Friday, April 23, 2010

Identity Verification System 'A Failure'

A $28 MILLION Howard government plan to create a high-tech system to help stamp out identity crime has been plagued by technical difficulties and has failed to achieve its aims, according to the Australian National Audit Office.

The national document verification service, announced by the Coalition in 2006, is a computer network which is supposed to link federal and state government agencies that issue key identity documents such as birth certificates, passports and driver's licences.

It is meant to be used to check the veracity of documents presented by people as proof of identity when applying for services or benefits or government clearances at a wide range of agencies.

But a report by the audit office found that despite the Attorney-General's Department spending $17 million to establish the service and linking it to dozens of agencies, the system is not being used because of concerns over its accuracy and timeliness. The report said that since coming into operation in October 2007, the service had been used only 10 times a day on average to check documents presented at participating agencies. By contrast, the department had built the system to handle 250,000 requests a day.

The report said several major document-issuing agencies had not joined the service until well after it had started.

The Victorian births, deaths and marriages and driver's licence authorities had still not joined nor had the Western Australian driver's licence agency.

There were also technical glitches deterring agencies from using the system. Over its first two years in operation, the service had not identified a single fraudulent document and 38 per cent of its responses had been errors - including ''false negatives'' where the system reported that a document could not be verified even though the document was genuine.

''The delivery of timely and accurate responses … has been an ongoing issue for the national document verification service,'' the report says.

''Notwithstanding [testing of a prototype] and over two years of implementation, the project is still resolving practical implementation issues and is rarely used. It is unlikely in the immediate future that use of the national document verification service will significantly contribute to strengthening Australia's personal identification processes.''

The audit office recommended that the Attorney-General's Department should devise ways to fix the problems including ''considering the future of the national verification document service itself''.

The government established the service as part of a package of measures agreed to at a counter-terrorism summit between former prime minister John Howard and state premiers in 2005.


the age

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Thieves - Owner Corporation Certificate rip-off


I write as to a concern that I have in regard to the provision of Certificates issued by Body Corporate Management companies same being necessary for a proposed sale of a property covered by an operative Body Corporate.

I fully appreciate that the State Government effected statutory changes to the operation of Bodies Corporate primarily for the protection of the property owner.

Relatively recent changes were to some extent to ensure that Management companies had proper procedures in place and these alterations I do not have any problem with whatsoever.

My concern is as follows and I set out a particular circumstance that effects me personally.

I happen to retain ownership of a residential apartment at Docklands, Melbourne.

Due to the structure, the building is covered by three separate Bodies Corporate.

I am contemplating a sale of the subject property and when I contacted the Management Company I was provided with a varying range of fees for provision of Certificates depending on the timing of issue and the urgency of same.

The base fee for a 14 day certificate is set at $150-00.

In my case, I am charged for three certificates being a total of $450-00.

With respect, Mr Minister, the fees are an absolute disgrace given the levels associated.

The certificates are effectively a "single page document" (for each of the Bodies Corporate) and from a timing perspective, would take all of one minute to generate via a computer system.

I dont at any time have a problem with companies being remunerated for fair and reasonable work performed be it on a time basis or a service basis although having today checked with a number of other Body Corporate Management companies, the fees are fairly standard and the excuse given is that these were set by Government.

It is suggested that a more preferable method of Fee charging be adopted either being a "fair and reasonable" fee or possibly as a percentage of the annual Body Corporate fees paid in regard to the unit which would actually reflect the level of workload involved by the Management company.

By way of example, if one pays say $1000 pa for fees, may be a 5% fee be charged for the certificate being $50.

Signed by a pissed off client (name withheld)
Addressed to Tony Robinson MP
Date: 13 April 2010 9:18:23 PM
Subject: Re: Bodies Corporate - Fees

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

ANZ insists third-party mortgage services are fully compliant

PERPETUAL'S mortgage services arm yesterday rejected claims that its operations do not comply with licensing rules.
It insisted legal work it performed on behalf of financial institutions was being done by qualified lawyers. The company's mortgage services subsidiary, Perpetual Mortgage Services, which provides mortgage processing and settlement services to some of the country's leading lenders, has come under scrutiny from property lawyers and conveyancers following a bungled outsourcing deal with ANZ. Perpetual spokesman Michael Woods yesterday defended the business against the attack from the Australian Institute of Conveyancers (AIC) and the Law Institute of Victoria. "Perpetual Mortgage Services Pty Ltd does not engage in legal practice," Mr Woods said in an emailed statement to BusinessDaily. Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar. Related Coverage Perpetual under fire on ANZ deal Daily Telegraph, 2 days ago ANZ under fire over mortgage settlements Perth Now, 6 days ago Rush to withdraw slowing The Australian, 1 Dec 2009 ANZ reroutes mortgage processing The Australian, 8 Jul 2009 New pain for ANZ to top $300m Herald Sun, 8 Jul 2009 End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar. "Perpetual provides mortgage processing services for customers. To the extent that these services involve legal work of any kind, it is carried out by . . . qualified Australian lawyers." Thousands of ANZ customers have suffered delays and additional costs on settling property sales since December when ANZ hired Perpetual to settle transactions involving the bank's customers. AIC president Pauline Barrow is concerned that a legal minefield is appearing as more banks outsource settlement and other mortgage functions to third parties such as Perpetual, arguing that they are not licensed to handle legal work on behalf of banks. Ms Barrow believes Perpetual's mortgage servicing arm needs to operate as a registered legal practice or conveyancing business to comply with state laws across Australia. If the AIC's concerns are valid, ANZ's relationship with Perpetual may have implications for its ability to comply with outsourcing standards set by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority. ANZ spokesman Paul Edwards said the bank's "arrangement with Perpetual is fully compliant with APRA's outsourcing standards." Ms Barrow said conveyancers who were required to adhere to licensing rules were concerned about dealing with organisations that were not licensed. "We're having to deal with a third party when we should be dealing directly with the bank," she said. Mr Woods acknowledged that many ANZ customers had suffered as a result of problems with the new settlements systems since December. "Perpetual is aware that as a result of changes made by ANZ to centralise its mortgage processing, which included the engagement of Perpetual to provide mortgage processing services, some ANZ customers have experienced delay inconvenience," he stated in the email.
"ANZ has apologised for the difficulties. Perpetual is working with ANZ as part of the bank's program to improve its settlement performance and is confident these initial service issues are being quickly overcome."

Herald Sun

Lawyers line up ANZ

VICTORIAN property lawyers are demanding an urgent overhaul of ANZ's mortgage procedures following the bank's recent move to outsource home loan settlement functions to Perpetual.

In a damning letter sent to the bank last month, the Law Institute of Victoria's acting president Caroline Counsel highlights deficiencies in ANZ mortgage processes which she claims have "substantially undermined" the certainty of property sales.

The bank has since apologised to the LIV.

In the February 4 letter leaked to BusinessDaily, Ms Counsel states that ANZ and Perpetual have committed only limited resources to booking property settlements which has led to confusion and frustration for conveyancing lawyers and their clients.

"Law Institute of Victoria members have reported that there have been instances when the Perpetual representative has not attended settlement at the allocated time," Ms Counsel told ANZ in the letter.

"Settlement in such cases has, of course, not occurred at the allocated time, and this has necessitated the inconvenience of re-booking settlement."

ANZ outsourced settlement responsibilities to Perpetual Mortgage Services last year as part of a wider effort to bring its mortgage administration and settlement systems in line with industry standards.

However, the move has been disastrous with communication problems between the bank and Perpetual leading to delays for home buyers and sellers completing transactions.

The institute's list of complaints include:

SALE failures caused by Perpetual not meeting settlement deadlines.

"UNDULY long" waiting times for lawyers seeking information over the phone from the bank and Perpetual.

FAILURE by Perpetual to provide details of payments due by property buyers within 48 hours of agreed settlement dates.

Ms Counsel told the bank that Perpetual's inability to provide payout numbers before settlement days meant that settlements had to be postponed in many cases because there was not enough time for cheques to be drawn by purchasers.

"When settlements fail as a result of ANZ's processes, there are additional financial and emotional burdens imposed on parties," Ms Counsel told the bank in the letter.

"The LIV urges ANZ to address settlement process issues, as they substantially undermine the certainty of transactions for parties."

In a replying letter sent on February 24, ANZ's head of mortgages, Michael Bock, acknowledged that the deficient settlement procedures had caused inconvenience for solicitors and parties involved in property transactions.

"It is clear from feedback from the profession that the changes we introduced to our settlements process have caused frustration and, in certain circumstances, significant inconvenience for some solicitors, conveyancers and clients - and we sincerely apologise," Mr Bock told the LIV.

"We are working hard to fix these problems ... We understand your concerns, and ANZ is committed to making the necessary changes to ensure we meet your needs and clients' expectations for timely and efficient settlement of all purchases and discharges."

Mr Bock stated that ANZ had established a special team of senior executives to drive improvements to the group's mortgage processes.

The urgent change program will try to simplify settlement procedures by increasing phone contact staff and investment in new technology.

LIV chief executive Michael Brett-Young said conveyancing solicitors also experienced settlement issues with other banks but the problems were more profound at ANZ.

"We've had more complaints from our conveyancing solicitors about ANZ and we are confident that the other banks are meeting requirements to achieve timely and smooth settlements for clients," he said yesterday.

A Perpetual spokesman declined to comment on the LIV's concerns about its performance under the outsourcing deal with ANZ.


  • From:Herald Sun
  • March 10, 2010
  • Tuesday, March 16, 2010

    Perpetual flawed process impacts 3 banks

    Three more banks could face investor concern over flawed mortgage outsourcing deals with Perpetual Ltd that give rise to confusion over who has the legal authority to complete the transactions.

    An analyst says that Perpetual could lose as much as 10 per cent of its revenue if all three banks, National Australia Bank, AMP Bank Ltd and Bendigo and Adelaide Bank - in addition to ANZ Banking Group Ltd - drop their business with the fund manager over the flawed contracts.

    Perpetual on Monday confirmed that National Australia Bank's (NAB) HomeSide mortgage lending unit, AMP Bank and Bendigo and Adelaide Bank outsourced the processing of mortgage applications to its mortgage services business.

    Credit Suisse analyst Arjan Van Veen said in the unlikely event the banks broke their outsourcing contracts with Perpetual over the issue, Perpetual's total revenue would drop by 10 per cent.

    Perpetual spokesman Michael Woods on Monday confirmed to AAP that HomeSide, AMP Bank and Bendigo and Adelaide had business relationships regarding mortgage services with each of the three lenders.

    Mr Woods said Perpetual has been in talks with all four banks over claims made by the Australian Institute of Conveyancers (AIC) that Perpetual's staff are not legally qualified to act for banks for the purpose of completing mortgage settlements.

    "To the limited extent, these services in terms of what we're providing to the ANZ that involve legal work of any kind, it is carried out by appropriately qualified Australian legal practitioners," he said in an interview on Monday.

    Mr Woods was responding to concerns voiced by the AIC president Pauline Barrow that the outsourcing deals had caused confusion among property lawyers and conveyancers over whether banks or third-party administrators like Perpetual have legal authority to complete mortgage settlements.

    "If they're acting for the ANZ then we need to know under what authority do they act," Ms Barrow told AAP.

    "Is it an agency, or (do) they act under Power of Attorney? Where does the risk lie?

    We don't know how that role is being performed."

    "Whilst we're dealing directly with ANZ, then the risk remains with ANZ. But whilst we're dealing with a third party we have to question whether or not they have the ability to undertake the work they're doing because they're in a settlement process."

    Ms Barrow said HomeSide, AMP Bank and Bendigo and Adelaide Bank had outsourced mortgage processing to Perpetual while other banks had outsourced the back office function to SAI Global's Espreon settlement services and brokerage unit.

    "(They) have expanded the work they undertake to include legal work, (but) we're not sure whether or not they're working outside any acts or legislation."

    Commonwealth Bank and Westpac Banking Corporation process mortgage settlements in-house, she said.

    Ms Barrow said the banks involved in the dispute had not formerly consulted the AIC on the processing changes and were not following chain of title, which caused significant delays in mortgage settlements through faulty documentation.

    NAB spokeswoman Gillian Griffiths declined to comment on the matter, while AMP Bank's Amanda Wallace confirmed it outsourced new mortgage preparation and settlements to Perpetual and was happy with its service.

    "Like any outsourcing deal, we have service standards in place that we continually monitor and we're happy with the level of service Perpetual is delivering," she said.

    "We're not seeing any issues."

    Bendigo and Adelaide Bank and SAI Global did not respond to calls.


    Source ninemsn

    By Alison Bell

    Friday, February 19, 2010

    Orchestrating a harmonious system

    Orchestrating a harmonious system
    by MM Park, J Wallace, and IP Williamson
    published Victorian Law Institute Journal, vol 83(5) pp 50-53 (May 2009)

    ABSTRACT: the authors consider those changes to the Victorian Torrens system necessary or desirable to assist in bringing about an Australian harmonised (or even a uniform) system of land title registration.

    Wednesday, February 17, 2010

    NECS and Web Services

    In this NECSpress we tell you more about work being done to define the requirements for system-to-system communications in NECS.

    Industry stakeholders have made it clear that for NECS to be of value to them its functions must be accessible by Web Services from the outset. Web Services is the means by which NECS is integrated with the in-house case management and documentation systems used by conveyancing industry participants. It is an alternative to a person using a web browser to access NECS and it is expected that the majority of transactions completed using NECS will use Web Services.

    NECS is an industry system that relies for its viability on being suitable for use by a wide range of independent users with different systems. Those systems include purpose-built systems and proprietary systems supplied and maintained by third parties, many of which are already using Web Services to communicate with other external systems.

    Implementation of Web Services in an environment of many independent users and systems requires standardisation of both the content of messages exchanged between systems (Data Standard Requirements) and the means by which the messages are exchanged (Web Services Requirements). Without such standardisation NECS would have to be provisioned to service a large number of existing different Web Services implementations and message content interpretations which would significantly affect its viability and implementation time, and make it a very fragile system in operation.

    Standardisation of the content and means of exchange of Web Services messages requires all parties to collaborate in developing standards that all parties can implement with the minimum amount of alteration, re-testing and re-commissioning of existing systems. This work cannot be done without extensive stakeholder involvement and input.

    Data Standard Requirements

    Standardisation of the content of messages is the purpose of the National Electronic Conveyancing Data Standard (NECDS) being developed with the Lending Industry XML Initiative Ltd (LIXI). Read about this work here.

    A Working Group of LIXI members under the direction of a specially convened Management Group has developed draft requirements for the NECDS and most recently a single, controlled vocabulary for terms used in the NECS environment, including wherever possible their synonyms used in the various States and Territories. If you are a LIXI member you can access the requirements documentation here and the NECS Vocabulary here.

    Late last year the National Office with the assistance of Ajilon Australia Pty Ltd reviewed the draft requirements and supplemented them with a Message Use Case Specification. The requirements documentation consists of separate Operations and Administration & Maintenance requirements for NECS/Land Registry and Industry/NECS transactions and the Message Use Case Specification covers all four requirement sets. All of these documents are available for review and feedback here.

    These documents are drafts and are currently being reviewed by stakeholders. Following the review, it is expected that a first draft of the XML schema for NECS/Land Registry transactions will be commissioned.

    Web Services Requirements

    Standardisation of the means by which messages are exchanged between systems will allow NECS to communicate efficiently and reliably with the wide range of systems used by industry and government participants. Defining the most suitable requirements for Web Services in the NECS environment allows industry participants to get their systems ready for communicating with NECS. Read more about the reasons for this work here.

    In February 2009, the National Office commissioned Saratoga Professional Services Pty Ltd to consult with industry participants and define the technical and commissioning requirements for Web Services connecting NECS to external systems. Saratoga undertook extensive stakeholder consultation and developed requirements set out in the report dated August 2009 available here.

    In November 2009, the National Office commissioned Ajilon Australia Pty Ltd to extend and clarify the Web Services requirements necessary for the NECS environment. Ajilon’s report dated February 2010 is available here.

    If you are interested in the definition of Web Services in environments characterised by a diverse range of independent users and systems and would like to comment on any of the work done to date, we would like to hear from you here.

    Friday, February 05, 2010

    Verisign makes outlandish claims about EC's performance

    Verisign, an American company providing digital signing technology to Land Victoria's Electronic Conveyancing project has published a case study. There is not just the usual positive spin, but the case study makes some specific outlandish claims which are either just porky pies or I would be happy to personally challenge ECV / Verisign to a public demonstration to prove you cannot lodge a caveat electronically in 4 - 7 minutes.

    The case study, page 4, verbatim says -

    We’ve introduced electronic caveats — the process of issuing a financial lien on a property—the online processing of these is substantially faster than the legacy process; 4 to 7 minutes versus the time taken by an individual to travel to the office and wait in a queue to manually lodge the paper documents.”

    My personal experience as a subscriber is that you cannot lodge an electronic caveat in any less than 20 minutes. Here's a link to the screen shots for an actual case study of lodging a caveat ECV style. Dont be put off by the 57 screen shots, because that is what it takes. The last time I lodged a caveat electronically, it took precisely 26 minutes. Whilst you are counting the screen shots, ask yourself why am I digitally signing this transaction no less than 3 times?

    After lodging a few caveats electronically, our legal practice has reverted to the old fashioned of lodging paper caveats, which by our experience takes just 2-3 minutes. Print, check, sign, lodge by post.

    The case study goes on to make other unsubstantiated claims, such as the potential cost savings of $235 to $395 per transaction. If caveats are any guide, which they are, and caveats are the simplest Land Registry transaction to perform, I am simply overwhelmed by the cost savings / time savings claim.

    Brett Hayton
    Hayton Kosky Lawyers

    Tuesday, February 02, 2010

    Do we really need to speak the same language?

    Business-to-business integration (B2Bi) is old-hat. A robust technology to allow the systems of two (or more) business to be integrated. An archetypal example is a direct purchase order/invoicing system between business customers and their suppliers. In these transactions, orders and invoices are being exchanged automatically and electronically, the relevant data fields being extracted and populated into the relevant ERPS and other databases on each side. Simple stuff and relatively easy to achieve, once both parties agree on the channels and the document structures that are sent to each other (the ‘language’).

    The challenges with this approach arise when you have many-to-many relationships in a business ecosystem with lots of different suppliers and customers. Some solutions arise by mandate – the sheer market grunt of one or a few big players that dictate to everyone else what the rules are. But without such a driving force, you either need everyone to agree on some common standards for describing things like purchase orders and invoices, or you have to engineer custom parsing B2B interfaces for each relationship. Or, you just live with the friction and continue processing a subset of your orders via email or fax.

    In the case of ‘common standards’, the example of purchase orders and invoices seems achievable universally, because they are items that are, in their most raw forms, common to every business. While such standards might exist in certain industry pockets (RosettaNet for the chip manufacturing industry comes to mind), there is no universal standard for ecommerce transactions. Furthermore, the challenge becomes even more interesting (to us, at least!) when you go beyond the ‘simple’ of purchase orders and invoices to the ‘complex’ – other types of business forms processing.

    The home loan and conveyancing industry sectors, groups with which we’ve had some involvement already, are ecosystems in which the electronic exchanges are far more fiddly and fraught than online purchase order processing. The National Electronic Conveyancing System (NECS) will attempt to address some of the efficiency needs in Australia. In this case you have seven or eight state jurisdictional land titles offices, each with their own similar-but-different language for describing business activities, such as transfer of land title ownership. One NECS approach could be to mandate that all state offices use the same language for common transactions. But this would require massive and disruptive changes within those agencies, some of which have been processing documents their own way for over a hundred years.

    A more palatable alternative is to let the agencies continue to maintain their own language and create an 8-way dictionary - a giant look-up table, or “universal translator” that supports not only human readability, but (eventually) software integration as well. While a thorough and robust solution would accommodate modern semantic techniques and standards, it is a simple concept and certainly achievable.


    Reprint from
    FRICTIONLESS BUSINESS ECOSYSTEMS - NICTA

    Wednesday, January 27, 2010

    Is property going social?

    I’ve got a feeling something interesting is happening to the way real estate operates online in the UK. Anecqdotal evidence is emerging that social networks like Facebook and less conventional startups are perhaps starting to find the chink in the armour of the traditional property listing market here.

    In particular, Facebook Marketplace is starting to be used by niche poperty agencies like Pimlico Flats, more successfully than the usual online suspects like Craigslist and Gumtree. That latter site has had problems with other aspects of its site like, having to dump dating because of spam and scams. The same problems are plaguing Craigslist in the UK, and this is something that Pimlico Flats picks up on in a blog post on the subject. The ability to verify Facebook users turns out to weed out the scammers.

    At the same time, although Findaproperty and Rightmove remain strong, less conventional sites like Globrix, Nestoria, Zoopla (see below) and even niche social networks like Asmallworld are being used.

    Zoopla, which is venture backed, is now innovating with realtime auctions.

    Today it’s partnered with US auction site Real Estate Disposition to launch real-time online bidding for property auctions. Property agents will get a 0.25% of the purchase price (in addition to normal commission. About 150 homes (worth £15m) will get auctioned beginning on February 11 and auctions will be weekly thereafter – note that less than two homes a week are sold by the average estate agent branch in the UK.

    TechCrunch
    Mike Butcher on January 26, 2010

    Friday, January 22, 2010

    Impasse broken in national e-conveyancing system

    A PUBLIC company has been established to develop a national electronic conveyancing system, in a major breakthrough in the long-running battle for a uniform approach that will save hundreds of million of dollars.

    The company, to be called National E-Conveyancing Development Ltd (NECDL) will be chaired by Alan Cameron AM, a lawyer and a former chairman of the Australian Securities & Investments Commission.

    Three state governments, NSW, Victoria and Queensland, are owners of the company and have contributed $5 million in equity. Last year, the federal government rejected a request for $20m to establish the company.

    "There were always those in the background saying this will never happen," said Simon Libbis, the executive director of the National Electronic Conveyancing Office.

    One of the problems has been making sure every interested group -- the lawyers, states, conveyancers and bankers -- agreed on the best approach.

    "Being a public company, it has clear obligations," Mr Libbis said.

    Last year it was reported the proposal was at risk, after years in the making. The benefits of the scheme include cost reductions for both buyers and sellers.

    One of the key issues the company will resolve is the extent to which Victoria's already established infrastructure can be used to help create a new system that will satisfy all stakeholders, Mr Libbis said.

    NSW Land Minister Tony Kelly has been a strong supporter of the initiative and said yesterday he was "very pleased" with the latest developments.

    "I know this will cause great savings for anyone buying and selling a home," Mr Kelly said.

    He was confident the system would succeed now "everybody has a stake on the board" as there had been earlier tensions between the groups.

    While NSW, Queensland and Victoria were involved at this stage, Mr Kelly said this represented more than three-quarters of development in Australia and that the system would be fairly easy to extend to the other states once the scheme was up and running.

    The savings in having a national electronic system have been estimated by industry groups to be $250m a year.

    It is also possible the establishment of the company will help state governments qualify for $550m in commonwealth funding for undertaking 27 major reforms that have been endorsed by the Council of Australian Governments.

    Apart from Mr Cameron, six other non-executive directors will sit on the board, representing a variety of interests.

    They are Rowan Munchenberg, the executive general manager at Commonwealth Bank; John McIntyre, former president of the NSW Law Society; Geoffrey Adam, chief executive of the South Australian division of the Australian Institute of Conveyancers; Leigh Sanderson, former deputy director-general and general counsel of the NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet; David Smith, executive director and commissioner of the Queensland Treasury; and Chris McRae, executive director, Land Victoria, of the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment.

    Susannah Moran | The Australian

    Thursday, January 21, 2010

    New E-conveyancing entity formed

    NSW, Qld and Victoria have officially formed the new national e-conveyancing entity called National E-Conveyancing Development Ltd (NECDL).

    NECDL has been established and funded by the governments of Queensland, NSW and Victoria to progress the work previously being guided by the National Steering Committee. The company is chaired by Alan Cameron AM, a lawyer and former Chairman of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, who brings extensive business and governance skills to the company critical to its task. The other six non-executive directors are:

    • Rowan Munchenberg, representing the Australian Bankers’ Association, is Executive General Manager for Service Delivery of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia

    • John McIntyre, representing the Law Council of Australia, is a former President of the Law Society of NSW and a current member of its Property Law Committee

    • Geoffrey Adam, representing the Australian Institute of Conveyancers, is Chief Executive of the SA Division of the Australian Institute of Conveyancers

    • Leigh Sanderson, representing New South Wales, is a former Deputy Director-General and General Counsel of the NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet

    • David Smith, representing Queensland, is Executive Director and Commissioner of the Queensland Treasury

    • Chris McRae, representing Victoria, is Executive Director, Land Victoria of the Victoria Department of Sustainability and Environment.

    NECS will continue its work through a transition phase.

    further information eCommerce Report

    Thursday, January 14, 2010

    Hayton Kosky voted "best conveyancing lawyers"

    Hayton Kosky Lawyers have polled #1 property lawyers by the readers of Your Investment Property magazine.

    Your Investment Property is read widely by property investors and each year YIP has a readers poll voting in categories such as
    • Property Investment Advisor of the year
    • Buyers Agent of the year
    • Mortgage Broker of the year
    Hayton Kosky won the award as "Property Law Specialists of the Year" in recognition of the service the firm provides to investors, being a combination of upfront advice to investors before they sign a contract; use of technology in delivering the service; and recognition that this is still a people business and could not be done with out the back up of dedicated staff.

    The award is no small feat given there are literally thousands of law firms and conveyancing companies across Australia

    Saturday, January 02, 2010

    Electronic titling systems

    A recently published research paper by Benito Arruñada does a comparative study on electronic titling systems, covering: functioning systems of New Zealand and Ontario; proposed Australia and UK.

    Abstract

    Initiatives in electronic conveyancing and registration show the potential of new technologies to transform such systems, reducing costs and enhancing legal security. However, they also incur substantial risks of transferring costs and risks among registries, conveyancers and rightholders, instead of reducing them; entrenching the private interests of conveyancers, instead of increasing competition and disintermediating them; modifying the allocation of tasks in a way that leads in the long term to the debasement of registries of rights with indefeasible title into mere recordings of deeds; and empowering conveyancers instead of transactors and rightholders, which increases costs and reduces security. Fulfilling the promise of new technologies in both costs and security requires strengthening registries’ incentives and empowering rightholders in their interaction with registriesr.

    1. Introduction

    Electronic automation has made possible new ways of contracting, registering and settling transactions. In essence, technology has enabled the automation of many tasks performed by conveyancers when preparing and authenticating contracts and communicating with each other and with the registries. Many registries’ tasks have also been automated, including not only communication and archiving but also some routine compliance checks.

    The least problematic changes are the use of information technologies for archiving and accessing information, by keeping the register in digital form and providing online access to the elements of the register that are open to conveyancers, parties or the general public. A second step is to make it possible for users and/or professionals to lodge documents at the registry electronically. In principle, these documents could be the digital version of those in the paper system. However, to fully exploit the potential of the new technologies, electronic lodgment is often accompanied by substantial standardization of documents and transactions. To this effect, the structure of the transactions has to be carefully examined and forms preapproved by the registry.1 For these standardized transactions, parties themselves or their legal representatives complete the forms in an electronic workspace by entering the specific data on the transaction they want to contract and register (e.g., the identity of the buyer or mortgagee, the name and incorporators of a new company), often “pre-populating” them with data from registry’s databases that identify each property and its owner or identify each company in subsequent filings. If necessary, documents in the workspace can be electronically shared by parties and their representatives for review, amendment and approval, which is useful in conveyancing. After all parties have granted their consent, the document is submitted electronically for registration. The most ambitious systems also provide for transferring funds between parties.

    The most problematic issues relate to: (1) who is allowed to lodge documents at the registry; (2) the nature of the review performed by the registry staff before registration; and, encompassing both of these aspects, (3) how the new system ensures that rightholders have granted their consent.

    First, to speed up reform, reduce opposition to reform and, allegedly but doubtfully, enhance security, the new system may reserve access to professional conveyancers, by granting them exclusive lodgment access to the registry. For example, in New Zealand, Singapore and British Columbia, only conveyancers may lodge documents electronically. Alternatively, the system may be open to other participants, at least to those who register for that purpose. This is the case of Ontario and the English 2002 Land Registration Act which allows “do it yourself conveyancing”.

    Second, lodged documents may be subject to a variable mix of automatic and human preregistration checks for compliance. Most systems have instituted electronic lodgment but retain manual review by registrars before registration. The idea of allowing conveyancers not only to lodge their instruments electronically but also to alter the register after automatic controls by an “electronic registrar” but without manual intervention by the registry staff (often called “agency registration”) is generally rejected or only applied to simple transactions. Thus, the pioneer Electronic Land Registration System in Ontario maintains ultimate control by registrars, and the same solution has been adopted in British Columbia and Singapore (Low, 2005). The system under development in England also introduces validation by the registry prior to execution and completion. The New Zealand Landonline system is exceptional in that conveyancers directly alter the register subject only to automatic checks for some impediments to registration, such as caveats and pending dealings, with no manual intervention by registry staff prior to registration. Thus, it provides the paradigm case of agency registration.

    Third, reforms introducing electronic conveyancing differ in how they ensure that rightholders have granted their consent to the transaction. Expediency has led some reformers also provide for transferring funds between parties. not only to allow but to actually require conveyancers to sign the documents electronically on behalf of their clients; clients sign only the authorization documents to be kept by conveyancers. (Interestingly, in some countries conveyancers were happy to sign on behalf of their clients while in others they were opposed to bearing the risks of such representation. A major factor here seems to be previous practice, as both solutions are in place in paper-based systems.3) Alternatively, the system may require the digital signature of rightholders on any document, lodged, which is safer. This may allow parties to dispense with witnesses, including conveyancers, for authenticating purposes. Security may also be enhanced by having the system notify rightholders and even request their consent before registering any relevant alteration in their rights.

    The rest of the paper examines in more detail some systems of electronic conveyancing and registration at different stages of development with a view to obtaining guidance on these issues. It focuses especially on the New Zealand experience which, as a lone example of agency registration, is an exception to the general policy of retaining manual control of registration.


    Link to the paper

    Sunday, December 20, 2009

    SAI to move to 100% in Espreon

    Source: News Bites

    SAI Global Ltd is seeking to compulsorily acquire the remaining 0.8% of Espreon Ltd, following the company reaching 99.2% of ownership after the acquisition of Vectis's 36.4% shareholding in Espreon.

    The consideration for the 34.5 million Espreon shares acquired from Vectis comprised a cash payment of $11.7 million and 3.3 million new SAI Global shares.

    STOCK DASHBOARD: December 18, 2009

    Wednesday, December 09, 2009

    Online Property Auctions - yet to take off

    Online property auctions mean new ways of selling, novel challenges for the players, and questions for the regulators, but it could be the way of the future.

    Melbourne on Saturday is like nowhere else in the world. That is when two of the city's most enduring cultural activities play out — Aussie rules and home auctions.

    But just as AFL has had to compete with the rising popularity of soccer, Melbourne's enduring love affair with auctions could be challenged by a new concept.

    Online property auctions have long been predicted as the next step for real estate, an industry in which buyers, sellers and agents have embraced internet marketing.

    Property has been sold in Australia for some time through web-based negotiation systems such as eBay, which currently has 15 mostly rural homes for sale, including a $665,000 house in Penrith, NSW.

    The new year will bring at least three new online home auction players onto the market, including one based in Melbourne. All will take a different approach to selling, raising a host of questions for regulators. But will any of them take off?

    There is no doubt the industry is yet to harness the full selling potential of the web. However, attempts to catch up with the booming online trade for retail goods have so far fallen short of revolutionary.

    In February, West Australian property site GeeWizAuctions.com claimed its first sale when a modest home in suburban Perth attracted several bids over a five-week cyber-auction.

    Agent Laura Grimes of Supersell Realty said her "low-ball opening bid created huge interest" and while the property failed to reach its reserve price, she negotiated afterwards to get the sale.

    "There was a huge saving in costs for the seller," she said. The site at present has 13 properties for sale, all from the same agency. It follows Queensland-based 2bid2.com.au that launched last year and operates in a similar way.

    Both sites sign up vendors through real estate agents. But unlike GeeWiz, an auction on this site runs for just an hour, starting when a registered bidder makes a first offer.

    With Brisbane's property market all but dead, the advantage for vendors is that hard-to-sell properties can stay listed indefinitely while they wait for an offer.

    Several well-known agencies have a scattering of properties available on the site, including Ray White, LJ Hooker and Elders.

    He said there was no greater risk of dummy bidding than at a public auction, with bidders required to view the property and register their details.

    However, Real Estate Institute of Victoria chief executive Enzo Raimondo said the trend towards online was being tempered by user caution in what is often the biggest transaction of their lives.

    "If you buy a house online or at an auction you should be confident that the same laws and protections apply," he said. "At this point they don't.

    "The Sale of Land Act and the Estate Agents Act do not cater for physical and online sales . . . which is why the REIV asked the State Government to review its laws some 19 months ago."

    Consumer Affairs Victoria is conducting a review. The REIV (the peak body for real estate agents) is particularly scathing of a website being formulated in Canberra called Uber Estate.

    It will be the first to allow sellers and developers to list without the intermediary of an agent. Bidders will verify their identity through the same software used by online gambling sites.

    "There's no chance of anyone being dodgy or fraudulent," founder Mark Higgins said. "It gives you as the seller total control in a way that's more transparent than anything you see on the weekend."

    He said that while bidders must be Australian, the online format would be accessible to interstate and expatriate buyers.

    Online-specialist agent Paul Osborne said Uber Estate would struggle because web portals such as domain.com.au excluded private sellers.

    So it seems Melbourne's Saturday pastimes of a street auction in the morning and footy in the afternoon are safe for now.

    Online auction sites mentioned

    GeeWizAuctions.com WA
    2bid2.com.au Qld
    Uber Estate ACT


    Author: Marika Dobbin
    Date: December 7, 2009

    Thursday, November 26, 2009

    Why does electronic conveyancing work in NZ and not Australia?



    This comparative table explains a lot of things




    In summary, New Zealand's electronic land registry system works.

    Australia has the problem that it has 8 separate land title systems, rules and governing legislation. The banks work cross all borders. They cannot afford to buy into 8 electronic systems and also cope with 8 legacy manual systems.

    For any government system of electronic conveyancing to work in Australia, the barriers to electronic conveyancing must be removed,


    Elimination of the paper Title

    The first barrier is the paper duplicate certificate of title. In NZ this was abolished in 2002, 4 years prior to introducing the e-Dealing system in 2006. It is an imperative the Australian jurisdictions introduce uniform legislation for the total elimination of the duplicate paper certificate of title. Wasn't this the system that Torrens had in mind in the first place in 1858? Yet what we have seen so far from NSW and Victoria is suggested hybrid systems of titles (a mix of paper and electronic). From the government's perspective, if the strategic goal is to automate the update of the Land Registry, first, the paper title must go.


    Rationalisation of multiple jurisdictions

    A single Land Register? Now this will never happen and e-conveyancing from a government point of view will always be hampered by

    • multiple jurisdictions, rules and legislation
    • multiple land registries
    • politics of change

    Creating a single land register makes sense, but it can be assumed "it wont happen in our lifetime". The Law Council of Australia is promoting the harmonisation of land laws in Australia, but State politics being what it is, again it looks like it wouldn't happen without a national referendum giving the Commonwealth power to be responsible for land management. The State's power to manage land is tied in with its powers to tax land and collect duties for land transfers.

    The approach of a single State going it alone has proved one thing, this didn't work. Victoria tried this and was brought to its knees when the major banks withdrew their support.

    However, where there is precedence there is hope. There used to be six separate State based stock exchanges, whereas they were all replaced by the one Australian Stock Exchange and the States acceded control of companies legislation to the Commonwealth Corporations Law. We can only live in hope.


    Settlement

    Its a straight forward observation but Government is responsible for running Land Registries and land registers. Governements have never been involved in settlements. Why the change?

    In NZ, settlements are still organised between conveyancers and lenders. New Zealands e-Dealing system still respects the boundary between industry and government functions.

    Yet in Australia there still persists this strategic goal to combine the settlements with registration. Yet this approach is flawed on several levels. Logically this approach cannot work unless every lender and every conveyancer was using the system. A 10% uptake is not enough. Government would need to mandate the system. So why the change? The lesson is government needs to remain focused on registration, not settlements.


    Lessons from New Zealand

    We can therefore see why New Zealand's phased approach has worked.

    1. Single register
    2. No duplicate title
    3. E-dealing. (settlements not part of the system)
    4. Mandate


    More importantly, NZ had the foresight to deal with the elimination of the paper title as the first priority issue, which they successfully did in 2002, 4 years prior to introducing the e-Dealing system in 2006.

    Elimination of the duplicate certificate of title is the greatest barrier to electronic registration systems. It is pointless for government to build an electronic registration system unless the duplicate is abolished. In Victoria, we have had a preview of the pCT and eCT, which is a hybrid system of paper and electronic titles. It just does not seem to make sense, just like the concept of being half pregnant.


    Australia needs to focus on the following priorities

    • Elimination of the duplicate certificate of title
    • Introduce the standard xml title search
    • Government restricts its side to registration matters
    • Industry to develop its own collaborative systems between lenders and conveyancers

    The vision is industry has its own framework of collaborative systems (shared workspaces, visibility of loan statuses and settlement booking systems). In addition, industry's strategic goal ought to be Unattended Settlements. An industry system of Unattended Settlements would therefore seamlessly dovetail with government e-registration systems.

    So you have to give credit to the kiwis. They have shown the aussies a thing or two about making electronic conveyancing seem easy. As it should be.

    Tuesday, November 24, 2009

    ANZ to shed staff as it restructures mortgage processing

    ANZ is to shed 248 back office positions as it restructures its mortgage processing operations nationwide.

    The job losses will come as the bank rationalises its network of mortgage centres in Sydney, Brisbane, South Australia, Western Australia, Northern Territory and Tasmania. About 150 jobs will absorbed by external providers contracted to take over certain document processing activities.

    Others jobs will be relocated to Melbourne, while approximately 40 roles are expected to be exported to the bank's offshore processing centre in Bangalore, India.

    In March, the bank ran into a political storm after it appeared to confirm speculation that it was to shift 500 jobs from its Melbourne back office and technology hub to its offshore development centre in Bangalore, which currently employs 3000 staff.

    Responding to the political sensitivities, the bank in June committed to spend $10 million on a new support package for staff affected by offshoring.

    Friday, November 20, 2009

    Call-Centre Workers Suffer High Stress

    WORKERS in the fast-growing call-centre industry face high, and unique, levels of stress, a survey shows.

    More than 250,000 people, or about one in 40 employed Australians, work in call centres and more than a third are always or often stressed at work.

    RMIT academic Ruth Barton, who conducted the survey for the Australian Services Union, said high stress resulted in high turnover of staff and absenteeism.

    Among factors causing stress were unrealistic performance targets, abuse from customers, high call volumes, repetitive work, concern their jobs would go overseas and excessive monitoring from management.

    Dr Barton said the industry was unique as workers had little control over the pace of their work. That could even extend to feeling under pressure not to go to the toilet. About 1500 call-centre workers were surveyed.

    BEN SCHNEIDERS - The Age 19 Nov 09

    Wednesday, November 11, 2009

    Monash professor to head property laws review

    VICTORIAN Deputy Premier and Attorney-General Rob Hulls has nominated the person to head a state-wide review of property law.

    Monash University associate professor Pam O’Connor will oversee the first stage of the property law review that is set to update the state’s “archaic property laws and cut the mountains of red tape that surrounded them”, Hulls said.

    “The Property Law Act is one of the most complicated, outdated and archaic pieces of legislation in Victoria and it is crying out for review,” Hulls said.

    “The first stage of the review will also look at easements and covenants, which involve things like rights of way, sewerage and drainage, and affect most homeowners.”

    Dr O’Connor’s appointment comes after Mr Hulls announced in August that the Victorian Law Reform Commission would be asked to review the state’s property laws and sought expressions of interest for the part-time Commissioner.

    Hulls said the Property Law Review was a bold first step in the journey to overhaul Victoria’s property laws, which have for too long tied up people in red tape.

    Dr O’Connor is associate dean at the Faculty of Law at Monash University, where she teaches property law.

    “Dr O’Connor has demonstrated she has a strong conceptual grasp of the tasks required to fulfil this position, the strategic vision required to perform the review and combined with her broad knowledge of property law she is a very capable inaugural Commissioner of this review.”

    11 November 2009 | by The New Lawyer

    Monday, October 26, 2009

    Accused Cash-For-Documents Scammer Bailed

    A woman accused of faking documents in Melbourne’s biggest international student cash-for-certificates scam has been released on $100,000 bail.

    Chinese born XiaoYi Huang of Carnegie faced Melbourne Magistrates Court accused of presenting fake documents on behalf of international students applying for skilled migration visas to Australia.

    The petite and pretty 24-year-old allegedly tried to pass off false education qualifications, work references and skills assessments to the Department of Immigration on behalf of her clients.

    She was arrested on Friday, and her Queen Street offices raided by members of the Australian Federal Police Identity Security Strike Team and federal immigration officers.

    Huang was charged with five offences relating to sham visa applications, including possessing 75 blank templates, that were allegedly to be used to create bogus documents.

    Huang appeared in court for a brief hearing, with an interpreter, before being granted bail, which was unopposed by the prosecution.

    Magistrate Amanda Chambers released her on bail with a $100,000 surety, and a set of special conditions requested by the prosecution.

    Huang was ordered not to interfere with prosecution witnesses except for her business partner. She was ordered not to leave Australia, to surrender her passport and not to apply for another, and not to be involved in the preparation of any visa applications.

    She is due to face court again in February.

    The Age Mex Cooper with Chris Johnston