VICTORIAN home buyers could be forced to pay an extra $6.2 million in property taxes because of the bungled introduction of a $40 million electronic conveyancing system.
Builders and lawyers are furious about a move by the Government to boost taxes for paper-based conveyancing by as much as 32%.
The decision to increase fees for all paper lodgements by $15.50 in November last year was supposed to trigger a speedy shift to a new, more efficient electronic system.
But banks and lawyers are refusing to accept the new system — which has also been hampered by software glitches — amid concern about legal ramifications and potential liabilities for solicitors who use it.
That means all transactions are still being done using the paper system, leading to windfall tax gains for the State Government of $15.50 each time one is lodged.
Conveyancing is the sometimes complex process of transferring legal ownership of a property from one person to another. With an estimated 400,000 conveyancing transactions a year in Victoria, the gain for the State Government could be as much $6.2 million.
In a strongly worded letter to Land Victoria, Master Builders executive director Brian Welch said it was a "thinly veiled attempt to collect more taxation from the building industry".
The letter urges the State Government to remove the fee differential, saying it represented another unnecessary tax for the industry. "Taxes and charges on the building industry add 30% to the cost of a new house and land, with 53% of these taxes going directly to the State Government," the letter says.
Asked about the issue in State Parliament, the minister responsible for the new system, Gavin Jennings, conceded there had been some "teething problems" but said there would be no move to lower the fees. He said Victoria's aim was to establish a national conveyancing system to solve the problems.
"I am confident that despite some teething problems … I think at the end of the day Victorian people will be well pleased that we will be at the heart of a national electronic conveyancing system," Mr Jennings said.
In another letter to Land Victoria, Law Institute of Victoria chief executive Michael Brett Young said the fee increase was an unjust financial imposition, given it had been shunned by major banks and lawyers.
State Opposition scrutiny-of-government spokesman David Davis said families were being forced to pay for a Government blunder.
"The Government has introduced increases of up to 30% to encourage people to use its botched electronic system, essentially ripping off families who have no realistic choice but pay," Mr Davis said.
Under the changes, charges for paper lodgement of transfer of sale documents increased to $112.50 from $97; charges for registering mortgages increased to $92.40 from $76.90; and charges for registering a variation of mortgage increased to $64, from $48.50.
The Age
Josh Gordon
February 28, 2008
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Sir Robert Richard Torrens - father of the Torrens system
SIR ROBERT RICHARD TORRENS (1814-1884), British colonial statesman, was born at Cork, Ireland, in 1814, and educated at Trinity College, Dublin. He went to South Australia in 1840, and was appointed collector of customs. He was an official member of the first legislative council and in 1852 was treasurer and registrar-general. When responsible government was established he was elected as a representative for Adelaide and became a member of the first ministry. In 1857 he introduced his famous Real Property Act, the principle of which consists of conveyance by registration and certificate instead of deeds. The system was rapidly adopted in the other colonies and elsewhere, and was expounded by the author during a visit to the United Kingdom in 1862-1864. After leaving South Australia, Sir R. R. Torrens represented Cambridge in the House of Commons from 1868 to 1874; in 1872 he was knighted. He was the author of works on the effect of the gold discoveries on the currency, and other subjects. He died on the 31st of August 1884.
Encyclopdia Brittanica - 1911 edition
Encyclopdia Brittanica - 1911 edition
Land Registration - 1911
A historical perspective of land registration
LAND REGISTRATION, a legal process connected with the transfer of landed property, comprising two forms - registration of deeds and registration of title, which may be best described as a species of machinery for assisting a purchaser or mortgagee in his inquiries as to his vendor's or mortgagor's title previously to completing his dealing, and for securing his own position afterwards. The expediency of making inquiry into the vendor's title before completing a purchase of land (and the case of a mortgage is precisely similar) is obvious. In the case of goods possession may ordinarily be relied on as proof of full ownership;. in the case of land, the person in ostensible possession is very seldom the owner, being usually only a tenant, paying rent to someone else. Even the person to whom the rent is paid is in many cases - probably, in England, in most cases - not the full owner, but only a life owner, or a trustee, whose powers of disposing of the property are of a strictly limited nature. Again, goods are very seldom the subject of a mortgage, whereas land has from time immemorial been the frequent subject of this class of transaction. Evidently, therefore, some sort of inquiry is necessary to enable a purchaser to obtain certainty that the land for which he pays full price is not subject to an unknown mortgage or charge which, if left undiscovered; might afterwards deprive him of a large part or even the whole of its value. Again, the probability of serious consequences to the purchaser ensuing from a mistake as to title is infinitely greater in the case of land than in the case of goods. Before the rightful owner can recover misappropriated goods, he has to find out where they are. This is usually a matter of considerable difficulty. By the time they have reached the hands of a bona fide purchaser all chance of their recovery by the true owner is practically at an end. But with land the case is far otherwise. A dispossessed rightful owner never has any difficulty in tracing his property, for it is immovable. All he has to do is to bring an action for ejectment against the person in possession. For these reasons, among others, any attempt to deal with land on the simple and unsuspecting principles which obtain in regard to goods would be fraught with grave risks.
Apart from very early and primitive social conditions, there appear to be only two ways in which the required certainty as to title to land can be obtained. Either the purchaser must satisfy himself, by an exhaustive scrutiny and review of all the deeds, wills, marriages, heirships and other documents and events by which the property has been conveyed, mortgaged, leased, devised or transmitted during a considerable period of time, that no loophole exists whereby an adverse claim can enter or be made good - this is called the system of private investigation of title - or the government must keep an authoritative list or register of the properties within its jurisdiction, together with the names of the owners and particulars of the encumbrances in each case, and must protect purchasers and others dealing with land, on the faith of this register, from all adverse claims. This second system is called Registration of Title. To these two alternatives may perhaps be added a third, of very recent growth - Insurance of Title. This is largely used in the United States. But it is in reality only a phase of the system of private investigation. The insurance company investigates the title, and charges the purchaser a premium to cover the expense and the risk of error. Registration of deeds is an adjunct of the system of private investigation, and, except in England, is a practically invariable feature of it. It consists in the establishment of public offices in which all documents affecting land are to be recorded - partly to preserve them in a readily accessible place, partly to prevent the possibility of any material deed or document being dishonestly concealed by a vendor. Where registration is effected by depositing a full copy of the deed, it also renders the subsequent falsification of the original document dangerous. Registration of deeds does not (except perhaps to a certain extent indirectly) cheapen or simplify the process of investigation - the formalities at the registry add something to the trouble and cost incurred - but it prevents the particular classes of fraud mentioned.
The history of land registration follows, as a general rule, a fairly uniform course of development. In very early times, and in small and simple communities, the difficulty afterwards found in establishing title to land does not arise, owing to the primitive habit of attaching ceremony and publicity to all dealings. The parties meet on the land, with witnesses; symbolical acts (such as handing over a piece of earth, or the bough of a tree) are performed; and a set form of words is spoken, expressive of the intention to convey. By this means the ownership of each estate in the community becomes to a certain extent a matter of common knowledge, rendering fraud and mistake difficult. But this method leaves a good deal to be desired in point of security. Witnesses die, and memory is uncertain; and one of the earliest improvements consists in the establishment of a sort of public record kept by the magistrate, lord or other local authority, containing a series of contemporary notes of the effect of the various transactions that take place. This book becomes the general title-deed of the whole community, and as long as transactions remain simple, and not too numerous, the results appear to be satisfactory. Of this character are the Manorial Court Rolls, which were in the middle ages the great authorities on title, both in England and on the continent. The entries in them in early times were made in a very few words. The date, the names of the parties, the name or short verbal description of the land, the nature of the transaction, are all that appear. In the land registry at Vienna there is a continuous series of registers of this kind going back to 1368, in Prague to 1377, in Munich to 1440. No doubt there are extant (though in a less easily accessible form) manorial records in England of equal or greater antiquity. This may be considered the first stage in the history of Land Registration. It can hardly be said to be in active operation at the present day in any civilized country - in the sense in which that term is usually understood. Where dealings become more numerous and complicated, written instruments are required to express the intentions of the parties, and afterwards to supply evidence of the landowner's title. It appears, too, that as a general rule the public books already described continue to be used, notwithstanding this change; only (as would be expected) the entries in them, once plain and simple, either grow into full copies of the long and intricate deeds, or consist of mere notes stating that such and such deeds have been executed, leaving the persons interested to inquire for the originals, in whose custody soever they may be found. This system, which may be regarded as the second stage in the history of land registration, is called Registration of Deeds. It prevails in France, Belgium, parts of Switzerland, in Italy, Spain, India, in almost all the British colonies (except Australasia and Canada), in most of the states of the American Union, in the South American republics, in Scotland and Ireland, and in the English counties of Yorkshire and Middlesex. Where it exists, there is generally a law to the effect that in case of dispute a registered deed shall prevail over an unregistered one. The practical effect is that a purchaser can, by searching the register, find out exactly what deeds he ought to inquire for, and receives an assurance that if, after completion, he registers his own conveyance, no other deeds - even if they exist - will prevail against him.
The expenses and delays, not to mention the occasional actual losses of property through fraud or mistake, attendant on the system of making every purchaser responsible for the due examination of his vendor's title - whether or not assisted by registration of deeds - have induced several governments to establish the more perfect system of Registration of Title, which consists in collecting the transactions affecting each separate estate under a separate head, keeping an accurate account of the parcels of which each such estate is composed, and summarizing authoritatively, as each fresh transaction occurs, the subsisting rights of all parties in relation to the land itself. This system prevails in Germany, Austria, Hungary, parts of Switzerland, the Australasian colonies, nearly the whole of Canada, some of the states of the American Union, to a certain extent in Ireland, and is in course of establishment in England and Wales. The Register consists of three portions: - (1) The description of the land, usually, but not necessarily, accompanied by a reference to a map; (2) the ownership, giving the name and address of the person who can sell and dispose of the land; and (3) the encumbrances, in their order of priority, and the names of the persons for the time being entitled to them. When any fresh transaction takes place the instrument effecting it is produced, and the proper alterations in, or additions to, the register are made: if it be a sale, the name of the vendor is cancelled from the register, and that of the purchaser is entered instead; if it be a mortgage, it is added to the list of encumbrances; if a discharge, the encumbrance discharged is cancelled; if it is a sale of part of the land, the original description is modified or the plan is marked to show the piece conveyed, while a new description or plan is made and a new register is opened for the detached parcel. In the English and Australian registries a "land certificate" is also issued to the landowner containing copies of the register and of the plan. This certificate takes the place more or less of the old documents of title. On a sale, the process is as follows: The vendor first of all produces to the purchaser his land certificate, or gives him the number of his title and an authority to inspect the register. In Austria and in some colonial registries this is not necessary, the register being open to public inspection, which in England is not the case. The purchaser, on inspecting this, can easily see for himself whether the land he wishes to buy is comprised in the registered description or plan, whether the vendor's name appears on the register as the owner of the land, and whether there are any encumbrances or other burdens registered as affecting it. If there are encumbrances, the register states their amount and who are entitled to them. The purchaser then usually' prepares a conveyance or transfer of the land (generally in a short printed form issued by the registry), and the vendor executes it in exchange for the purchase money. If there are mortgages, he pays them off to the persons named in the register as their owners, and they concur in a discharge. He then presents the executed instruments at the registry, and is entered as owner of the land instead of the vendor, the mortgages, if any, being cancelled. Where "land certificates" are used (as in England and Australia), a new land certificate is issued to the purchaser showing the existing state of the register and containing a copy of the registered plan of the land. The above is only a brief outline of the processes employed. For further information as to practical details reference may be made to the treatises mentioned at the end of this article.
Source: 1911 Encyclopedia
LAND REGISTRATION, a legal process connected with the transfer of landed property, comprising two forms - registration of deeds and registration of title, which may be best described as a species of machinery for assisting a purchaser or mortgagee in his inquiries as to his vendor's or mortgagor's title previously to completing his dealing, and for securing his own position afterwards. The expediency of making inquiry into the vendor's title before completing a purchase of land (and the case of a mortgage is precisely similar) is obvious. In the case of goods possession may ordinarily be relied on as proof of full ownership;. in the case of land, the person in ostensible possession is very seldom the owner, being usually only a tenant, paying rent to someone else. Even the person to whom the rent is paid is in many cases - probably, in England, in most cases - not the full owner, but only a life owner, or a trustee, whose powers of disposing of the property are of a strictly limited nature. Again, goods are very seldom the subject of a mortgage, whereas land has from time immemorial been the frequent subject of this class of transaction. Evidently, therefore, some sort of inquiry is necessary to enable a purchaser to obtain certainty that the land for which he pays full price is not subject to an unknown mortgage or charge which, if left undiscovered; might afterwards deprive him of a large part or even the whole of its value. Again, the probability of serious consequences to the purchaser ensuing from a mistake as to title is infinitely greater in the case of land than in the case of goods. Before the rightful owner can recover misappropriated goods, he has to find out where they are. This is usually a matter of considerable difficulty. By the time they have reached the hands of a bona fide purchaser all chance of their recovery by the true owner is practically at an end. But with land the case is far otherwise. A dispossessed rightful owner never has any difficulty in tracing his property, for it is immovable. All he has to do is to bring an action for ejectment against the person in possession. For these reasons, among others, any attempt to deal with land on the simple and unsuspecting principles which obtain in regard to goods would be fraught with grave risks.
Apart from very early and primitive social conditions, there appear to be only two ways in which the required certainty as to title to land can be obtained. Either the purchaser must satisfy himself, by an exhaustive scrutiny and review of all the deeds, wills, marriages, heirships and other documents and events by which the property has been conveyed, mortgaged, leased, devised or transmitted during a considerable period of time, that no loophole exists whereby an adverse claim can enter or be made good - this is called the system of private investigation of title - or the government must keep an authoritative list or register of the properties within its jurisdiction, together with the names of the owners and particulars of the encumbrances in each case, and must protect purchasers and others dealing with land, on the faith of this register, from all adverse claims. This second system is called Registration of Title. To these two alternatives may perhaps be added a third, of very recent growth - Insurance of Title. This is largely used in the United States. But it is in reality only a phase of the system of private investigation. The insurance company investigates the title, and charges the purchaser a premium to cover the expense and the risk of error. Registration of deeds is an adjunct of the system of private investigation, and, except in England, is a practically invariable feature of it. It consists in the establishment of public offices in which all documents affecting land are to be recorded - partly to preserve them in a readily accessible place, partly to prevent the possibility of any material deed or document being dishonestly concealed by a vendor. Where registration is effected by depositing a full copy of the deed, it also renders the subsequent falsification of the original document dangerous. Registration of deeds does not (except perhaps to a certain extent indirectly) cheapen or simplify the process of investigation - the formalities at the registry add something to the trouble and cost incurred - but it prevents the particular classes of fraud mentioned.
The history of land registration follows, as a general rule, a fairly uniform course of development. In very early times, and in small and simple communities, the difficulty afterwards found in establishing title to land does not arise, owing to the primitive habit of attaching ceremony and publicity to all dealings. The parties meet on the land, with witnesses; symbolical acts (such as handing over a piece of earth, or the bough of a tree) are performed; and a set form of words is spoken, expressive of the intention to convey. By this means the ownership of each estate in the community becomes to a certain extent a matter of common knowledge, rendering fraud and mistake difficult. But this method leaves a good deal to be desired in point of security. Witnesses die, and memory is uncertain; and one of the earliest improvements consists in the establishment of a sort of public record kept by the magistrate, lord or other local authority, containing a series of contemporary notes of the effect of the various transactions that take place. This book becomes the general title-deed of the whole community, and as long as transactions remain simple, and not too numerous, the results appear to be satisfactory. Of this character are the Manorial Court Rolls, which were in the middle ages the great authorities on title, both in England and on the continent. The entries in them in early times were made in a very few words. The date, the names of the parties, the name or short verbal description of the land, the nature of the transaction, are all that appear. In the land registry at Vienna there is a continuous series of registers of this kind going back to 1368, in Prague to 1377, in Munich to 1440. No doubt there are extant (though in a less easily accessible form) manorial records in England of equal or greater antiquity. This may be considered the first stage in the history of Land Registration. It can hardly be said to be in active operation at the present day in any civilized country - in the sense in which that term is usually understood. Where dealings become more numerous and complicated, written instruments are required to express the intentions of the parties, and afterwards to supply evidence of the landowner's title. It appears, too, that as a general rule the public books already described continue to be used, notwithstanding this change; only (as would be expected) the entries in them, once plain and simple, either grow into full copies of the long and intricate deeds, or consist of mere notes stating that such and such deeds have been executed, leaving the persons interested to inquire for the originals, in whose custody soever they may be found. This system, which may be regarded as the second stage in the history of land registration, is called Registration of Deeds. It prevails in France, Belgium, parts of Switzerland, in Italy, Spain, India, in almost all the British colonies (except Australasia and Canada), in most of the states of the American Union, in the South American republics, in Scotland and Ireland, and in the English counties of Yorkshire and Middlesex. Where it exists, there is generally a law to the effect that in case of dispute a registered deed shall prevail over an unregistered one. The practical effect is that a purchaser can, by searching the register, find out exactly what deeds he ought to inquire for, and receives an assurance that if, after completion, he registers his own conveyance, no other deeds - even if they exist - will prevail against him.
The expenses and delays, not to mention the occasional actual losses of property through fraud or mistake, attendant on the system of making every purchaser responsible for the due examination of his vendor's title - whether or not assisted by registration of deeds - have induced several governments to establish the more perfect system of Registration of Title, which consists in collecting the transactions affecting each separate estate under a separate head, keeping an accurate account of the parcels of which each such estate is composed, and summarizing authoritatively, as each fresh transaction occurs, the subsisting rights of all parties in relation to the land itself. This system prevails in Germany, Austria, Hungary, parts of Switzerland, the Australasian colonies, nearly the whole of Canada, some of the states of the American Union, to a certain extent in Ireland, and is in course of establishment in England and Wales. The Register consists of three portions: - (1) The description of the land, usually, but not necessarily, accompanied by a reference to a map; (2) the ownership, giving the name and address of the person who can sell and dispose of the land; and (3) the encumbrances, in their order of priority, and the names of the persons for the time being entitled to them. When any fresh transaction takes place the instrument effecting it is produced, and the proper alterations in, or additions to, the register are made: if it be a sale, the name of the vendor is cancelled from the register, and that of the purchaser is entered instead; if it be a mortgage, it is added to the list of encumbrances; if a discharge, the encumbrance discharged is cancelled; if it is a sale of part of the land, the original description is modified or the plan is marked to show the piece conveyed, while a new description or plan is made and a new register is opened for the detached parcel. In the English and Australian registries a "land certificate" is also issued to the landowner containing copies of the register and of the plan. This certificate takes the place more or less of the old documents of title. On a sale, the process is as follows: The vendor first of all produces to the purchaser his land certificate, or gives him the number of his title and an authority to inspect the register. In Austria and in some colonial registries this is not necessary, the register being open to public inspection, which in England is not the case. The purchaser, on inspecting this, can easily see for himself whether the land he wishes to buy is comprised in the registered description or plan, whether the vendor's name appears on the register as the owner of the land, and whether there are any encumbrances or other burdens registered as affecting it. If there are encumbrances, the register states their amount and who are entitled to them. The purchaser then usually' prepares a conveyance or transfer of the land (generally in a short printed form issued by the registry), and the vendor executes it in exchange for the purchase money. If there are mortgages, he pays them off to the persons named in the register as their owners, and they concur in a discharge. He then presents the executed instruments at the registry, and is entered as owner of the land instead of the vendor, the mortgages, if any, being cancelled. Where "land certificates" are used (as in England and Australia), a new land certificate is issued to the purchaser showing the existing state of the register and containing a copy of the registered plan of the land. The above is only a brief outline of the processes employed. For further information as to practical details reference may be made to the treatises mentioned at the end of this article.
Source: 1911 Encyclopedia
Friday, February 22, 2008
NECS - THE NATIONAL PROJECT TEAM
A Stakeholder Working Group meeting was held in Canberra on 15 February 2008 to develop a consensus among stakeholders on arrangements for a National Project Team (NPT) to advance definition of the National Electronic Conveyancing System (NECS)
The meeting had more than 50 stakeholder representatives and industry participants present and after introductions was addressed by Ian Gilbert, Director of Australian Bankers Association (ABA) and John Corcoran, President‐elect of the Law Council of Australia (LCA) who both provided industry perspectives on the importance of the meeting.
Ian Gilbert confirmed that the banks fully support a NECS which would provide valued microeconomic reform. He emphasised that a pre‐condition for success was the co‐operation of jurisdictions and the private sector in the realisation of a single national system capable of servicing stakeholder needs in all jurisdictions. He made it clear that NECS is much more than a computer system, that the business practices supporting it are equally important and that the banks need a fully consultative process for its development otherwise their business case for participation will fail.
John Corcoran confirmed that lawyers want a system that can operate in all jurisdictions; integrates with the technology in legal practices; suits all firms, large and small; is efficient reliable and robust; and is fair in its distribution of risk. He advised the meeting that, from the perspective of the legal profession, a federation of separate jurisdiction systems is unacceptable and the system must be a
single, national, multi‐jurisdiction system supported by all major stakeholders. He also emphasised the importance of adequate funding for the work of establishing NECS.
Simon Libbis, Executive Director of the National Office, presented the background to the meeting, including the unanimous decision at the last National Steering Committee to establish the NPT and to hold an open meeting of stakeholders to reach a consensus on arrangements. He emphasised that the Steering Committee intended that the team work within the context of the agreed National Business Model and he presented a number of suggested arrangements as a basis for the meeting’s discussion. He advised that the arrangements agreed upon would be presented to the Steering Committee for confirmation before any substantive work got underway.
Under the chairmanship of Richard Glenn, the Australian Government representative on the National Steering Committee, the meeting reached consensus on the following outcomes -
1. The NPT is to be responsible to the National Steering Committee but work through the National Office in providing its advice.
2. The NPT is to consist of eight permanent and up to six casual members.
3. The permanent members are to be:
• 1 representative of banks nominated by the ABA
• 1 representative of legal practitioners nominated by the LCA
• 1 representative of licensed conveyancers nominated by the AIC
• 1 representative of land registries nominated by the jurisdictions
• 1 representative of non‐bank lenders nominated by the MFAA
• 1 representative of independent mortgage processors nominated by NECO
• 1 representative of information brokers nominated by IBLSA
• 1 representative of revenue offices nominated by the Revenue Commissioners
4. The casual members are to be appointed as required by the National Steering Committee to provide additional stakeholder representation or specialist advice.
5. Current members of the National Steering Committee are to be ineligible for NPT membership so as to avoid any conflict in the governance of the team’s arrangements.
6. The team is to meet face‐to‐face every six weeks, or as the need arises, with video conferencing if necessary and available, and in between times exchange views by email and teleconferences. Meeting locations are to best suit team members. The National Office is to provide a non‐voting chair for meetings and record determinations. Team members are to meet their own costs of attending meetings and the National Office is to meet the cost of arranging and holding meetings.
7. Team members are to be encouraged to tap into the resources of their respective organisations, profession and stakeholder group for assistance and guidance, and are to be able to provide third‐party advice for team consideration provided it is of good standing and supported.
8. The team is to consider issue papers prepared by the National Office and make determinations that advance the development of NECS within the context of the National Business Model. The team’s determinations are to be based on a simple majority consensus and adopted automatically into the National Roadmap when consistent with it. Contentious determinations are to be referred by the National Office to the National Steering Committee for resolution.
9. All determinations are to be referred to the National Steering Committee for confirmation or resolution.
10. All issue papers considered and all determinations made are to be published on the NECS website for unrestricted access.
11. The team’s initial priorities are to be in order of immediate importance:
• System functions and features
• System performance characteristics
• Supporting business practices
• Risk management regime (including a compensation fund)
• Legislative framework
• Implementation planning (including take‐up initiatives and transition arrangements).
The meeting had more than 50 stakeholder representatives and industry participants present and after introductions was addressed by Ian Gilbert, Director of Australian Bankers Association (ABA) and John Corcoran, President‐elect of the Law Council of Australia (LCA) who both provided industry perspectives on the importance of the meeting.
Ian Gilbert confirmed that the banks fully support a NECS which would provide valued microeconomic reform. He emphasised that a pre‐condition for success was the co‐operation of jurisdictions and the private sector in the realisation of a single national system capable of servicing stakeholder needs in all jurisdictions. He made it clear that NECS is much more than a computer system, that the business practices supporting it are equally important and that the banks need a fully consultative process for its development otherwise their business case for participation will fail.
John Corcoran confirmed that lawyers want a system that can operate in all jurisdictions; integrates with the technology in legal practices; suits all firms, large and small; is efficient reliable and robust; and is fair in its distribution of risk. He advised the meeting that, from the perspective of the legal profession, a federation of separate jurisdiction systems is unacceptable and the system must be a
single, national, multi‐jurisdiction system supported by all major stakeholders. He also emphasised the importance of adequate funding for the work of establishing NECS.
Simon Libbis, Executive Director of the National Office, presented the background to the meeting, including the unanimous decision at the last National Steering Committee to establish the NPT and to hold an open meeting of stakeholders to reach a consensus on arrangements. He emphasised that the Steering Committee intended that the team work within the context of the agreed National Business Model and he presented a number of suggested arrangements as a basis for the meeting’s discussion. He advised that the arrangements agreed upon would be presented to the Steering Committee for confirmation before any substantive work got underway.
Under the chairmanship of Richard Glenn, the Australian Government representative on the National Steering Committee, the meeting reached consensus on the following outcomes -
1. The NPT is to be responsible to the National Steering Committee but work through the National Office in providing its advice.
2. The NPT is to consist of eight permanent and up to six casual members.
3. The permanent members are to be:
• 1 representative of banks nominated by the ABA
• 1 representative of legal practitioners nominated by the LCA
• 1 representative of licensed conveyancers nominated by the AIC
• 1 representative of land registries nominated by the jurisdictions
• 1 representative of non‐bank lenders nominated by the MFAA
• 1 representative of independent mortgage processors nominated by NECO
• 1 representative of information brokers nominated by IBLSA
• 1 representative of revenue offices nominated by the Revenue Commissioners
4. The casual members are to be appointed as required by the National Steering Committee to provide additional stakeholder representation or specialist advice.
5. Current members of the National Steering Committee are to be ineligible for NPT membership so as to avoid any conflict in the governance of the team’s arrangements.
6. The team is to meet face‐to‐face every six weeks, or as the need arises, with video conferencing if necessary and available, and in between times exchange views by email and teleconferences. Meeting locations are to best suit team members. The National Office is to provide a non‐voting chair for meetings and record determinations. Team members are to meet their own costs of attending meetings and the National Office is to meet the cost of arranging and holding meetings.
7. Team members are to be encouraged to tap into the resources of their respective organisations, profession and stakeholder group for assistance and guidance, and are to be able to provide third‐party advice for team consideration provided it is of good standing and supported.
8. The team is to consider issue papers prepared by the National Office and make determinations that advance the development of NECS within the context of the National Business Model. The team’s determinations are to be based on a simple majority consensus and adopted automatically into the National Roadmap when consistent with it. Contentious determinations are to be referred by the National Office to the National Steering Committee for resolution.
9. All determinations are to be referred to the National Steering Committee for confirmation or resolution.
10. All issue papers considered and all determinations made are to be published on the NECS website for unrestricted access.
11. The team’s initial priorities are to be in order of immediate importance:
• System functions and features
• System performance characteristics
• Supporting business practices
• Risk management regime (including a compensation fund)
• Legislative framework
• Implementation planning (including take‐up initiatives and transition arrangements).
Families skip meals to pay rent
RISING rents are forcing thousands of Australians to skip meals and deny their children school excursions, according to new research.
This came as another study showed there will be a massive increase in the number of renters over the next 40 years as housing becomes increasingly unaffordable to low-income earners.
Research by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, based on surveys and interviews with 1400 renter households and 400 recent home purchasers, found that 26% of low-income renters surveyed sometimes go without food and 42% can't afford school excursions. Forty-seven per cent said that, even with improved income, rents would still be too high.
"Despite the government obsession with home ownership, private rental is the problem sector," institute researcher Terry Burke told the National Housing Conference in Sydney.
Many home owners pay their mortgage by taking second jobs, but Professor Burke said: "Any economic slowdown means they could lose those jobs and then you have thousands who are going to be in trouble. I suspect we are approaching that situation."
He criticised negative gearing, the first home owners' grant, capital gains tax and rent assistance as measures that add to demand for housing without boosting supply, but said he doubted the Federal Government would drop the policies.
A separate study presented at the conference, headed by housing analyst Judith Yates of Sydney University, projects that over the next 40 years, the number of households will increase by 50%, but the number of renters will almost double.
"In the future, as in the past, the majority of Australians will have affordable, secure housing over their lives," the study said. "(But) it will be increasingly difficult for low and moderate-income households who have deferred home purchase to become home owners. "The number of lower-income households in housing stress in the private rental market is expected to increase by 120%."
The study points out that home ownership rates are already falling among younger households. Between 1981 and 2006, the proportion of householders aged 35 to 44 who do not own their home has risen from 25% to 32%. The proportion aged 25 to 34 who are renting has swollen from 39% to 49%.
The Housing Industry Association forecast that in 2007-08 there would be hardly any growth in housing starts.
Housing Industry Association director Chris Lamont said housing starts had stalled at a level providing about 20,000 fewer homes a year than Australia needed. New rate rises would further restrict supply, putting more pressure on house prices and rents.
The Age
Sunanda Creagh and Tim Colebatch
February 22, 2008
This came as another study showed there will be a massive increase in the number of renters over the next 40 years as housing becomes increasingly unaffordable to low-income earners.
Research by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, based on surveys and interviews with 1400 renter households and 400 recent home purchasers, found that 26% of low-income renters surveyed sometimes go without food and 42% can't afford school excursions. Forty-seven per cent said that, even with improved income, rents would still be too high.
"Despite the government obsession with home ownership, private rental is the problem sector," institute researcher Terry Burke told the National Housing Conference in Sydney.
Many home owners pay their mortgage by taking second jobs, but Professor Burke said: "Any economic slowdown means they could lose those jobs and then you have thousands who are going to be in trouble. I suspect we are approaching that situation."
He criticised negative gearing, the first home owners' grant, capital gains tax and rent assistance as measures that add to demand for housing without boosting supply, but said he doubted the Federal Government would drop the policies.
A separate study presented at the conference, headed by housing analyst Judith Yates of Sydney University, projects that over the next 40 years, the number of households will increase by 50%, but the number of renters will almost double.
"In the future, as in the past, the majority of Australians will have affordable, secure housing over their lives," the study said. "(But) it will be increasingly difficult for low and moderate-income households who have deferred home purchase to become home owners. "The number of lower-income households in housing stress in the private rental market is expected to increase by 120%."
The study points out that home ownership rates are already falling among younger households. Between 1981 and 2006, the proportion of householders aged 35 to 44 who do not own their home has risen from 25% to 32%. The proportion aged 25 to 34 who are renting has swollen from 39% to 49%.
The Housing Industry Association forecast that in 2007-08 there would be hardly any growth in housing starts.
Housing Industry Association director Chris Lamont said housing starts had stalled at a level providing about 20,000 fewer homes a year than Australia needed. New rate rises would further restrict supply, putting more pressure on house prices and rents.
The Age
Sunanda Creagh and Tim Colebatch
February 22, 2008
Saturday, February 16, 2008
The Democratic Nomination - EC Vic or NECS?
If the race for the democratic nomination was a choice between EC Vic and NECS, the lobbying for delegates is intense. Victoria has bagged Queensland, Bendigo Bank and MECU as delegates. NECS can count on NSW, the Law Council of Australia and the Australian Bankers Association. On Friday 15 February NECS launched the National Project Team being a body made up of industry representatives from every sector and reps standing in for the jurisdictions. Banks, Non-banks, Lawyers, Conveyancers, Mortgage Processors, Information Brokers, Jurisdictions and others will all have hand picked reps to start the process to define the shape and framework of the National Electronic Conveyancing System. Priorities and time lines will be set by the National Project team to report upline to the National Steering Committee. If there was one message in the background, that message is National, underscored and in bold. The day was chaired by Richard Glenn who is from the Commonwealth Government Attorney-General's Department, assistant secretary. I wouldn't go as far to say the conference was Super Tuesday, but it was close. The banks are the super-delegates for the casting of votes. Yesterday there was unquestionable support for the national process. How long will EC Vic fight the fight, we dont know but their star is waning and I cant see them outgunning NECS, despite all the problems of funding and ownership, and counter arguments. It is anyone's guess when we will see EC rolled into NECS. IP and all. This is not a quote, this is just speculation. If anyone wants to leave comment, please do
I expect NECS will shortly make an announcement on the make up of the National Project Team (NPT) as well as the priorities that will be set by the industry representatives.
There was several calls from the floor of the conference, that the NPT priorities need to give clear attention and address the issues of take up, traction, transition and conversion as well as a rigorous cost / benefit analysis. I agree these are important fundamental issues, which I would believe were not given to the design and implementation of EC Vic.Take up and transition are the core to the design of NECS. Lets not forget the consumer. Giving focus and attention to the client should be a very high and guiding principle within the system. What is to be the starting point? These will be interesting and challenging questions for the NPT.
I expect NECS will shortly make an announcement on the make up of the National Project Team (NPT) as well as the priorities that will be set by the industry representatives.
There was several calls from the floor of the conference, that the NPT priorities need to give clear attention and address the issues of take up, traction, transition and conversion as well as a rigorous cost / benefit analysis. I agree these are important fundamental issues, which I would believe were not given to the design and implementation of EC Vic.Take up and transition are the core to the design of NECS. Lets not forget the consumer. Giving focus and attention to the client should be a very high and guiding principle within the system. What is to be the starting point? These will be interesting and challenging questions for the NPT.
Home buyers hurt by ECV delays
Chris Merritt | February 15, 2008 | The Australian
THE Victorian Government has forced the state's home buyers to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in extra government fees because disputes have hobbled its $40 million electronic conveyancing system.
Home buyers have been paying extra charges since November because the Government has been unable to settle disputes affecting its relatively cheap electronic conveyancing system (ECV).
As a result, thousands of people who have bought and sold property since November have had no alternative but to use the old paper-based conveyancing system that has been hit by government fee increases of up to 32 per cent.
The Government imposed those increases in November to encourage a quick take-up of the electronic system. But it has refused to remove the fee increases despite its inability to resolve disputes with key players in the conveyancing industry that have limited the take-up of the new system.
Those disputes, which have been dragging on since last year, have led to a boycott of ECV by the major banks and most of the state's solicitors.
But they have also led to a windfall in conveyancing fee income for the state Government from the old paper-based system.
The Australian Institute of Conveyancers said the Government had been receiving about $20 more for each document filed under the old system than it would have received under ECV.
"There would be thousands of these documents filed each week," said Australian Institute of Conveyancers Victorian chief executive Jill Ludwell.
The blow-out in conveyancing fees has alienated the remaining key players in the conveyancing industry who were not already at odds with the state Government over ECV.
The Australian Institute of Conveyancers, the Law Institute of Victoria and the Victorian arm of the Master Builders Association all called this week for the fee increases on paper-based conveyancing to be abandoned.
The other key players in conveyancing -- the major banks -- were already involved in one of the two disputes with the Government that are affecting ECV.
The big banks withdrew their support from ECV last year until they were satisfied that Victoria was committed to establishing a single national system of electronic conveyancing instead of a series of state-based systems.
In November the Victorian minister responsible for ECV, Gavin Jennings, was a key player in the establishment of a high-powered committee of state government officials aimed at working towards a national e-conveyancing system.
The other dispute affecting ECV involves the Legal Practitioners Liability Committee, the organisation that provides professional indemnity insurance for Victoria's solicitors.
The committee had not been consulted about ECV until relatively late in the system's development. The Government has not yet been able to ease the committee's concerns about the potential liability of solicitors who take part in the system.
Without the committee's sign-off, the Law Institute of Victoria has been unable to recommend that solicitors take part in the system. However, the Rudd Government has now intervened in the dispute and is attempting to broker a solution that could address the concerns of the big banks (see accompanying report).
The state opposition has also taken an interest in the affair.
Shadow Attorney-General Robert Clark said that if the problems afflicting ECV could not be resolved by government officials, Attorney-General Rob Hulls needed to take a direct role in talks with the banks and the Law Institute. "This needs to be thrashed out. You cannot have a system introduced by the Government that these key and respected organisations believe is unsatisfactory," Mr Clark said.
"Until the new system is up and running, the consumer is paying through the nose for the old paper-based system," he said.
He endorsed the call from the conveyancing industry for the fee increases to be wound back.
Before unveiling the latest stage of ECV in November, the Government promised it would result in cost savings on property transactions of up to $395.
However, the Australian Institute of Conveyancers said the net impact of ECV and its associated disputes had increased the cost of conveyancing and hurt the public. "The public is being penalised because the electronic system in Victoria cannot get up and running," said the AIC's Jill Ludwell.
Body: She said the fee increases for paper-based conveyancing would have caused far less disruption had they been introduced once ECV was being widely used. "The industry is fed up with all the bickering," Ms Ludwell said.
Figures assembled by the Master Builders Association show the cost of filing a traditional property transfer, after a sale, rose by 16 per cent in November. Government fees on other paper-based documents rose by between 20.2 and 32 per cent.
The Law Institute warned the Government on November 1 that ECV, at least in its early stages, was unlikely to be widely used. LIV chief executive Michael Brett Young wrote to Land Victoria saying the fee hikes were being introduced even before the latest stage of ECV was due to be launched on November 16. He urged Land Victoria not to introduce the new fees until there was wider participation in ECV.
"It is an unjust financial imposition upon the end-users of Land Victoria's registration system to bear additional costs associated with paper-based transactions," Mr Brett Young wrote.
On September 3, the Master Builders had sent Land Victoria a similar warning. Executive director Brian Welch wrote that the state Government's over-reliance on building industry taxes was undermining housing affordability, discouraging investment and reducing employment opportunities. "Taxes and charges on the building industry add 30 per cent to the cost of a new house and land, with 53 per cent of these taxes going directly to the state Government," Mr Welch wrote.
Mr Welch told The Australian that ECV was a good idea that had been spoiled by bad execution. "What we need is a transition and I suspect that was never considered," he said.
Mr Brett Young said electronic conveyancing was a worthwhile initiative but to work there needed to be one system across the nation. He said the best way to ensure a quick take-up of ECV would be to greatly reduce the cost of online filing while returning the fee scale for paper-based conveyancing to its original level.
He believed a benefit of having Labor governments in office in Canberra and the states was that it increased the likelihood of achieving a national approach to electronic conveyancing.
A spokesman for Victorian Environment Minister Gavin Jennings said the state's electronic conveyancing system had become "fully operational" late last year.
"The electronic conveyancing system will provide savings of up to $395 per for party settlement, and more than $70 million of annual savings to Victorian industry and the community by 2012," the spokesman said. "We are continuing to work with our industry partners and commonwealth, states and territory colleagues toward the development of a national EC system."
THE Victorian Government has forced the state's home buyers to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in extra government fees because disputes have hobbled its $40 million electronic conveyancing system.
Home buyers have been paying extra charges since November because the Government has been unable to settle disputes affecting its relatively cheap electronic conveyancing system (ECV).
As a result, thousands of people who have bought and sold property since November have had no alternative but to use the old paper-based conveyancing system that has been hit by government fee increases of up to 32 per cent.
The Government imposed those increases in November to encourage a quick take-up of the electronic system. But it has refused to remove the fee increases despite its inability to resolve disputes with key players in the conveyancing industry that have limited the take-up of the new system.
Those disputes, which have been dragging on since last year, have led to a boycott of ECV by the major banks and most of the state's solicitors.
But they have also led to a windfall in conveyancing fee income for the state Government from the old paper-based system.
The Australian Institute of Conveyancers said the Government had been receiving about $20 more for each document filed under the old system than it would have received under ECV.
"There would be thousands of these documents filed each week," said Australian Institute of Conveyancers Victorian chief executive Jill Ludwell.
The blow-out in conveyancing fees has alienated the remaining key players in the conveyancing industry who were not already at odds with the state Government over ECV.
The Australian Institute of Conveyancers, the Law Institute of Victoria and the Victorian arm of the Master Builders Association all called this week for the fee increases on paper-based conveyancing to be abandoned.
The other key players in conveyancing -- the major banks -- were already involved in one of the two disputes with the Government that are affecting ECV.
The big banks withdrew their support from ECV last year until they were satisfied that Victoria was committed to establishing a single national system of electronic conveyancing instead of a series of state-based systems.
In November the Victorian minister responsible for ECV, Gavin Jennings, was a key player in the establishment of a high-powered committee of state government officials aimed at working towards a national e-conveyancing system.
The other dispute affecting ECV involves the Legal Practitioners Liability Committee, the organisation that provides professional indemnity insurance for Victoria's solicitors.
The committee had not been consulted about ECV until relatively late in the system's development. The Government has not yet been able to ease the committee's concerns about the potential liability of solicitors who take part in the system.
Without the committee's sign-off, the Law Institute of Victoria has been unable to recommend that solicitors take part in the system. However, the Rudd Government has now intervened in the dispute and is attempting to broker a solution that could address the concerns of the big banks (see accompanying report).
The state opposition has also taken an interest in the affair.
Shadow Attorney-General Robert Clark said that if the problems afflicting ECV could not be resolved by government officials, Attorney-General Rob Hulls needed to take a direct role in talks with the banks and the Law Institute. "This needs to be thrashed out. You cannot have a system introduced by the Government that these key and respected organisations believe is unsatisfactory," Mr Clark said.
"Until the new system is up and running, the consumer is paying through the nose for the old paper-based system," he said.
He endorsed the call from the conveyancing industry for the fee increases to be wound back.
Before unveiling the latest stage of ECV in November, the Government promised it would result in cost savings on property transactions of up to $395.
However, the Australian Institute of Conveyancers said the net impact of ECV and its associated disputes had increased the cost of conveyancing and hurt the public. "The public is being penalised because the electronic system in Victoria cannot get up and running," said the AIC's Jill Ludwell.
Body: She said the fee increases for paper-based conveyancing would have caused far less disruption had they been introduced once ECV was being widely used. "The industry is fed up with all the bickering," Ms Ludwell said.
Figures assembled by the Master Builders Association show the cost of filing a traditional property transfer, after a sale, rose by 16 per cent in November. Government fees on other paper-based documents rose by between 20.2 and 32 per cent.
The Law Institute warned the Government on November 1 that ECV, at least in its early stages, was unlikely to be widely used. LIV chief executive Michael Brett Young wrote to Land Victoria saying the fee hikes were being introduced even before the latest stage of ECV was due to be launched on November 16. He urged Land Victoria not to introduce the new fees until there was wider participation in ECV.
"It is an unjust financial imposition upon the end-users of Land Victoria's registration system to bear additional costs associated with paper-based transactions," Mr Brett Young wrote.
On September 3, the Master Builders had sent Land Victoria a similar warning. Executive director Brian Welch wrote that the state Government's over-reliance on building industry taxes was undermining housing affordability, discouraging investment and reducing employment opportunities. "Taxes and charges on the building industry add 30 per cent to the cost of a new house and land, with 53 per cent of these taxes going directly to the state Government," Mr Welch wrote.
Mr Welch told The Australian that ECV was a good idea that had been spoiled by bad execution. "What we need is a transition and I suspect that was never considered," he said.
Mr Brett Young said electronic conveyancing was a worthwhile initiative but to work there needed to be one system across the nation. He said the best way to ensure a quick take-up of ECV would be to greatly reduce the cost of online filing while returning the fee scale for paper-based conveyancing to its original level.
He believed a benefit of having Labor governments in office in Canberra and the states was that it increased the likelihood of achieving a national approach to electronic conveyancing.
A spokesman for Victorian Environment Minister Gavin Jennings said the state's electronic conveyancing system had become "fully operational" late last year.
"The electronic conveyancing system will provide savings of up to $395 per for party settlement, and more than $70 million of annual savings to Victorian industry and the community by 2012," the spokesman said. "We are continuing to work with our industry partners and commonwealth, states and territory colleagues toward the development of a national EC system."
Conveyancing back on the pollies' agenda
Chris Merrit, The Australian 15 Feb
THE federal Government is taking direct action aimed at reinvigorating the push for a single national electronic conveyancing system.
The Government believes the project is one of the key initiatives that could help reduce the cost of housing.
It is also seen as a way in which the Government could implement its goal of cutting red tape and increasing federal-state co-operation.
One of the top officials in the Attorney-General's Department, assistant secretary Richard Glenn, will be chairing a crucial meeting in Canberra today of the conveyancing industry's key players.
Mr Glenn has been heavily involved in an inter-governmental project aimed at establishing a national register for personal property securities.
Today's meeting will be attended by representatives of most state law societies, non-lawyer conveyancers, federal Treasury, the major banks and Australian Government Information Management Office.
It is aimed at forming a national project team to build the national system.
That team could help to eliminate the focus on inter-governmental rivalry that has slowed progress on the project.
A successful outcome from today's meeting is expected to help ease some of the concerns that are behind the boycott by the major banks of Victoria's state-based system.
The big banks have withdrawn their support from the Victorian system because they want to deal with one national system instead of a series of state-based systems.
As well as chairing today's meeting, the Attorney-General's Department has joined the steering committee that is overseeing the development of the national e-conveyancing system. Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland said progress on establishing a national system had stalled under the Howard government.
He will be raising the issue with his state and territory counterparts when they meet next month.
The Government is also examining the option of including electronic conveyancing on the agenda for the Council of Australian Governments.
The COAG business regulation and competition working group will consider the push for a national system at its meeting this month.
Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner said the Government had asked the states and territories to consider "whether a national system could be placed on the COAG agenda with an agreed implementation timeline".
"A national electronic conveyancing system is an example of harnessing technology to reduce the costs of doing business," he said.
The proposed national system is not intended to replace the land registries that are run by state and territory governments.
Instead, it would enable parties involved in property transactions to deal electronically through a single national portal.
The Australian Bankers Association endorsed the proposed establishment of a national project team.
ABA director Ian Gilbert said the intention was to assemble a team with the technical know-how to take the national electronic conveyancing project to the next stage.
THE federal Government is taking direct action aimed at reinvigorating the push for a single national electronic conveyancing system.
The Government believes the project is one of the key initiatives that could help reduce the cost of housing.
It is also seen as a way in which the Government could implement its goal of cutting red tape and increasing federal-state co-operation.
One of the top officials in the Attorney-General's Department, assistant secretary Richard Glenn, will be chairing a crucial meeting in Canberra today of the conveyancing industry's key players.
Mr Glenn has been heavily involved in an inter-governmental project aimed at establishing a national register for personal property securities.
Today's meeting will be attended by representatives of most state law societies, non-lawyer conveyancers, federal Treasury, the major banks and Australian Government Information Management Office.
It is aimed at forming a national project team to build the national system.
That team could help to eliminate the focus on inter-governmental rivalry that has slowed progress on the project.
A successful outcome from today's meeting is expected to help ease some of the concerns that are behind the boycott by the major banks of Victoria's state-based system.
The big banks have withdrawn their support from the Victorian system because they want to deal with one national system instead of a series of state-based systems.
As well as chairing today's meeting, the Attorney-General's Department has joined the steering committee that is overseeing the development of the national e-conveyancing system. Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland said progress on establishing a national system had stalled under the Howard government.
He will be raising the issue with his state and territory counterparts when they meet next month.
The Government is also examining the option of including electronic conveyancing on the agenda for the Council of Australian Governments.
The COAG business regulation and competition working group will consider the push for a national system at its meeting this month.
Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner said the Government had asked the states and territories to consider "whether a national system could be placed on the COAG agenda with an agreed implementation timeline".
"A national electronic conveyancing system is an example of harnessing technology to reduce the costs of doing business," he said.
The proposed national system is not intended to replace the land registries that are run by state and territory governments.
Instead, it would enable parties involved in property transactions to deal electronically through a single national portal.
The Australian Bankers Association endorsed the proposed establishment of a national project team.
ABA director Ian Gilbert said the intention was to assemble a team with the technical know-how to take the national electronic conveyancing project to the next stage.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Transfer of Land (Electronic Transactions) Act 2004
EC's legislative framework stems from the amendments to the Transfer of Land Act 1958. In reviewing the functionality of EC many of its features are a direct result of the changes mandated. The summary of changes are -
PART 2—AMENDMENTS TO THE TRANSFER OF LAND ACT 1958
3. Definitions
4. New section 27AB inserted
27AB. Verification of identity
5. Instruments in duplicate and triplicate
6. New Part IIIA inserted
PART IIIA—ELECTRONIC INSTRUMENTS
44A. Restriction on lodgement of electronic instruments
44B. Registrar may provide electronic lodgement network
44C. Agents for lodging electronic instruments must be eligible persons
44D. Powers of Registrar
44E. Duty of Registrar in relation to priority of electronic instruments
44F. Notification of registration
44G. Evidence of registration of electronic instrument
44H. Electronic lodgement network malfunction
44I. Destruction of certificate of title
44J. Registrar may require production of documents
44K. Registrar may specify matters to be certified
44L. Evidence of electronic instruments
44M. Electronic certification of electronic instrument
44N. Registrar may deal exclusively with responsible party
Link to a word version of the Act. These changes are now formally coded as part of the Transfer of Land Act 1958
PART 2—AMENDMENTS TO THE TRANSFER OF LAND ACT 1958
3. Definitions
4. New section 27AB inserted
27AB. Verification of identity
5. Instruments in duplicate and triplicate
6. New Part IIIA inserted
PART IIIA—ELECTRONIC INSTRUMENTS
44A. Restriction on lodgement of electronic instruments
44B. Registrar may provide electronic lodgement network
44C. Agents for lodging electronic instruments must be eligible persons
44D. Powers of Registrar
44E. Duty of Registrar in relation to priority of electronic instruments
44F. Notification of registration
44G. Evidence of registration of electronic instrument
44H. Electronic lodgement network malfunction
44I. Destruction of certificate of title
44J. Registrar may require production of documents
44K. Registrar may specify matters to be certified
44L. Evidence of electronic instruments
44M. Electronic certification of electronic instrument
44N. Registrar may deal exclusively with responsible party
Link to a word version of the Act. These changes are now formally coded as part of the Transfer of Land Act 1958
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Why are houses prices unaffordable?
I have an alternative theory why housing is so unaffordable. One is Keynsian economic theory, demand exceeds supply, prices rise. If demand is high and supply is low, prices will rise and the converse applies. Victoria has had a rising population which has added to the demand side of the equation.
Monetary economics applies as well. If interest rates drop, as they have or did for quite a while, prices rise. Interest rates have been on the rise for a number of consecutive quarters but we have still seen prices rising. This is an anomaly, so there must be another factor.
There is a third factor. And that is the government's role in the property sector. Taxation.
Each of these taxes are either an ingoing tax or exit tax, and each will make a significant impact on peoples decision to buy, sell or hold.
The first, being stamp duty, is the most insinuous tax. The second affects only investors. The third impacts the new building sector the greatest.
Stamp duty, historically, taxed mums and dads on the purchase of a home at a rate of 2%. That now is effectively 5%, through the effects of inflation on the marginal threshold when the stamp duty rate rose to 6%. Governments have conveniently forgotten to raise the marginal threshold. The current threshold in Victoria is around $115,000. After that the tax impost of stamp duty raises itself to 6%. That 6% margin used to only tax the very well to do who lived in Toorak or the better end of Brighton. Not any more. Your ordinary mum and dad gets slugged the
Toorak rate in Caroline Springs or Narre Warren. That's the people's representatives representing you which has brought this situation about. Solution. Stamp duty should be a flat 2% on everyone, unless the purchase price is $2 million and above, indexed by CPI.
CGT - Capital Gains Tax. This is a reason investors wont sell even if there is a profit in it for them. Many will die first before selling, to avoid paying CGT.
GST - Builders are pointing out that up to 30% of new housing is taken up by various imposts, planning costs, stamp duty, GST etc.
All the above, combined, has resulted in a significant drop in turnover of property sales in Victoria. Have a look at the statistics.
Turnover of sales in Victoria
2001 182,543 properties
2006 143,416 properties
A decrease of 21%. Twenty one percent or 39,127 fewer properties were sold and the trend has not yet reversed.
This is a huge reduction on the supply side of the economic equation, whilst demand has increased due to population trends and investor demand from negative gearing and individuals chasing wealth progams.
The supply side is throttled by taxation issues, all listed above. Stamp duty is the worst offender as individuals postpone decisions to trade up or down because of the ruinous effect of stamp duty and the cost of switching properties.
Our politicians have their head in the sand on this one, and tinker with bullshit changes around the edges to rates and rebates.
Yes house prices have been rising around the world but Victoria is front and centre on the state in the top 10 of unaffordable housing. Taxes on property throttle and distort the supply and demand equation. The 21% drop in turnover in an economy that is booming is a telling statistic. I ask you John Brumby what are you going to do about it?
If not, the answer is for the Commonwealth to make property taxation a federal tax and let them decide what is a rational levy on property transfers. New Zealand it is Nil
Monetary economics applies as well. If interest rates drop, as they have or did for quite a while, prices rise. Interest rates have been on the rise for a number of consecutive quarters but we have still seen prices rising. This is an anomaly, so there must be another factor.
There is a third factor. And that is the government's role in the property sector. Taxation.
- State stamp duty
- Commonwealth Capital Gains Tax
- GST
Each of these taxes are either an ingoing tax or exit tax, and each will make a significant impact on peoples decision to buy, sell or hold.
The first, being stamp duty, is the most insinuous tax. The second affects only investors. The third impacts the new building sector the greatest.
Stamp duty, historically, taxed mums and dads on the purchase of a home at a rate of 2%. That now is effectively 5%, through the effects of inflation on the marginal threshold when the stamp duty rate rose to 6%. Governments have conveniently forgotten to raise the marginal threshold. The current threshold in Victoria is around $115,000. After that the tax impost of stamp duty raises itself to 6%. That 6% margin used to only tax the very well to do who lived in Toorak or the better end of Brighton. Not any more. Your ordinary mum and dad gets slugged the
Toorak rate in Caroline Springs or Narre Warren. That's the people's representatives representing you which has brought this situation about. Solution. Stamp duty should be a flat 2% on everyone, unless the purchase price is $2 million and above, indexed by CPI.
CGT - Capital Gains Tax. This is a reason investors wont sell even if there is a profit in it for them. Many will die first before selling, to avoid paying CGT.
GST - Builders are pointing out that up to 30% of new housing is taken up by various imposts, planning costs, stamp duty, GST etc.
All the above, combined, has resulted in a significant drop in turnover of property sales in Victoria. Have a look at the statistics.
Turnover of sales in Victoria
2001 182,543 properties
2006 143,416 properties
A decrease of 21%. Twenty one percent or 39,127 fewer properties were sold and the trend has not yet reversed.
This is a huge reduction on the supply side of the economic equation, whilst demand has increased due to population trends and investor demand from negative gearing and individuals chasing wealth progams.
The supply side is throttled by taxation issues, all listed above. Stamp duty is the worst offender as individuals postpone decisions to trade up or down because of the ruinous effect of stamp duty and the cost of switching properties.
Our politicians have their head in the sand on this one, and tinker with bullshit changes around the edges to rates and rebates.
Yes house prices have been rising around the world but Victoria is front and centre on the state in the top 10 of unaffordable housing. Taxes on property throttle and distort the supply and demand equation. The 21% drop in turnover in an economy that is booming is a telling statistic. I ask you John Brumby what are you going to do about it?
If not, the answer is for the Commonwealth to make property taxation a federal tax and let them decide what is a rational levy on property transfers. New Zealand it is Nil
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Its a joke
We were instructed to prepare a vendor statement for a sale of an apartment in Building No 5, Lorimer Street Docklands Melbourne
Joke 1. The apartment is affected by 5 body corporates, now called owners corporations. The new legislation Owners Corporation Act mandates the inclusion in the vendors statement of an owners corporation s151 certificate for each body corporate. So, unless the vendor includes the 5 certificates at $150 a pop, this could give rise to the vendor statement being invalid and giving the purchaser an option to withdraw from the sale any time before settlement. It is indeed perverse that One of the five owners corporations, levies the apartment a mere $29 per annum. Yet the owners corporation manager, Property Essentials, can charge our mutual client $750 for providing the 5 certificates. Is this one of the unintended consequences of the new legislation?
Joke 2. The size of the vendors statement could be used as a boat anchor, weighing in at a whopping 308 pages and a slip of a 60 megabyte file. And the agent wants 3 copies. The offending document was the Plan Subdivision as well as the 5 owners corporations certificates. This is not an uncommon problem around Docklands and any hi-rise apartment building in inner city Melbourne. The answer is digital signing of digital vendors statements by vendors and buyers. It can be done and will take some re-educating of estate agents et al.
Is there are answer to the first issue? I guess our politicians need to review the effect of the legislation after 12 months or so. Perhaps a $150 cap on what managers can charge to any vendor whether there is one, two or 5 owners corporations
If you want to view the offending documentation 1303, 90 Lorimer Street Docklands
Do not attempt to print
Joke 1. The apartment is affected by 5 body corporates, now called owners corporations. The new legislation Owners Corporation Act mandates the inclusion in the vendors statement of an owners corporation s151 certificate for each body corporate. So, unless the vendor includes the 5 certificates at $150 a pop, this could give rise to the vendor statement being invalid and giving the purchaser an option to withdraw from the sale any time before settlement. It is indeed perverse that One of the five owners corporations, levies the apartment a mere $29 per annum. Yet the owners corporation manager, Property Essentials, can charge our mutual client $750 for providing the 5 certificates. Is this one of the unintended consequences of the new legislation?
Joke 2. The size of the vendors statement could be used as a boat anchor, weighing in at a whopping 308 pages and a slip of a 60 megabyte file. And the agent wants 3 copies. The offending document was the Plan Subdivision as well as the 5 owners corporations certificates. This is not an uncommon problem around Docklands and any hi-rise apartment building in inner city Melbourne. The answer is digital signing of digital vendors statements by vendors and buyers. It can be done and will take some re-educating of estate agents et al.
Is there are answer to the first issue? I guess our politicians need to review the effect of the legislation after 12 months or so. Perhaps a $150 cap on what managers can charge to any vendor whether there is one, two or 5 owners corporations
If you want to view the offending documentation 1303, 90 Lorimer Street Docklands
Do not attempt to print
Real estate agents launch defamation action against Google
Two Victorian real estate agents have launched a defamation action against the search engine company Google.
Counsel for agents Mark Forytarz and Paul Castran of Castran Gilbert, appeared in the Supreme Court today for a directions hearing, alleging their clients have been defamed by articles found via Google searches.
The plaintiffs claim the articles suggest Mr Forytarz bullied an intellectually disabled man into selling his home in order to claim a commission of at least $200,000.
It is claimed the article paints Mr Forytarz as unscrupulous and unethical and he suffered distress embarrassment and humiliation as a result.
They also claim another article alleges Mr Castran used dummy bidders to inflate the prices of the properties he sold.
They claim they asked Google to remove links to the articles late last year, but no effective action was taken.
They will return to court in March.
ABC news 8 Feb 2008
Counsel for agents Mark Forytarz and Paul Castran of Castran Gilbert, appeared in the Supreme Court today for a directions hearing, alleging their clients have been defamed by articles found via Google searches.
The plaintiffs claim the articles suggest Mr Forytarz bullied an intellectually disabled man into selling his home in order to claim a commission of at least $200,000.
It is claimed the article paints Mr Forytarz as unscrupulous and unethical and he suffered distress embarrassment and humiliation as a result.
They also claim another article alleges Mr Castran used dummy bidders to inflate the prices of the properties he sold.
They claim they asked Google to remove links to the articles late last year, but no effective action was taken.
They will return to court in March.
ABC news 8 Feb 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
