Well, neither are as dangerous as jaywalking, so I don't think we need to worry too much about it Snitchy.
Thankyou again for demonstrating your complete lack of a moral compass... you really make it too easy for me when you keep walking into doors like this.
oh, btw, calling me snitchy is personal abuse, please keep your emotions in check and refrain from such ad hominem.
Rufus
13 Oct 2016, 07:56 PM
The lender should be accepting what they are told in the application for the purpose of preliminary evaluation, and then checking it against the valuation.
To be honest what you are telling me doesn't add up. Why would the lender (finance company) change what has been advised to them except when a valuation has been obtained, and why would they tell you they had altered it unless they were happy to accept a computer generated valuation because you have a low LVR, in which case they are using the valuation, and why are you using a finance company - almost no finance companies exist these days except in the specialist field.
Is there a bare trust in this application?
BTW onthehouse are rubbish. I wouldn't use them in a fit.
actually, looking at it again, I was quite incorrect... There were cut and paste segments in the email that made it look the other way.
Broker bumped up new IP val by massive amount ($110k), and kept our guesstimate of PPOR the same... now I know we got a good price on the IP, but not that good.
Finance company (Origin) pulled new IP Val back to a level only 20k above purchase price, and kept our guesstimate of PPOR the same.
That is something I am more comfortable with.. lets see final Val's.
btw, The finance did not tell me anything... broker sent me an email confirming the finance company's conditional approval based on the val's to be confirmed that LVR is as low as we claimed ... he accidentally included the email chain that was his summary email to Origin, and their response, just a simple mistake that any of us can make ... he sent a 'recall message' to redact the email, but gmail does not do that so the original email, the recall one and the intended (redacted) version all hit my inbox.
No bare trust... ended up not going with SMSF, but simply using some equity in the PPOR as we were refinancing anyway.
Have to agree with onthehouse comment, but not sure there are many other free valuation options available for the punters who want to scour an area and don't want to pay for 10 or 20 val's to RPDATA ... I used the ANZ one and it was pretty similar.
"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
How do you know they didn't contest it? The banks would have verified the data and used whatever figures were determined to be correct. If somebody rounded up their income to $100K on their application, but their payslip showed their income was only $98.5K, then the bank would use the lower figure to assess the loan. The borrower probably wouldn't even know or care - they would simply be told how much they could borrow based on the bank's assessment of the application.
You weird me out.
You do a much better job then me showing how dumb property speculators are.
Do you think they'd be stupid enough to lie about their wage....and then hand over a payslip showing the lie?
That is gigglingly dumb!
Property speculation has just got to be their only chance in life lol.
"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
Thankyou again for demonstrating your complete lack of a moral compass... you really make it too easy for me when you keep walking into doors like this.
oh, btw, calling me snitchy is personal abuse, please keep your emotions in check and refrain from such ad hominem.
actually, looking at it again, I was quite incorrect... There were cut and paste segments in the email that made it look the other way.
Broker bumped up new IP val by massive amount ($110k), and kept our guesstimate of PPOR the same... now I know we got a good price on the IP, but not that good.
Finance company (Origin) pulled new IP Val back to a level only 20k above purchase price, and kept our guesstimate of PPOR the same.
That is something I am more comfortable with.. lets see final Val's.
btw, The finance did not tell me anything... broker sent me an email confirming the finance company's conditional approval based on the val's to be confirmed that LVR is as low as we claimed ... he accidentally included the email chain that was his summary email to Origin, and their response, just a simple mistake that any of us can make ... he sent a 'recall message' to redact the email, but gmail does not do that so the original email, the recall one and the intended (redacted) version all hit my inbox.
No bare trust... ended up not going with SMSF, but simply using some equity in the PPOR as we were refinancing anyway.
Have to agree with onthehouse comment, but not sure there are many other free valuation options available for the punters who want to scour an area and don't want to pay for 10 or 20 val's to RPDATA ... I used the ANZ one and it was pretty similar.
I'll tell you how it works. You reckon you got a great deal - fine. The valuation used by the lender will be either the purchase price, or the valuation - whichever is the LESSER.
If you paid $500K and the valuation is $525,000 then the valuation used is $500K If the valuation is $480K then that is what the lender will use, not the purchase price.
No lender that I know does it any other way, although when there is a related party transaction such as inter family sales, then they use the valuation as they recognise that family prices may be well below market valuations. They will tell the valuer that it is a family transaction so the valuer does more research and isn't swayed by the sale price.
I have no idea why your broker upped the valuation by $110K unless he is just getting a pre-approval for you, but you indicated that you had a sale. What he did doesn't make any sense to me. Either he/she is inexperienced or there is something that you haven't told me.
Essentially when you contract to purchase a house today for $XXXXXX then you have set the market value for that house, so the valuer has to believe you got it wrong before he will give you a lower val. They do that from time to time.
I know nothing about Origin, but they are probably mortgage originators with rebadged products from a lender. Like Aussie Home Loans. They will do exactly what I advised above. There is no other way. Any lender caught doing the wrong thing would be castrated by APRA.
There are some lenders who are not ADI's (deposit taking institutions) but I doubt that you are dealing with one of them, and even they are playing by APRA's rules.
Your article says 14% said they overstated income. Providing a payslip or a tax statement is mandatory.
You don't suppose some may have doctored, or invented their payslips do you?
I hear there are crime syndicates that help with that sort of thing. False bank balances and the like.
ASIC engaged in a public wank about this stuff a few years ago, but I guess, giventhe survey that found mortgage fraud is rife, and very strongly stated claims on this site that 99.9% of applicants engage in criminal activity- that ASIC didn't actually mean this:
"We do want to send a message that if any stage you are tempted or encouraged to go for more than your income actually justifies then don't go into that territory," ASIC deputy chairman Peter Kell told News Corp Australia. While no clients have faced action, ASIC is not ruling that out in the future".
You don't suppose some may have doctored, or invented their payslips do you?
Unlikely, and if they doctor their tax statement they're sure to be caught out.
No Golly, it's most likely a case of a few people rounding up their income to the nearest 5K in their application. Many people don't even know exactly what their annual income is, and in their haste to get the form filled out they'll stick in something that's close enough, and then let the bank figure out the precise figure from the payslip and tax statement.
"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
You don't suppose some may have doctored, or invented their payslips do you?
I hear there are crime syndicates that help with that sort of thing. False bank balances and the like.
Yep they are out there, but banks want more than that. They are now asking for the last PAYG Summary (Group Certificate to some) plus they want your bank statements showing your wages being credited (amounts get checked against payslips) and they contact your employer to confirm as much as possible.
If the deal is over 80% LVR the mortgage insurer will also do their own checks. Add to that credit card statements, car loan statements etc, and all of that becomes quite a task for forgers to get right. The amounts quoted on the pay slips all have to make sense on a macro basis (looking at the over all flow of money within the accounts.
But that level of fraud isn't a little fudge, it's outright fraud and not what this article was all about.
Ex BP Golly
13 Oct 2016, 11:08 PM
And here we have little Rufus promoting criminal activity as normal, if not commendable behaviour. Weird
Don't be so dishonest, I clearly stated that 99.9% of people embellish their position, I didn't say it was commendable.
Unlikely, and if they doctor their tax statement they're sure to be caught out.
No Golly, it's most likely a case of a few people rounding up their income to the nearest 5K in their application. Many people don't even know exactly what their annual income is, and in their haste to get the form filled out they'll stick in something that's close enough, and then let the bank figure out the precise figure from the payslip and tax statement.
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