Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Reply
Young couple reinvent the Japanese Property Strategy; At 24.5 years of age they "own" 22 properties, 19 acquired this year!
Topic Started: 20 Sep 2015, 11:14 AM (15,175 Views)
Shadow
Member Avatar
Evil Mouzealot Specufestor

The Whole Truth
22 Sep 2015, 02:03 PM
Banks kick innocent families out of homes every day but you don't read about it because the 2 major corporations that control the media wouldn't dare run a story on the practice.
LOL, cool story. Yeah, Today Tonight and ACA hate sticking it to the banks. They'd never publish anything like that if it happened. :lol

http://aca.ninemsn.com.au/article/8890951/the-banks-and-the-battlers-bad-loans

http://au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/money/article/-/12994514/luring-customers-into-debt

http://www.7perth.com.au/view/today-tonight-articles/today-tonight-bank-mistakes

http://7perth.springcms.com.au/view/today-tonight-articles-archives/today-tonight-bank-action

http://7perth.springcms.com.au/view/today-tonight-articles-archives/today-tonight-bank-fees
Edited by Shadow, 22 Sep 2015, 02:13 PM.
1. Epic Fail! Steve Keen's Bad Calls and Predictions.
2. Residential property loans regulated by NCCP Act. Banks can't margin call unless borrower defaults.
3. Housing is second highest taxed sector of Australian Economy. Renters subsidised by highly taxed homeowners.
4. Ongoing improvement in housing affordability. Australian household formation faster than population growth since 1960s.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
zaph
Default APF Avatar


The Whole Truth
22 Sep 2015, 02:03 PM
What a load of rubbish. Banks kick innocent families out of homes every day but you don't read about it because the 2 major corporations that control the media wouldn't dare run a story on the practice.
And govts run a surplus by borrowing.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Ex BP Golly
Member Avatar


Shadow
22 Sep 2015, 02:02 PM
Why all the abuse?

If the clause exists in an NCCP regulated contract then prove it by posting a scan of a contract that includes the clause.
Not till you explain how those quotes from treasury could possibly be taken out of context.

Show me a context that they could otherwise work in.


WHAT WOULD EDDIE DO? MAAAATE!
Share a cot with Milton?
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Shadow
Member Avatar
Evil Mouzealot Specufestor

Ex BP Golly
22 Sep 2015, 02:36 PM
Not till you explain how those quotes from treasury could possibly be taken out of context.

Show me a context that they could otherwise work in.

Those two lines obviously weren't the full extent of your conversation with Treasury. For some reason, you appear reluctant to post the full text.

While you're at it, show us an NCCP regulated mortgage contract containing this clause you claim they all include.

Because I have several NCCP regulated mortgage contracts, and no such clause exists in them.

In the other thread, Sydneyite scanned and posted his entire contact. The clause wasn't there either.

The whole thing is a silly bear myth.
Edited by Shadow, 22 Sep 2015, 02:42 PM.
1. Epic Fail! Steve Keen's Bad Calls and Predictions.
2. Residential property loans regulated by NCCP Act. Banks can't margin call unless borrower defaults.
3. Housing is second highest taxed sector of Australian Economy. Renters subsidised by highly taxed homeowners.
4. Ongoing improvement in housing affordability. Australian household formation faster than population growth since 1960s.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Mike
Default APF Avatar


Shadow
22 Sep 2015, 02:38 PM
While you're at it, show us an NCCP regulated mortgage contract containing this clause you claim they all include.

Because I have several NCCP regulated mortgage contracts, and no such clause exists in them.

In the other thread, Sydneyite scanned and posted his entire contact. The clause wasn't there either.

The whole thing is a silly bear myth.
Spot. None of my contract have such a clause.

He is clutching at straws and unable to support his statement with facts.

He is wrong and knows it.

Case closed.
http://mike-globaleconomy.blogspot.com.au/
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Ex BP Golly
Member Avatar


What possible context would otherwise explain this Shadow?

Subject line: Concerning protections governing negative equity arrangements associated with home loans. [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

"...In regard to your question about protections against negative equity for other mortgages there are no similar statutory provisions.
Under a home loan, banks will usually only take steps to repossess a property when the borrower is in arrears on their home loan after missing the scheduled repayments.".....

That is explicit Shadow.

Do you think it's a trick?

Do you think Treasury don't understand their own legislation?

WHAT WOULD EDDIE DO? MAAAATE!
Share a cot with Milton?
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
zaph
Default APF Avatar


Ex BP Golly
22 Sep 2015, 02:53 PM
Do you think Treasury don't understand their own legislation?

Highly likely.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Shadow
Member Avatar
Evil Mouzealot Specufestor

Ex BP Golly
22 Sep 2015, 02:53 PM
Do you think Treasury don't understand their own legislation?

Do you? Unlike you, I'm willing to quote the full text of the letter I received from Treasury, and the email I sent to Treasury...

'Dear Mr xxxxxxxxx

Thank you for your inquiry.

We understand that some lenders will require the borrower to reduce their liability to a specified amount to reduce their risk exposure where property values fall. However, this is restricted to lines of credit or interest only loans where the principal is not required to be reduced until the end of the contract.

We are not aware of any normal ‘principal and interest’ home loans where the lender has the right to sell a property simply because property values fall. However, a provision of this type, if included, could infringe the unfair contracts terms legislation in the Australian Consumer Law.

We trust that this information is of assistance to you.

Consumer Credit Unit
Retail Investor Division
The Treasury, Langton Crescent, Parkes ACT 2600'


(this was in response to my email below)

'Hi,

I have a question about residential mortgages and the NCCP Act. I'm trying to determine exactly what protection a borrower has from a bank taking foreclosure action in an instance where the borrower continued to make all payments on time and adhered to all other provisions of the mortgage contract. My specific question is this...

Do lenders have the ability to foreclose, force the sale of, repossess, call in, demand a loan 'top up', 'margin call' or otherwise take action against a borrower simply because general house prices have fallen? If the mortgage contract includes a clause stating that a default occurs when the lender is not 'reasonably satisfied' with the value of the property, could the lender use this clause in the event of a general property crash to declare that the borrower has defaulted? Would the NCCP permit the lender to take action against the borrower in such a case?

For example, after taking out a mortgage, property values in the area fall to a point where the value of the property might be less than the originally agreed LVR, or fall to some other point where the lender is not 'satisfied' with the valuation. Does the lender have the right to then revalue the property, declare that the borrower has defaulted, and take action against the borrower?

In other words, the borrower is keeping up with their repayments, has not breached any other conditions of the contract, and the only issue is that the bank decides it is no longer 'satisfied' with the value of the property because house prices happen to have fallen. Is the borrower protected by the NCCP?

Thanks for your advice in this matter.

Regards.

xxxx xxxxxxxxx'
1. Epic Fail! Steve Keen's Bad Calls and Predictions.
2. Residential property loans regulated by NCCP Act. Banks can't margin call unless borrower defaults.
3. Housing is second highest taxed sector of Australian Economy. Renters subsidised by highly taxed homeowners.
4. Ongoing improvement in housing affordability. Australian household formation faster than population growth since 1960s.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
A Lurker
Default APF Avatar


Shadow
22 Sep 2015, 03:46 PM

'

Regards.

xxxx xxxxxxxxx'
Burt Lancaster?
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Ex BP Golly
Member Avatar


Shadow
22 Sep 2015, 03:46 PM
Do you? Unlike you, I'm willing to quote the full text of the letter I received from Treasury, and the email I sent to Treasury...

'Dear Mr xxxxxxxxx

Thank you for your inquiry.

We understand that some lenders will require the borrower to reduce their liability to a specified amount to reduce their risk exposure where property values fall. However, this is restricted to lines of credit or interest only loans where the principal is not required to be reduced until the end of the contract.

We are not aware of any normal ‘principal and interest’ home loans where the lender has the right to sell a property simply because property values fall. However, a provision of this type, if included, could infringe the unfair contracts terms legislation in the Australian Consumer Law.

We trust that this information is of assistance to you.

Consumer Credit Unit
Retail Investor Division
The Treasury, Langton Crescent, Parkes ACT 2600'


.....'[/i][/b]
I will provide the letter when I get out of the Bush. It is a pdf, and just as you have, I want to remove identifying information.

Once again, in relation to your letter I raise the point that it is full of qualifications:

"...We are not aware of any normal ‘principal and interest’ home loans where the lender has the right to sell a property simply because property values fall. However, a provision of this type, if included, could infringe the unfair contracts terms legislation in the Australian Consumer Law.."

So they " Are unaware" and more importantly they only say "it could infringe", not that "it would infringe", or "it does infringe".

Show me the part of the NCCP Act (other than in relation to reverse mortgages) that deals with negative equity.


Edited by Ex BP Golly, 22 Sep 2015, 04:04 PM.
WHAT WOULD EDDIE DO? MAAAATE!
Share a cot with Milton?
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Australian Property Forum · Next Topic »
Reply



Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.

Forum Rules: The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.

Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.

Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.

This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.

For more information go to Limitations on Exclusive Rights: Fair Use

Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ

Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy