Show us the clause in a contract that lets them do this.
Or an example of it ever having happened.
ANZ have been doing it to farmers all across the country, effectively revaluing the land and assessing it as underwater. They then go in hard with repossession and foreclosure as the loan holder has no way of making up the negative equity.
No you havent. That all relates to reverse mortgage. A mortgage designed for people who are retired and have no job income to meet repayments. In effect, they are a NON conforming loan and in no way related to a conventional housing loan.
What else have you got?
These are the only people given specific negative equity protection Frank. No one else has it. That is the point.
Chris
21 Sep 2015, 08:35 PM
ANZ have been doing it to farmers all across the country, effectively revaluing the land and assessing it as underwater. They then go in hard with repossession and foreclosure as the loan holder has no way of making up the negative equity.
We've been through all this before. Commercial mortgages are not covered by the NCCP Act.
Do rural properties or farms take a commercial classification? Are they covered under the NCCP given they are also PPOR for almost all operators?
This is something I'm not sure of.
If they are though then you will need to explain how ANZ have taken on High a Court challenges for foreclosure and won if this isn't allowed in the act?
I don't think that's true. Any residential PPOR loan holder subject to the NCCP Act is protected from the bank margin calling them.
There are no similar statutory provisions protecting any other form of borrower from this action.
Banks haven't yet proceeded against home loans, but if needed, they can.
The possibility of negative equity being a default provision is stipulated in every contract I've ever seen, and everyone who has checked has it in theirs.
Go read your contact....it's easy.I'm sure there must be a couple of people on this forum who can check their contracts
We've been through all this before. Commercial mortgages are not covered by the NCCP Act.
You have banged on about this on somersoft but in true grey man style you have only cut and paste excerpts. Given you infamy in relation to deceptive/misleading data, I can't help but feel you may have been extremely selective in your information collection and highly likely you omitted certain details.
For example, the reference you have provided states that process of foreclosure and repossession can only start once the borrower is in default. I would like to read the act and understand what the definition of 'default' is. The act may define negative equity as s form of default.
How about you provide a link to the entire act with terms of reference, definitions and glossary.
I smell a rat with the selective information you have thrown around.
You said something pretty ridiculous (the tree thing) given where you are fundamentally coming from regarding desiring home ownership John, and I called you on it.
With you apparently not appreciating being called on it? - To the extent where you go looking for me re supposed frustration and hypocrisy on my part.
Well OK, to address same:
The supposed hypocrisy re Socialism - I see no fundamental conflict in recognising that while there are genuine cases out there who need a helping hand to get by (which I'm very happy to see given to them) that Socialists are just effing idiots to pay so little attention to the fact that it does seem to be a pretty inherent part of human nature to want to improve one's lot financially; And as such, for them to not realise that Socialism is fundamentally at odds with something that is an inherent part of human nature; And that we'd be effing idiots as well if we didn't recognise that to the extent Socialists just might be successful in implementing full on Socialism, what they really are being successful in is creating an ever increasing bunch of bludging free loaders. With that in itself inevitably sowing the seeds for the destruction of their beloved egalitarian Socialist system.
As to the supposed hypocrisy re Georgism (and that Aussie dill David Collyer who promotes it) the story is pretty much ditto as above for Socialism - In that Henry George possibly failed to understand the immense obstacles to implementing a system that was fundamental at odds with what would seem to have historically and currently still be, a pretty natural human desire to acquire land and resources and profit from the ownership thereof. Though in fairness to George, whilst being NO expert on it myself, I suspect he was probably much more after 'the land barons' of his day as opposed to 'the homesteaders' of his day? But silly bloody Collyer's even got the knife into the average basic Joe Six Pack 'homesteader' of our modern era. And wants to tax him to death TOO! So he's a VERY unrealistic dill. And gets what he deserves - For mine - With that being pretty much squat to date at least apparently!?!
Now my fundamental approach tends to be to say Yes, the desires to get ahead financially and acquire land and resources, are so ingrained in most people anyway (hopefully anyway!!! - with the alternative of them not being so, not sounding especially attractive to me at all) that we best just accept this is so and develop systems that recognise and support these desires, rather than fight them - If we want to have systems that just might have some sort of chance of being successful long term.
And in having said that, as you seem SO keen to nail me for some sort of fundamental 'HYPOCRISY', you VERY well could be in with a shot (or three) - Because while I incline to supporting systems that recognise the inherent desires of humans to get ahead financially/acquire land and resources for the benefit of them and theirs blah, blah, because these seem to be pretty natural things to want to do (from my observations anyway):
* Potential Shot A: I'm NOT inclined to support systems that actively encourage people to become bludging layabouts - Despite the fact it could be argued a desire to become a bludging layabout just could be pretty inherent part of human nature ALSO maybe? and
* Potential Shot B: It can pretty easily be turned around to say that in wanting to acquire land and resources from which one can profit, one is just displaying their natural tendency to want to become a bludging layabout anyway - Which is something I've previously said (or at least strongly implied?) I DON'T support perhaps? and
* Potential Shot C: If you can't dream up AT LEAST ONE of your own, I'll be quite disappointed in you John ...
So finally, to the "frustrated" 'accusation' - Well as it happens, I'm pretty content. In most ways anyway Ta. And in any ways I'm not, I very much doubt you have the ability or capacity to assist me in becoming more content - So don't see any point telling you all my supposed little 'issues and problems'. Though will admit, some pretty strange things DO seem to be being proposed by some pretty strange people in the world these days. But with me saying Oh well, it will be what it be and I'm pretty bloody confident I'll make the bloody best of it regardless - And if I bloody don't, then on my own bloody head be it!
Oh Frummy, Oh Frummy - Wherefore art thee thou noisy PO vacuous S?
A Professional Demographer to an amateur demographer:"negative natural increase will never outweigh the positive net migration"
You have banged on about this on somersoft but in true grey man style you have only cut and paste excerpts. Given you infamy in relation to deceptive/misleading data, I can't help but feel you may have been extremely selective in your information collection and highly likely you omitted certain details.
For example, the reference you have provided states that process of foreclosure and repossession can only start once the borrower is in default. I would like to read the act and understand what the definition of 'default' is. The act may define negative equity as s form of default.
How about you provide a link to the entire act with terms of reference, definitions and glossary.
I smell a rat with the selective information you have thrown around.
Just do what I did, and they will confirm what I have said, contact:
Ministerial Correspondence Team Parliamentary Services Unit Department of Treasury
They will also say that it is unlikely that a bank would proceed with such a process [but we know they have for other loan types] and that a borrower if proceeded thus, could apply to the bank to be considered for the hardship provisions under the NCCP Act, but, that the only people protected from negative equity provisions are those under reverse mortgage loans.
It's so easy to do, I'm sure even Shadow could get onto them
If they have any problems finding it quickly, tell them it has already been dealt with under correspondence:
Concerning protections governing negative equity arrangements associated with home loans. [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] 29 July 2014.
Do rural properties or farms take a commercial classification? Are they covered under the NCCP given they are also PPOR for almost all operators?
This is something I'm not sure of.
If they are though then you will need to explain how ANZ have taken on High a Court challenges for foreclosure and won if this isn't allowed in the act?
The NCCP Act covers residential property mortgages. Not farms.
There was already a 200 page thread on this, with links to the Act and lots of other info.
After hundreds of pages, nobody could find any examples of an Australian bank ever repossessing the home of an NCCP protected borrower, simply because it fell in value through no fault of the borrower.
If you or Golly want to argue that it 'could' happen in some bizarre scenario where the bank tries to take someone's home, when the owner has done nothing wrong, thereby swapping a performing loan for an underwater asset (which makes no commercial sense), and the bank doesn't care about the bad publicity, and then the Supreme Court goes along with the plot and grants the repossession order... then sure, it 'could' happen, in the same way Malcolm Turnbull 'could' join APF tomorrow to announce a new round of first home buyer grants.
It's not going to happen. It has never happened, and never will.
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.
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