquare
    Participant
    @wobblysquare
    Join Date: 2010
    Post Count: 95

    Fair to reasonable chance that this claim may put the builder out of business…..resulting in owners having to find the money……resulting in a rush to sell and drop in prices….
    – What other building issues will subsequently arise? (unknown)
    – Also how about issues with Owner Z refuses to pay?

    Ask for 50k for 5 years, and to cover ANY special costs (ie law suit funds etc) NOT just building issues….Until these issues are sorted then your re-sale value will be greatly impacted. Only OK if you dont want to sell….

    Profile photo of VictoriaCVictoriaC
    Member
    @victoriac
    Join Date: 2012
    Post Count: 18

    Dont do it. You said that the worst case scenario is that it will cost you $20K, I disagree. The worst case scenario is that other issues will be found and you get hit with many special levies.
    Also if you find that you need/want to sell the unit you may not be able to get your money back – if you are concerned about the report other buyers will be too.
    I had a friend buy a unit 2 years ago as an investment AGAINST her solicitors advise, major plumbing works needed in the building. After MANY special levies she couldnt afford to keep it anymore – sold for about $10K more than original price but lost a lot of money in interest, repairs, levies in the process, aswell as a few trips to Tribunal with a tenant wanting compensation for the inconvenience of the repairs! She too fell in love with the unit – now its just a bad breakup!

    NB: get your solicitors advise.

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.