Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Reply
Speech on Land Titles; The heart of our system of land ownership
Topic Started: 18 Jun 2017, 04:52 PM (6,557 Views)
Ex BP Golly
Member Avatar


Trollie
2 Jul 2017, 02:06 PM
I'm just telling you what happens, you can argue all you want it's still reality.
What happens?

A couple of useless property investors roll over and can't protect themselves even when the legislation, procedures and policies are on their side?

You shouldn't be basing your understanding on things by watching gutless people who can't stand up for themselves.


It's clear from Shadows posts he has already rolled over on the issue; and it hasn't happened, nor is it likely to happen to him.

He hasn't even mentioned his fallback technique of throwing himself at the mercy of A Current Affair when things get too much for him
:lol






Edited by Ex BP Golly, 2 Jul 2017, 03:55 PM.
WHAT WOULD EDDIE DO? MAAAATE!
Share a cot with Milton?
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Rat
Member Avatar
Filthy Rodent

Ex BP Golly
2 Jul 2017, 01:19 PM
The legislation is clear
Yes. If the fraud is committed by the registered interest holder, then the title is not indefeasible..

Torrens Title
"there exist exceptions or circumstances that can penetrate the indefeasibility. Common factors that, when evidenced by a party, may penetrate and defeat the registered holder's claim include:
Fraud committed by the registered interest holder"


However as we saw in the Perth and Canberra cases, the new buyers purchased in good faith (no fraud by the registered interest holder) and the government spokesman and solicitors involved confirmed that the new buyer has indefeasible title...

New owners didn't know they bought a house sold by scammer
"A government spokesman said ACT police would contact "the parties involved as part of their ongoing investigation". He said registered real estate purchases made in good faith were protected by the ACT Land Titles Act.
Archie Tsirimokos, managing partner of Canberra-based commercial law firm Meyer Vandenberg Lawyers, said it was unlikely the property owner who was defrauded would be able to get the house back.
"The presumably innocent buyer of the home is now the registered proprietor and is entitled to keep the home."
Mr Tsirimokos said Australia had a system of land title whereby a register is maintained by the government and guaranteed "indefeasible title to those included in the register"
Edited by Rat, 2 Jul 2017, 06:54 PM.
Consumer protection laws extended to small businesses. Banks not permitted to repossess due to non-monetary defaults (for example, a fall in the property value).
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Ex BP Golly
Member Avatar


Rat
2 Jul 2017, 06:51 PM
Yes. If the fraud is committed by the registered interest holder, then the title is not indefeasible..

Torrens Title
"there exist exceptions or circumstances that can penetrate the indefeasibility. Common factors that, when evidenced by a party, may penetrate and defeat the registered holder's claim include:
Fraud committed by the registered interest holder"


However as we saw in the Perth and Canberra cases, the new buyers purchased in good faith (no fraud by the registered interest holder) and the government spokesman and solicitors involved confirmed that the new buyer has indefeasible title...

New owners didn't know they bought a house sold by scammer
"A government spokesman said ACT police would contact "the parties involved as part of their ongoing investigation". He said registered real estate purchases made in good faith were protected by the ACT Land Titles Act.
Archie Tsirimokos, managing partner of Canberra-based commercial law firm Meyer Vandenberg Lawyers, said it was unlikely the property owner who was defrauded would be able to get the house back.
"The presumably innocent buyer of the home is now the registered proprietor and is entitled to keep the home."
Mr Tsirimokos said Australia had a system of land title whereby a register is maintained by the government and guaranteed "indefeasible title to those included in the register"
Stop rolling over like a puppy Shadow- a wiki article doesn't trump the legislation.

"REAL PROPERTY ACT 1900 - SECT 118
Registered proprietor protected except in certain cases
118 Registered proprietor protected except in certain cases
(1) Proceedings for the possession or recovery of land do not lie against the registered proprietor of the land, except as follows:
(d) proceedings brought by a person deprived of land by fraud against:
(i) a person who has been registered as proprietor of the land through fraud."


The legislation doesn't require the fraud to be committed by the purchaser.

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


Ex BP Golly
2 Jul 2017, 03:00 PM
What happens?

A couple of useless property investors roll over and can't protect themselves even when the legislation, procedures and policies are on their side?

You shouldn't be basing your understanding on things by watching gutless people who can't stand up for themselves.


It's clear from Shadows posts he has already rolled over on the issue; and it hasn't happened, nor is it likely to happen to him.

He hasn't even mentioned his fallback technique of throwing himself at the mercy of A Current Affair when things get too much for him
:lol





They did, they sued and won.

It just shoots your opinion that a duplicate of your title is enough to just stroll in and take the property back full of holes. Hence why you are pouting.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Ex BP Golly
Member Avatar


Trollie
2 Jul 2017, 07:27 PM
They did, they sued and won.

It just shoots your opinion that a duplicate of your title is enough to just stroll in and take the property back full of holes. Hence why you are pouting.
They should have got their property back but they rolled over like little property investors:

"(1) Proceedings for the possession or recovery of land do not lie against the registered proprietor of the land, except as follows:
(d) proceedings brought by a person deprived of land by fraud against:
(i) a person who has been registered as proprietor of the land through fraud."

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


Ex BP Golly
2 Jul 2017, 07:51 PM
They should have got their property back
They "should" ? According to who, you?

It's clear your opinion on the matter is flawed.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Rat
Member Avatar
Filthy Rodent

Trollie
2 Jul 2017, 07:56 PM
They "should" ? According to who, you?

It's clear your opinion on the matter is flawed.
I wonder who we should believe here? Golly the Bush Lawyer? Or the government spokesman and the solicitor involved in the case. :lol

Here's what they said...

New owners didn't know they bought a house sold by scammer
"A government spokesman said ... registered real estate purchases made in good faith were protected by the ACT Land Titles Act.
Archie Tsirimokos, managing partner of Canberra-based commercial law firm Meyer Vandenberg Lawyers, said it was unlikely the property owner who was defrauded would be able to get the house back.
"The presumably innocent buyer of the home is now the registered proprietor and is entitled to keep the home."
Mr Tsirimokos said Australia had a system of land title whereby a register is maintained by the government and guaranteed "indefeasible title to those included in the register"
Consumer protection laws extended to small businesses. Banks not permitted to repossess due to non-monetary defaults (for example, a fall in the property value).
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Ex BP Golly
Member Avatar


Rat
2 Jul 2017, 08:35 PM
I wonder who we should believe here? Golly the Bush Lawyer? Or the government spokesman and the solicitor involved in the case. :lol

Here's what they said...

New owners didn't know they bought a house sold by scammer
"A government spokesman said ... registered real estate purchases made in good faith were protected by the ACT Land Titles Act.
Archie Tsirimokos, managing partner of Canberra-based commercial law firm Meyer Vandenberg Lawyers, said it was unlikely the property owner who was defrauded would be able to get the house back.
"The presumably innocent buyer of the home is now the registered proprietor and is entitled to keep the home."
Mr Tsirimokos said Australia had a system of land title whereby a register is maintained by the government and guaranteed "indefeasible title to those included in the register"
1st wiki, now a government spokesperson!

You could try reading what the law says.

I'll quote it for you:

"(1) Proceedings for the possession or recovery of land do not lie against the registered proprietor of the land, except as follows:
(d) proceedings brought by a person deprived of land by fraud against:
(i) a person who has been registered as proprietor of the land through fraud."


That very straightforward. If you were right, why would the legislation say:

"Proceedings for the possession or recovery of land can take place against a person who has been registered as proprietor of the land through fraud" (paraphrased)


You're very quick to roll over on this Shadow.
WHAT WOULD EDDIE DO? MAAAATE!
Share a cot with Milton?
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Rat
Member Avatar
Filthy Rodent

Golly, like a typical bush lawyer, you're completely misinterpreting the clause you keep quoting. You fail to understand that no proceedings can be brought against the registered proprietor if the registered proprietor is not the person who committed the fraud. If the registered proprietor committed fraud, then yes, proceedings can be brought against them by the person deprived of land. But you can't initiate proceedings against an innocent party. Silly old Golly. :lol

Listen to what the government spokesman and the solicitor involved in the case said...

1. Registered real estate purchases made in good faith were protected by the ACT Land Titles Act
2. It was unlikely the property owner who was defrauded would be able to get the house back
3. The presumably innocent buyer of the home is now the registered proprietor and is entitled to keep the home
4. Australia had a system of land title whereby a register is maintained by the government and guaranteed "indefeasible title to those included in the register

Edited by Rat, 2 Jul 2017, 09:02 PM.
Consumer protection laws extended to small businesses. Banks not permitted to repossess due to non-monetary defaults (for example, a fall in the property value).
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Ex BP Golly
Member Avatar


Rat
2 Jul 2017, 08:54 PM
Golly, like a typical bush lawyer, you're completely misinterpreting the clause you keep quoting. You fail to understand that no proceedings can be brought against the registered proprietor if the registered proprietor is not the person who committed the fraud. If the registered proprietor committed fraud, then yes, proceedings can be brought against them by the person deprived of land. But you can't initiate proceedings against an innocent party. Silly old Golly. :lol

Listen to what the government spokesman and the solicitor involved in the case said...

1. Registered real estate purchases made in good faith were protected by the ACT Land Titles Act
2. It was unlikely the property owner who was defrauded would be able to get the house back
3. The presumably innocent buyer of the home is now the registered proprietor and is entitled to keep the home
4. Australia had a system of land title whereby a register is maintained by the government and guaranteed "indefeasible title to those included in the register

What does the legislation say Shoddy?

"(1) Proceedings for the possession or recovery of land do not lie against the registered proprietor of the land, except as follows:
(d) proceedings brought by a person deprived of land by fraud against:
(i) a person who has been registered as proprietor of the land through fraud."

This doesn't say that have to have committed the fraud, only that they were registered because of fraud.

It's not difficult.

I wonder what government spokespeople had to say for over a decade about the fire risk complaints at Grenfell Tower before it went up like a Roman Candle?
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)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
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