Contemporaneous Settlements - What they don't tell you...

Just an explanation of what they are first.  Contemporaneous Settlements aka Double Settlements are a property transaction whereby a property is brought and settled twice on the same day; brought once by the property finder, who will have gotten the property at a very discounted rate, and then sold by the property finder and brought again by the end purchaser.

An example on how this works:

Key
Purchaser 1 (P1) - Property Finder
Purchaser 2 (P2) - End Purchaser/Owner

P1 negotiates the purchase price on a property for $200,000
P1 finds P2 and signs up P2 to purchase the property for $250,000
Registered valuation on this property: $260,000

When the settlement day roles around, hopefully everything will go through smoothly and P2 makes $50,000 as their fee, less any agent/solicitor fees etc and P2 purchases a property $10,000 under valuation.

Very simply, this is how it works.

So effectively everybody wins and all is good, right?  Well.... I have some views on this...

I agree that property finders can provide a valuable service.  Their role is to find incredible property deals and because they have the time and resource to do this it can really help some purchasers who potentially wouldn't have brought otherwise.  Property Finders obviously need to get paid on their service and so, a contemporaneous settlement is a good way to ensure this happens.

HOWEVER, what I fear some Property Finders don't tell you is how the banks view these deals and how hard they can be to get approved.

Firstly, if the vendors name on the sale & purchase agreement is not on the title, the bank could want to look into this further and request to see the original sale & purchase agreement between the original vendor and Property Finder.  Banks now look at titles on each purchase.  They didn't used to which is why these deals used to be so frequent.  This is not the case anymore.

So, (referring to key and example above) if the bank sees that P1 has got a contract on the property for $200,000 and P2 is trying to obtain mortgage finance of $200,000 which is 80% of their purchase price of $250,000; the bank will more than likely turn around and say that they will only lend on the original contract.
What does this mean?   It means that the bank will only lend 80% against the $200,000 NOT 80% against the $250,000.  What this effectively means is that you need to come up with another $40,000 for your deposit as the mortgage the bank will approve in this case will be $160,000 (80% of $200,000 - original purchase price).

So, ask questions around the final mortgage approval if you are considering purchasing a property through a property finder.  Check with your bank if they would lend in these circumstances and tell your bank everything; don't hide this as they will find out.

This is based off my market research into this and own personal experience with trying to get these deals through when I was a mortgage broker.

New REAA booklet - NZ Residential Property Sale & Purchase Agreement

Just got off the phone with the REAA and this is quite an important post so I hope you buyers out there are reading!  Feel free to pass this on also - spread the love...

As the Author of Young & Singles Guide to Property Investment, a book I wrote and designed specifically for newbies to the property market, (you should REALLY think about ordering yourself a copy if you don't have one by the way, especially if you are buying anytime soon), I feel a sense of duty to advise you of your rights as a buyer in regards to this booklet that the REAA have put out.  You, as the buyer, need to read this booklet if you are making an offer on a property, you will then need to sign a form to say you have received and understood the contents of this booklet.

So, with that said, on page 5 of this booklet, I found the wording to be a little bit unclear.  All's I will say is I have researched it and my findings are as follows (always chat to your solicitor though before you sign the agreement - please):

The wording in the REAA booklet reads that you pay your deposit on Acceptance and the commission is then paid to the Agents when the contract goes Unconditional.  Let me start by saying, you DO NOT have to pay a deposit on the Acceptance of the Sale & Purchase Agreement.  In my opinion, I would advise you to pay the deposit on the Unconditional day, you can even hold the whole amount and pay all of it on Settlement day if you really wanted to (might be a bit tougher to get the Vendor to agree to that though).  

Please keep in mind that you as the buyer can be in just as much control as the vendor, you can negotiate the terms of sale too.  So for example, if you only want to pay $10,000 as your deposit on Unconditional day and the rest on Settlement day, as long as the vendor agrees, then you can do that.  This example is common, especially when you have a smaller deposit to start with.

If you have comments to add, please do, be good to get the feedback on this issue.

Right, now I can sleep easy.

;-)

The new Real Estate Agents Act and what does this mean for you as a buyer?

Ok, thought I'd explain a few of the changes in this new Real Estate Agents Act (2008) that came into effect last Tuesday on 17th November 2009 after going unchanged for 33 years.

The nitty gritty of the new act is explained in Alistair Helm's blog who is the CEO of Realestate.co.nz, well worth subscribing to his blog by the way.

There is also good information in Ross Brader's Blog, a successful Agent in Pt Chev.

Of course you can also go to the actual REAA website (Real Estate Agents Authority).

Few bullet points as to the key changes:

1. Cost for agents to stay working in the industry are going to increase. They now need to be individually licensed, this wasn't the case in the past. They had to be qualified of course, but not individually licensed as either a sales person, branch manager or licensee.
2. Agents need to now disclose to the vendor all discounts off marketing/advertising they might be privy to; and the commission they receive from the sale.
3. As a buyer you will need to sign a disclosure confirming you have received 'The New Zealand Residential Property Sale & Purchase Guide' BEFORE you sign the Sale & Purchase Agreement. The vendor will also need to sign one similar.
4. Licensee's now need to produce a market appraisal on each property listed. The price they come up with must be supported by comparative sales and must meet expectations of the Vendor.
5. Fines toward Agents or Agencies are now not in the hundreds they are in the thousands and tens of thousands.

My take on the new Act is that it's definitely been needed. It is going to professionalize the industry even more than it was which can only be a good thing. It is basically going to make everything very transparent, which again, is a good thing.

One thing I would mention is, think really hard if you are going to make a formal complaint to REAA about an Agent... not only will they be taken through a very lengthly battle of paperwork and drama, but they could be fined thousands and thousands of dollars. Ok, absolutely fair enough if what they did was purely wrong and the mistake is valid, but just keep in mind what you could be ruining by making that complaint.

Real Estate Jargon - what does it all mean?!!

Real Estate jargon that is commonly used on listing adverts can confuse and annoy buyers who are searching for the most basic piece of information on a property such as - PRICE. The price in my opinion should be on all listings, especially as people who often search for properties do not live in the area and won't know that the property they are searching for (and possibly fell in love with), is out of their price range. We could all be saved a lot of time, frustration and hassle if prices were on listings!

I must admit that when I am searching for property, I do tend to skip the ones that don't have a price, and I know a lot of other people who do the same.

I would like to shed a bit of light on the following common phrases and acronyms used by Real Estate Agents, instead of putting the price on their listings:

POA - Price on Application

This means you just need to make contact with the Agent to obtain the price or price range. It is sometimes said that POA is used when the vendor is testing the market so therefore may not be too motivated to actually sell.

Buyer Enquiry Over

Obviously this is what the Vendor would like the buyer enquiry to be over and at least with this one, Agents usually give you a figure to work off. However, being me, if I was going to offer, I would still probably offer just under the 'Buyer Enquiry Over' figure, you never know what vendors are willing to accept.

Tender

Tenders are a very good way, from a Vendors perspective, of drawing out the very best offers from potential buyers with minimal mucking around. As the buyer, you will need to make contact with the Agent to find out what the Vendors expected sale price range is. The Agent won't give you an exact figure but should at least give you a range so you have something to work off. If after asking the Agent you are still a bit unsure of the price - go to Zoodle - and purchase a sales report to find out what other like properties in the area are selling for. At the very least, download the free report on the property from Zoodle and check out the Capital/Rateable Valuation.

As a buyer, you need to go in with the leanest offer you can muster. What I mean by that is you need to have your offer look the most attractive to the vendor, so while a cashed up offer would be best, it is sometimes not possible, so what I mean by lean, is having minimal conditions on your offer and going in with your highest price. So, as a buyer, you have ZERO control of this situation and that is why I really really don't like it.

Auction

Auctions are a great way of Vendors relying on emotional buyers competing on Auction day which of course pushes the price sometimes well in excess of the valuation figures. Same goes as above in Tenders, for Auctions, you will need to get in touch with the Agent to discuss prices or check out Zoodle.

As a buyer, you need to have all your reports organised before the Auction day, such as valuation, building reports, LIM etc. Your 10% deposit needs to be on hand too. If you win at the Auction you are expected to pay your 10% deposit that day. If, you decide later that you don't want the property, you may find that you don't get your 10% back, so be very certain when you are bidding at Auction!

Negotiation

Another frustrating one as you will need to get in contact with the Agent to obtain the price expectancy of the vendor. At least with Negotiation you have a bit more control than Tenders and Auctions as it is a Offer and Negotiation process.

All this stuff and more is in my book, Young & Singles Guide to Property Investment - feel free to order yourself a copy.

UK Immigrants unknowingly entering into NZ Sale and Purchase Agreements

A new Blog Post by Steve Koerber regarding new immigrants purchasing homes with major leaky home issues, got me thinking; I back Steve up completely on this stuff and there is also another key issue when it comes to new immigrants buying NZ property, specifically people from the UK.

According to Statistics NZ - 18,361 people came to live in NZ from the UK from July 2008 - July 2009.

The house buying process in the UK is somewhat different to NZ. In the UK, a 'Offer of Purchase' is made to the vendor from the buyer via an Estate Agent. Ok, so you may be thinking, this is not too different to the NZ way of putting in an offer on a property via a 'Sale and Purchase Agreement'; but here is the difference: The UK offer is not a legally binding contract like the NZ one is. You can walk away from the UK one at any time and you are also at risk right up until the day of Exchange (our Unconditional day) of being Guzumped or Guzundered.

So, my issue is that UK immigrants are at risk of unknowingly making offers on NZ property and not understanding at the offset that the offer is a legally binding document and they are at risk of losing their deposit or worse.

To aid in this issue, I think that NZ Real Estate Agents should at all times ensure that Immigrants are made aware of the risks of an unconditional Sale and Purchase agreement and advise to set conditions especially a full building report in support of Steve's blog post as mentioned above.

Retirement - Are you saving for yours?

I've been thinking about doing a blog like this for a while... It is such an important topic that people, especially the under 30's, just don't even think about, letalone plan for!

I've been doing a bit of research, which was not actually that easy as I couldn't find the stats that I was after, especially in NZ pages, but, I did have some interesting findings I thought i'd share.

One wesite I came across had the following:

A survey commissioned by the BBC has revealed that saving for a pension is not a top priority for many UK adults.

The report revealed that half of adults in the UK aged between 20 and 60 are not putting anything towards a pension with the situation being worst for those under the age of 30.

The reason for not saving towards their retirement is a lack of funds with the priority being paying off their debts.

Furthermore, younger adults said they felt retirement was too far away to be worth planning for.

Meanwhile, 45% of the 41 to 60-year-old category are not paying into a pension fund with a number of reasons being cited such as redundancy and women who never joined a pension scheme because of giving up full-time work to have children.

This explains that basically HALF of people are not doing anything about their reitirement - that is pretty staggering in my opinion!

This website explained componding interest quite well I thought http://www.sheknows.com/articles/807585.htm.

Both money and years factor into how well your retirement account will do over time. The sooner you start, the more your money will compound or grow, even if you begin by investing only a small amount each month. The interest you earn will continue to compound over time, growing the value of your account substantially as the years add up.

Example

The earlier you start investing, the more time your money has to compound, which earns you a higher reward in the end. Here’s an example of consistently investing $100 per month at 5% compounded quarterly until age sixty.

Starting when you're 20... By age 60... $152,410

Starting when you're 30... By age 60... $83,525

Starting when you're 40... By age 60.... $41,175

Sorted.org.nz did have some good information for when you actually want to start the planning phases and working out how much you will need. See http://www.sorted.org.nz/home/sorted-sections/retirement

Even if it just $100-$500 per month, it's something. Or even if it is just kiwisaver, it's something. Maybe even a rental property perhaps? At least then you can claim on the tax losses and offset them against your personal 9 - 5 income. My mix at this stage is property and kiwisaver, it's not much but it's something. Sounds all very cliched but honestly a little bit of planning now can save a hell of a lot of hard work and unnecessary stress later.

You are eventually going to get to retirement age one day, and I don't know if anyone agrees with me but the older I get the quicker the years are going.

Unfortunately we don't live in Never Land. The one thing you can 100% depend on in life, is time.

Cross Securing vs Stand Alone Mortgages

I wanted to offer some clarification on cross securing vs stand alone mortgages when obtaining finance for a new property.

CROSS SECURING
This means the bank you are mortgaging your property with is taking security over A) the property you are purchasing AND B) your existing property or potentially your whole portfolio of properties if they are all with the one lender. The danger with this is people are unknowingly getting themselves into a tangled web and when it comes time to liquidate and sell off one property, issues arise. One of the issues with cross securing is explained in a NZ Herald article I read recently, where Liz Brown from the Banking Ombudsman was interviewed.

"When people buy two or more properties, they think one loan belongs to each property and, if they sell one, only that loan has to be repaid." she says.

"But normally the bank will have taken security over all their properties for all of their debt. And, particularly if they don't have much equity left in the properties, the bank is within its rights to ask the customer to reduce that debt as well as pay back anything they took out in the first place to buy the property they have now sold."

Brown says while this is legitimate, she is concerned that banks are failing to tell people they plan to do this until long after they have made their plans and commitments based on the expectation of getting more from the sales than the bank leaves them.

STAND ALONE
If possible, always try to insist new mortgages are only secured against the new property. Sometimes this will not work due to cashflow or lender criteria reasons but wherever possible, re-finance existing properties to pull out enough cash so you can use this as the deposit (work off 20% needed here) to purchase the new property. That 20% deposit you have pulled out from the existing property/ies will grant the new property its very own mortgage at 80%, meaning no cross securing is done and the properties are stand alone.

Some lenders only have the cross securing option and you don't actually get a choice in the matter. However some lenders do have this option so it certainly pays to ask the question up front.

This is all more reason why you should spread your mortgages around different lenders so again, you don't end up in a tangled mess like you can if you have all your eggs in one basket.