PropertyGutsParticipant@propertygutsJoin Date: 2010Post Count: 57
Has anybody heard Dominique Grubisa present? I understand she is a barrister with a specialty in 'how to purchase mortgagee in possession property", etc etc/ She is presenting in Sydney on Tues 29May and Bisvegas this weekend.
Is her message worth listenning too?
We have seen her speak and purchased her product – she is very knowlegable and her product is one of a kind. Definately worth at least seeing what she has to offer.
KatePoeParticipant@poeJoin Date: 2008Post Count: 4
I understand she made her name in debt reduction. What can one expect from this presentation?
While she is know for debt reduction, the product is more so about asset protection and that is why we signed up. She has a trust system that you can still buy property in your own name, but the property will still be protected. It can also be used for any possessions you own.
Sorry I forgot to say, another main reason we signed up is you can protect house you already have under your own name without paying stamp duty to transfer it to a trust.wisepearlMember@wisepearlJoin Date: 2009Post Count: 264
i’d agree with what Kate said above, tho she had a history of debt reduction her spiel will be on asset protection. She’ll scare you with some tales of nasty banks and introduce you to the all money clause and will explain how she has developed a system for asset protection. Her presentation was informative and well delivered, I enjoyed listening to her. I could see merit in her product but did not purchase as did not see it as a requirement for me at this time right now.wisepearlMember@wisepearlJoin Date: 2009Post Count: 264
in a very rough summary it involved putting a caveat on the title under the bank’s mortgage one, directing all equity as owned by the trust. thereby giving the individual owner no “net worth” or equity ownership in the property. it obviously entails a lot more than that but that was a very oversimplified gist of it.
theory being in the event an individual is sued and their asset (property or other) is challenged, the bank gets first right to take away their stake and in theory a court could then take away leftover equity from an individual. But she claims she can protect it with this caveat + trust structure.
Thank you wisepearl.
A caveat is not a form of security, but just is notice that someone else has an interest in the property. I am not sure how a trust could have an interest in the property that you as an individual would buy, but maybe the trust provides the deposit money and thereby has an interest.
Not knowing the full details, but this sounds like an uncommercial transaction designed to defeat creditors.
In NSW it could be void under s37A conveyancing act. There would be similar provisions in other states
Under the Commonwealth law you have provisions under the Corporations Act and Bankruptcy Acts which may apply.
s301 Bankruptcy act
s588FC Corporations Act
s588FDA Corporations Act
s 588FE etc
may also apply.
I went to the Dominique’s event on the 29th May. Very interesting, more informative than hype.
Kate – what did you get in the asset protection package and how much was it?
As for what she charges to help people get out of bad debt situations into a more comfortable position seems to be money well spent – a DIY package with her advice on what to do in your specific situation.
Terry – in reference to the above links in your post, briefly what is the plain English interpretation? We won’t hold you liable, just help us to understand it better
This thread relates to another thread (possibly SS) where you made a comment on buying distressed sales and the dangers of bankruptcy – which I guess comes down to critical dates. Other than asset protection, Dominique Grubisa also sells a package/course on buying from distressed sellers, where to get the details of potential targets and all the relevant documents and contract wording etc to take control of the property (various strategies) deeds of release etc. She is a barrister so it is assumed/hoped she knows what she is doing. She has also been drawn through the mud and nearly made bankrupt as a result of lending someone money who ended up going down the gurgler, but she managed to get the money back …..only to have administrators? want the money back and then tied up all her assets in the legal struggle. Once again I am guessing a critical date is the key.
Any key tips to watch out for if buying distressed sales? What protection if buying a mortgagee sale – or taking control prior and coming to arrangements with the bank. Can a bank trying to recover its money in a mortgagee sale get tangled up in bankruptcy – is there is a sequence of events which protects such complications.
You will have to seriously look into the Bankruptcy Act if you really want to know about asset protection. What you are essentially protecting yourself from is creditors and creditors can get at your assets by forcing you into bankruptcy.
But it is not as simple as some promotors make out. I don’t know anything about Dominique and if she is a barrister then she would probably know a lot, but I recall listening to one promoter who had tried to bamboozle the audience using technical terms and making it all sound complex (which it can be). But the strategies didn’t really work because there is a long tradition of people trying to avoid creditors and the laws have been toughened over the years to capture the simple strategies.
eg. A knows he is going bankrupt so sells his house to his wife or worse gifts it to his wife. This transaction could be over turned indefinitely.
The Bankruptcy Act has some sections such as 120 and 121 which deal with this. You must have a look at then look at the time periods and see if they could apply.
Then look at the other sections I linked above too.
Same with company stuff, eg, the director of a company makes a payment from his company to another company controlled by his wife just before the first company goes down. This would or could be an unfair preference even if it is a legitimate payment. He could be seen as favouring his wife.
There are others such as a term of a trust deeds that could be overturned or other uncommercial transactions such as involving leases or options. eg. A giving a long term lease to his brother for $1 pa for 30 years and then A going bankrupt. This is clearly uncommercial.
Very interesting topic, but very complex. Considering this is Dominique’s forte It would be interesting to to see what she has come up with, and then have others with good knowledge try to tear it to pieces to confirm its “water tightness” …….if such a thing can exist. As her reputation is at risk I would expect it to be better than what others promote and put together by third parties.
In one of her videos I found on the internet where she is trying to grow/ franchise her business (http://aussiedebtrescue.com) she describes Fox Symes as amateurs compared to what she does.
By uncommercial do you mean a transaction with the apparent intention to transfer possession of something for a nominal and unrealistic price so that it can’t be seized. (I was not aware leasing to another person achieves similar outcome to selling)
ThanksMcBeefyMember@mcbeefyJoin Date: 2012Post Count: 4PropertyGuts wrote:Has anybody heard Dominique Grubisa present? I understand she is a barrister with a specialty in 'how to purchase mortgagee in possession property", etc etc/ She is presenting in Sydney on Tues 29May and Bisvegas this weekend.
Is her message worth listenning too?
Hi PropertyGuts- I attended her seminar in melbourne. Shes was the headliner in one of Stuart Zadel TGR seminars. Interesting subject matter, claims to have discovered a legal loophole in buying property from distressed sellers that she has spent years finessing. And just as she has the audience on the edge of their seats to hear this 'secret', she tells everyone that she is holding a 'masterclass' for 25 or so people, which includes cd's, dvds, property monitors data, legal support, legal templates for a cool $5,500 (if you register before leaving the room, otherwise $6,000)
the worse part about the presentation was, unlike some other seminars i've attended, dominique did not take questions in front of the audience. It was like "bang! here's the sales pitch" then literally bolted off the stage in the front of the room. of course, she may have her reason for that, but it instantly raised suspicion. why didnt she feel comfortable opening herself and her subject matter to quizzing from the crowd?
Should you attend? I think its worth a look, and if its the same seminar I attended- you'll get a free 'think and grow rich' book
McBeefy, interesting to read your comments. I enjoyed her presentation in Sydney, and after doing some internet research I am inclined to give her the benefit of doubt that what she offers may be reasonable value for money, particularly debt management. As for the Real Estate Rescue package /course it may be worth the money for the legal documents and contracts (if you had to pay someone to create the same specific docs), but without knowing exactly what else you get it is hard to determine if good info or basic info that most with half a brain would already know of..
This video fills in the blank as far as what her ultimate plan is: http://www.viddler.com/v/6bd44b63 The value of what she offers may be watered down by others with less experience and motivation.
Some good info and downloads available on her site : http://aussiedebtrescue.com/adr/about.html
She also has this business: http://australiandebtpurchasers.com.au/#/paper-profits-course/4548020085
<moderator: delete language> Doing some research I found a video of feedback from a similar course she sold last year called Real Estate Gold: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0FEyBMfegs&feature=channel&list=UL So much for first time offered as promoted!
Stuart Zadel is just trying to create a name for himself as far as I am concerned, reproducing the Think and Grow Rich book under his name and giving it away or selling (under various schemes to satisfy the definition of selling), in the hope that he can claim the title of a best selling author by basically giving heaps of copies away. If anyone has a different opinion I would be interested to hear.
Interesting regarding the hardship letters.
I have done this for someone in the past. Negotiated reducing credit card debts by half. It is very easy to do and the credit card companies reduce the debt easily. Saved someone about $40,000
If you had debt of $10,000 and only $5,000 in the bank you can simply email the lender and say you wish to pay out your debt because of (going overseas, no job, blah blah) and offer them $2,000 for full and final repayment. They may counter offer $5,000 and you could settle on $4k. Just saved yourself $6k.
The one we signed up for was $4k – we get the trust that goes as a caveat on our titles and also a testamentary trust. We also got the legal templates (which was a bonus we didn’t know they were coming!) and we can contact Dominique about most legal questions. We are also setting up another trust with her at no extra cost. The trust that goes on the caveat is completely separate from ourselves and cannot be tied back to us (eg by transferring money to family), she has based her system on the Vestey Trust which as I believe has not been able to be broken and family are still receiving benefits now. We thought this was pretty cheap for what we were getting, to set up a trust at our accountant was quite expensive plus tax returns and if we were to transfer the properties into our name we would have to pay stamp duty.
Sorry that wasn’t clear – the trust adds a caveat to the title of the property so it has an interest in the property. Therefore if someone was to see what assets you have they would see the bank would have a part and then there is another party who also has an interest. If you were to sell your house the bank would get what they are owed and the rest would have to go to the trust.
Doesn't really make sense to me.
The trust may have an interest in the property but what happens if the property grows in value.
$80,000 loan with Bank west
$20,000 interest via the trust having an equitable claim – not sure what
You may be able to say the person owns 80% and the trust 20%
After 10 years,
Person 'owns' $160,000 less the $80,000 = $80,000
Trust 'owns' $40,000
If person goes bankrupt the trustee in bankruptcy will come in and take over the property (standing in the shoes of the person). The trust may have its position secured by registering its interest which may be a higher interest than the creditors. Bank will be first in line.
But the $80,000 equity will be exposed and when the trustee in bankruptcy sells the property this (minus there $79,000 fees) will go to creditors.
Also for that to be effective the trust would have to do something for its interest, such as injecting money.
I do not believe there is a set amount that the trust has an interest in, from my understanding it has an interest in the remainder of the equity no matter if it goes up. So if you have a loan of 80% then the trust has an interest in the remainding 20%, if the price was to go up so does the % the trust is interested in also goes up. I do not know the technicalities yet as we have not put this into place, but from what I understand this is the way it works.
The trust also does not need to put in any money to be a caveat on the title, if the owner gives the trust permission to put a caveat on the title it cam. Creditors can do the same if they can prove that you owe them money.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.