Real estate agent again

[Wongo]

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/10/05/1096949493724.html?oneclick=true

Sef Gonzelas murdered his entire family in their house and a real estate agent has managed to sell the haunted house. Knowing that the buyers would regret it when they find out the story of the house. Knowing that it is morally wrong but yet they still did it. Are they really that bad? :mad: :mad:

I have 2 questions for you.
1. What do you think of the real estate agent?
2. Would you be brave enough to live in that house?

Personally I would never ever trust a real estate agent. They are dishonest and greedy. I reckon scientist should stop using mice for scientific experiment because real estate agent seems to be a better alternative.

There is no way I would move in that house. It is just too much and I would not be sleeping well at night.

[Grunt]

1. Mostly they are slime but I've met a few that are reasonably straight up and down.
2. Not a problem. I don't believe in ghosts.

[Wood Borer]

What do I think of that Real Estate Agent? The answer is in the question - a Real Estate Agent. They are mostly slime.

My cousin is one, I left a message on his answering machine 26 years ago and the @#$%* still hasn't returned the call. Back then we didn't have 2 bob to rub together so I suspect he didn't see any personal advantage calling me back. Genuine friendship seems foreign to these scum.

Would I live in the house? Not by choice but then perhaps our block of land or house was a massacre place years ago but we don't know about it. What about Europe and Asia and Africa where millions of people have died in wars. People must be living on that land. I am not sure they are aware of it though.

[silentC]

I agree that the new buyers certainly had a right to know before they bought the house. I don't think that what the agent did was illegal in any way, so maybe their only recourse is to sue on the grounds of the shock they got when they found out. Not a lawyer, so can't say. The agent was probably unethical in concealing it but that wouldn't surprise too many people.

The thing is, there is nothing physically wrong with the house. If you didn't know about what happened there, it would make no difference. It's something that lives only in the concience of the people who know about it: the agent, the vendor, the neighbours etc. Unless you believe in ghosts that is.

From the vendor's point of view, do they have the right to get a fair price for the house and land, or should they accept the fact that it will never sell for what it's worth? Not a very good situation for them.

Would I live there? It probably wouldn't bother me too much. Friends of ours bought a house once. A policeman friend told us that the previous owner had hung himself in the lounge room - he knew this because he had attended the scene. Neither of us told our friends - would you? They were blissfully ignorant and never found out. We stayed one night and my wife says she heard noises. I wonder if she would have heard them if she didn't know.

Assuming you didn't build your house, do you know what has happened in it in the past? I've lived in some pretty old houses in Sydney - who know's what went on between those walls?

[craigb]

While I agree with all of the above sentiments, I wonder what would be the purchasers reaction if the vendor said "Righto, because of what's occurred in this house we'll sell it to you for $200k less than its market value."

Call me a cynic but I reckon that the fear of ghosts would suddenly diminish somewhat.

[Wongo]

I am not a religious person nor do I believe in ghost and evil spirit. I just feel uncomfortable after knowing the murder case and seeing the images of the family from the media.

Silent, I agree with you 100%. I don’t think they have done anything wrong by the book. But not everything by the book is morally right.

Craig, unfortunately the vendor did not tell "what’s occurred in the house" and the couple did say that they would not move in even if it was free.

[jackiew]

some places and some physical things can give me the heebie jeebies ... was given quite a nice ear-ring that gives me the creeps ... you couldn't pay me to wear it ... presumably the purchasers of the house had good feelings about the house.

Just because someone dies badly somewhere doesn't mean to say they are going to hang around and persecute the next occupants.

I found out after I'd paid the deposit on my house that a big apartment block was planned for the bottom of my garden ( but no plans had been submitted to council so my due diligence ( which obviously wasn't diligent enough :( ) didn't show it up ). The owners definately knew as they'd been shown the plans ( this has been confirmed by the neighbours). The Agent probably knew.

If it ever gets built ( lets hope the land owner goes belly up first from paying interest on the land when there is no market for apartments at the moment) I'm up for 2 years of 6 days a week noise from 7am. Would I have bought the house if I'd known. maybe. but I'd certainly not have paid as much for it. So I can quite understand the new owners feeling aggrieved.

Morally they should have been told. Legally - another matter entirely.

[craigb]

I am not a religious person nor do I believe in ghost and evil spirit. I just feel uncomfortable after knowing the murder case and seeing the images of the family from the media.

Silent, I agree with you 100%. I don’t think they have done anything wrong by the book. But not everything by the book is morally right.

Craig, unfortunately the vendor did not tell "what’s occurred in the house" and the couple did say that they would not move in even if it was free.

Wongo,

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. They should have been told. Would they have used the information as a negotiating tool? Perhaps not but maybe they would have if they'd known up front.

Would I want to live there? No but not only because of what's occured there but because it's a really ugly house IMO.

Cheers

Craig

[LineLefty]

forget lawyers, real estate agents - general - are duplicitous and sleazfy by nature. The few that aren't must get frustrated at stories like this.

Why anyone would want to do that job is beyond me. No way I'd be wearing a suit on sundays.

As a case in point, have a look at this geezer, he's head of Ray White WA and his face is plastered over the West Australian on saturdays:

Would you trust this man?

[simon c]

I like to compare real estate agents and used car salesmen.

I have a lot more respect for used car salesmen because they take the risk. They buy a car from one person and sell it to another. Any profit is entirely at their risk, if they buy a lemon, then they are stuck with it. Whereas real estate agents just take a commission with no risk. If a property doesn't sell or goes for a cut down price, then they just make a smaller profit rather than facing a potential loss.

Having said that, I have only bought one house in Australia and the agent ws great. Very honest, told both sides what the deal was and negotiated a price that was in both sides interests. The property had been passed in a few months earlier and we were the only interetsed partyy. I would be happy to recommend him and in fact I will: Alan Bramich from Fletchers in the Melbourne Eastern Suburbs.

[jackiew]

its interesting comparing the approach ( and costs ) of real estate agents in uk against here.

selling a house in uk about 2 years ago ... didn't pay for advertising (advertising included house being on internet, in the window of the real estate agent with interior and exterior shots, in local paper a few times ) ... agent showed people round as I had to come back here before it sold ( normally the householder shows people round ) ... no open for inspections ... inspection by appointment only fee was 1% - no sale no fee

when you want to buy you go round registering your details with lots of agents .. they give you sheets on what they've got at the moment .. and if you live in another town will send you regular info on new properties. If you've no house to sell then you are welcomed with open arms because it means there is no "chain" below you. In Uk you end up with a chain of buyers all having to exchange contracts on the same day. It took my sister 9 months to sell her house to someone because that person wasn't at the bottom of the chain and her buyers kept dropping out.

buying a house here ( before everything softened) was a very frustrating experience. Could I get an agent to actually take my details .... no way, "we don't do that". Not even when they'd seen me bid at auction was an agent interested in taking my details or letting me know about their other properties. Whole onus is on you to run round trying to find what is on the market.

Can't make the open for inspection time?.... tough luck ... agents aren't prepared to ring the vendor and ask for a private inspection.

Want to put an offer in on a house? The Agent can refuse to pass the offer on to the vendor ( several weeks later the agent rang me back and said "they'll accept your offer" .... my answer "sorry mate what offer, I've just bought another house"). I always thought that you put an offer in and the vendor says yes or no and if they say no you either up your offer or walk away. According to the real estate institute of victoria ( I know because I rang up and asked ) the agent has no obligation to pass on offers to vendors!!!!

I'm sure there are plenty of real estate agents who do try and do a good job but I'm also sure that there are plenty who were rolling in money and treating both buyers and sellers with contempt when the market was on the up but I reckon they are going to suffer now the market is on the way down.

[Ben from Vic.]

From the vendor's point of view, do they have the right to get a fair price for the house and land, or should they accept the fact that it will never sell for what it's worth? Not a very good situation for them.

Ah, the vendor's are dead, so no, it's not a very good situation for them. :eek:

It's a bit creepy though.

Not sure either way, but if it was a bargin, I don't think I'd pass it up.


Ben.

[echnidna]

If its real cheap I would buy it.

[Sturdee]

I have 2 questions for you.
1. What do you think of the real estate agent?
2. Would you be brave enough to live in that house?


1. That agent did his job very well. He is hired by the seller to sell the house and he has no right, legally or morally, to say anything that could hurt the sellers prospects in a sale. In fact if he had told the buyer the seller could sue him. The property market, like everything else, is buyer beware. If the buyer had been diligent they would have known. It is their own fault if now the purchaser pulls out and loose their deposit.

2. Yes, just because people died, however badly, in that house,it is not haunted. Most older houses have had people dying in it. FYI I bought my house from my parents. In our bedroom firstly my father died and then later my mother and no doubt at some stage me. This did not make it haunted and we don't have any problems sleeping.


Peter.

[LineLefty]

Sturdee,

you're not a real estate agent are you?

I understand where you're coming from but sheesh, it's still dishonest in most peoples eyes

[echnidna]

I agree with Sturdee!

[Iain]

Some people would actually find it fascinating to live in such a place and probably pay for the privelege, but with agaents and ethics where do you draw the line.
Why are the vendors selling, they have separated and divorce is iminent, what an opening for a low offer and a short settlement.
Tossed that one in so you can have a rethink on ethics.
I'm not an agent and I dislike most but when we bought our place at auction the agent asked if we wanted to take the key and have a look ourselves or have him with us, we opted for the former.
The place was run down and vacant and we had an opportunity to estimate how much it would cost to restore the house without him looking at his watch.
When we arrived on auction day we knew what we were prepared to pay and put in the low winning bid, two years on the place is nearly completed and I appreciate the agents willingness to allow us this option as there were no surprises.
I find that most people can see what is in front of them and cannot probe any deeper beyond the veneer.

[simon c]

1. That agent did his job very well. He is hired by the seller to sell the house and he has no right, legally or morally, to say anything that could hurt the sellers prospects in a sale. In fact if he had told the buyer the seller could sue him. The property market, like everything else, is buyer beware. If the buyer had been diligent they would have known. It is their own fault if now the purchaser pulls out and loose their deposit.

2. Yes, just because people died, however badly, in that house,it is not haunted. Most older houses have had people dying in it. FYI I bought my house from my parents. In our bedroom firstly my father died and then later my mother and no doubt at some stage me. This did not make it haunted and we don't have any problems sleeping.


Peter.

Not sure I agree with the first point in general. A seller can't mis-represent a sale and deliberately omiting to tell somebody a critical point that you were aware of is not acceptable. It's like the tobacco companies knowing that their product was cancer causing and addictive and hiding the fact. However, in this case I agree as it is questionable as to whether this information is really relevant.

And I totally agree with your second point. Most old houses probably had somebody die in them. If we were worried about ghosts then nobody whould ever set foot in a hospital as millions of people must die there.

[Sturdee]

Firstly I am not a real estate agent but a semi retired Accountant and having spent my working career firstly in a bank then a large restaurant ( Swagman ) an accounting firm and then a private golf club. Personally I dislike the real estate agents I happen to know and I don't trust them.

Nevertheless the fact remains that real estate agents are employed by the sellers to represent their, and only their, interests. They are paid by the seller not the purchaser. They are required to get the best price for their principal not a lower price by disclosing any defects or other matter that may reduce the price or saleability.

The only time that they may disclose any fact detrimental to the seller 's interest is when required by law and only then are they protected against any legal action by the seller.

This may not be what you want to read but that is the law in relation to master and agent. The way the law is now that agent could not have ethically or legally disclosed the fact of the murders and thereby reduce the sale price obtained.

The other point that I can not understand is when people make the biggest investment in their lives they fail to make the most basic enquiries into what they are buying before they enter a contract.

Why don't they engage their own agent to act on their behalf to investigate and negotiate on their behalf. If they buy a used car they get a RACV report or take a mechanic to check the car over. If they spend say $ 800,000 to buy a house they take no expert, builder or otherwise, with them. Relying on a solicitor, after having entered a contract, is only good if you had the right clauses inserted in the contract.


I know this may seem cynical but over the years I have seen so many stupid examples like this one that I have become immune to this socalled ethical argument when they are unhappy but they never seem to complain when it suits them.


Peter.

[craigb]

its interesting comparing the approach ( and costs ) of real estate agents in uk against here.

selling a house in uk about 2 years ago ... .

Yes but Jackie, you live here now.

With the greatest respect, how they do things in the UK, USA or Outer Mongolia is totally irrelevent.

Maybe we don't have "worlds best practice" when it comes to buying and selling real estate but, as with a lot of other things, that's just the way it's done here.

Craig

[Gumby]

let's put this in perspective.

There are no dishonest cops??

There are no dishonest politicians?

There are no dishonest lawyers?

There are no dishonest doctors bulk billing to their hearts content?

Ther are no dishonest chemists dispensing illegal drugs?

Come on people, stop generalising. People are people. There are honest ones and dishonest ones.

Line lefty, what do you do for a living? Are there dishonest people in your line of work and if so, does that make you immediately dishonest?

Nuf said.

[DanP]

There are no dishonest cops??


NUP.



:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[silentC]

Ah, the vendor's are dead, so no, it's not a very good situation for them.
I think you'll find that the vendor - Gonzales' grandmother and will executor Amelita Claridades - is very much alive. Or she was at last report. ;)

[Wongo]

It is probably one of the most horrifying murder cases in recent time. The way they were killed, the media coverage and the images. It happened only a couple years back and it is still so fresh.

It is slightly different from say “your grandfather passed away peacefully in his bed 20 years ago”. Or “someone you don’t know got shot 40 years ago”.

Or maybe I am just a wuss.

Are all real estate agents dishonest? Probably no. I was just having a go at them. Don’t we all enjoy that from time to time?

[Wood Borer]

Wongo,

You are so forgiving. I judge people by their actions and the actions of all the Real Estate agents I have met places them in the self centred rude cheating category.

If I ever meet one that whose actions are to the contrary that Real Estate agent will be doing them all a favour.

Sorry to sound like sour grapes on this one but like I said I can only judge them by their actions.

[jackiew]

Yes but Jackie, you live here now.

With the greatest respect, how they do things in the UK, USA or Outer Mongolia is totally irrelevent.

Maybe we don't have "worlds best practice" when it comes to buying and selling real estate but, as with a lot of other things, that's just the way it's done here.

Craig

I'm not saying the way things are done in UK is 100% better ( the chain situation is an absolute nightmare for buyers for a start) I'm just pointing out that real estate agents in uk seem to make a fairly healthy living with sellers paying them a lot less money for a lot more work. Obviously being ripped off by real estate agents when you sell a house is traditional here so nothing can be learned from elsewere :)

I can't believe that it is in a seller's best interest ( and sturdee has quite rightly pointed out that agents work for the seller ) to refuse to put forward an offer to a potential buyer or to not keep any information on people who are actively looking and in a postion to buy a house in their area. Other than establishing a price ( and you can pay a valuer to do that ) - sticking up a board and putting some adverts in the paper mostly agents here don't seem to do anything but sit back and wait for their commission.

Even passing on basic information about a house for sale seems to be beyond some agents. Sample conversations in Real Estate Agents Offices

"I can't tell from the description or the picture - is it a garage or a carport with a door on the front?". answer "I don't know you'll have to go to the open for inspection". Can't get to the open for inspection ... tough luck.

"Can you tell me what the guide price is". Answer "No" So I'm going to take time off work to go and view a house which may not be in my price range. I don't think so. I'm going to get a deposit cheque together made out to the agent's trust fund and rock up to an auction where the first bid is going to be over my maximum. I don't think so. But the house could have been in my price range. I could have gone to see it and fallen in love with it. I'm not going to buy it if I don't go and see it, and I'm not going to see it unless I'm reasonably sure that it meets my needs.

I hate those real estate agents adverts where the picture of the agent and the name of the agent takes up half of the page and the rest of it is waffle about birds singing and how close it is to the local park. They forget to tell you if its got a garage, sometimes they don't even tell you how many bedrooms the place has got. So some poor seller has shelled out mega bucks for an advert that advertises the agent and doesn't advertise THEIR house.

One of the agents in the eastern suburbs has revamped their logos and signs. They now have an arty-farty board where 1/4 of it is lime green with unreadable script and the rest is photos of the inside of the house. How many bedrooms has it got .. who cares ... obviously not the potential buyer.
End of rant.

[TassieKiwi]

The agent's responsibility is to get the best price for the vendor. Full stop. Wouldn't you want him to do this for you?


As to the 'slimy estate agent', I agree that many are only interested in their cut, and hold the 'average joe vendor' in contempt, using the facct that you only buy/sell a few times in one life to feed all sorts of cr@p to you.

Neil Jenman gets a big bouquet from me with 'The Jenman Way"

[craigb]

Wow Jackie, you must have had even worse experiences with agents than I have :)

I've usually found that they're happy enough to give you a "price guide" even if it does bear no relation to reality. :rolleyes:

You have to see it from the vendor's point of view too when it comes to inspections.

Selling a house is a real pain and the thought of an agent just dropping in willy nilly with somebody who MAY be interested in your property is enough to give you nightmares.

If the property is vacant then fair enough, but it's hard enough to keep the house up to scratch for the weekly open day.

I've met one or two agents that were o.k. Most of them are pond life IMO.

Craig

[jackiew]

the thought of an agent just dropping in willy nilly with somebody who MAY be interested in your property is enough to give you nightmares.
Craig

I think the best deal here is that a time mutually acceptable to buyer and seller be arranged for inspection. It isn't actually essential to have an agent there when you look round if the owner is there ... although in these days of home invasions its probably not a bad thing. I certainly think its quite acceptable for an owner/agent to request photo id of someone who is going to go into someone else's home and look round.

I had the interesting experience of looking round a home via a Jenman agent ... the owners were there but I wasn't allowed to talk to them directly ... so we had the ridiculous situation where I asked the agent a question he went over to them where they were standing in the garden and asked them the question ... listened to the reply .... relayed it back to me ... i then asked for clarification ..........

I'm going to inspect a house in my street during my lunch break. It seems totally bizarre to me that with no intention of buying I can go and have a sticky beak at someone else's house, but, as the owners obviously are happy to have all and sundry poke their noses in I shall avail myself of the opportunity.

[craigb]

I don't want to be there to answer questions when somebody is inspecting my property.

That's what I'm paying an agent for. To deal with the buyer and get me the best price possible.

Although in Sydney, most houses are still sold at auction, so it's the agent's job to get more than one punter to the auction

Or, even if they don't sell on the day, they'll generally go to auction first and the agent will hopefully have at least one serious buyer to negotiate with afterwards.

What is this Jenman agent thing? I've not heard of it before.

[Rocker]

I have to say that I agree with Jackiew, that Australian Real estate Agents have something to learn from those in the UK. In the UK, agents normally hand out detailed house descriptions covering two or three A4 sheets to prospective buyers. By collecting the details of a number of houses in your price range, the potential buyer can avoid wasting time looking at houses that are clearly unsuitable. Here, it seems, it is too much trouble for the agent to prepare a detailed description.

Rocker

[jackiew]

for those who haven't heard of the jenman system ....


http://www.jenman.com.au/

[DanP]

Neil Jenman gets a big bouquet from me with 'The Jenman Way"

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

That's funny. I sold a house through a Jenman agent. They guarantee your house will get btwn XXX dollars and XXX dollars, so if your house sells for less than the lower figure, you pay less fees. The figure, mind you, is about $20,000 less than what the house is worth. So no real risk there.

BUT...(there's always a but when there's a real estate agent involved)

They charge about $3,000 as base fee which you have to pay regardless of price guarantee. Then they stick you a further 2.7% of sale price, which is about what all the others charge. So either way they win and there's no risk to them. On top of all that they have you sign a sole agent contract so you can't use any other agent to sell your house.

The area I used to live in had several RE Agents. Most of them offered "no sale, no fee". I was a bit naive (sp) and got sucked in by the "honest dependable" Jenman rubbish.

Dan

[DanP]

The way those stories are written by Neil JENMAN shows the type of person he is. Most of the story is hearsay and biased rediculously. JENMAN could easily graduate to what is, IMHO, the lowest form of life, the journalist. :mad:

Dan

[Wood Borer]

Gee Dan,

Looks like your trying to pick between lowest of the low and lower than lowest of the low. :eek:

I am sure there are some good people in both groups but they are rare in my experience.

[simon c]

The agent's responsibility is to get the best price for the vendor. Full stop.

...snip...

I agree that many are only interested in their cut

I think you've got it right in your second point rather than the first. An agent's responsibility to make money for their business. This does not necessarily mean getting the best price for the vendor. An agent will push a vendor to sell at a reduced price if it means a quick sale as losing a small part of his commission is acceptable for a quick return as the agent gets paid out of the deposit.

Simon

[Iain]

Thanks for the singing birds Jackie, reminds me of a few years ago when I went to inspect a block of land in the sticks, quote 'with a babbling trout stream at the boundary'
Took the fly rod along and took six nice trout, kept one of about two pounds, went to the inspection and the agent asked where I got the fish from, told him in the stream in the ad, his response, 'is there fish in there?'
When we sold our house two years ago I read the ad and was tempted to buy, ye gods it sounded pefect and just what we were looking for :D

[silentC]

Just on the issue of 'buyer beware', I assure you that is a thing of the past.

Three years ago we sold our house (very happy with the price, agents worked in our favour). Since then, it seems that the second bathroom has been attacked by termites. I don't know the extent of the damage but it's enough that the new owner called last night to get details of the termite protection that we put in when we built the bathroom (owner builder). We gave her the details - pipe flanges fitted to the slab penetrations by a company in Sydney.

In the event that she gets no joy from them, she either has to fix it herself, or she forces us to. All she has to do is prove that we, or one of our subbies, were somehow neglectful and failed to provide adequate termite protection. If successful, we not only have to fix the termite protection, we also have to repair the damage. The best bit - we can't do it ourselves, we have to get a licensed builder to do it and he has to guarantee HIS work for 7 years.

The fact that in 3 years she has NEVER had a termite inspection - until now when it's too late - apparently carries no weight, even though we advised her to get it inspected at least every 6 months because there are active termites in the area.

I'd rather ghosts than termites...

[himzol]

I'd rather ghosts than termites...

Someone on this BB may get a bit miffed at this :D :D

[silentC]

Bill is a friendly, helpful termite, not the kind that eats your house :D

[Alastair]

Besides, if he complains, we'll just sic the Numbat on him!

Alastair

[jackiew]

[QUOTE=silentC]
The fact that in 3 years she has NEVER had a termite inspection - until now when it's too late - apparently carries no weight, even though we advised her to get it inspected at least every 6 months because there are active termites in the area.
QUOTE]

would suggest that this comes under the heading of contributory negligence which means that while she might screw you for some of the money she shouldn't be able to screw you for all of it.

which reminds me ... got to go under my house for a look see.

[jackiew]

my lunchtime house inspection down the road was very interesting. The renovators have turned what was a total heap into an absolutely amazing house but ......

1. front verandah doesn't slope so when it rains there is a big puddle on it ...right up against the timber front wall of the house.
2. the new three storey block of flats planned for the bottom of the garden is going to look right into the fantastic new family room. Of course the agent won't be mentioning the flats.
3. the double garage advertised on the front of the info sheet turns out to be a car port ( as shown on the plan at the back of the sheet!!!).
4. the sewer pipes from the house must run down the garden to the laneway ( either under the carport slab or under the garden ) ... there is no inspection hatch in the garden or carport and there ain't one in the laneway. wonder what happens if they get a problem. I asked the agent about this and he said "oh you'd have to ask the council ... they've replaced everything new". you'd think if they replaced everything new the builder would know where the drains went and then you wouldn't need to ask the council would you?

[silentC]

... she might screw you for some of the money ...
Such a lovely turn of phrase. She's not my type though, really ;)


... contributory negligence...
You're probably right but in the eyes of the Dept. of Fair Trading, the builder/owner builder is an untrustworthy scumbag who is always trying to rip-off poor, innocent, unsuspecting home owners. In other words, she gets the benefit of the doubt, we get bent over the desk and... well you know what we get.

[himzol]

I'm with Jackie, now that the subject has turned to Termites it's reminded me that it's time I had a look under the house as well. I remember all too well having to replace a section of floor and some other timber work in my Parents house.

To get the thread back on some sort of path...
If I was in the market for a house I don't think that one of my first questions would be " So.. has anybody been killed here recently?" . If they've managed to clean up the blood stains and remove the chalk outline from the floor, and the axe murderer wasn't still on the premisses and the house was to my liking then I would probably buy it. ( as long as there were no termites).

Himzo.

[Wood Borer]

What happened to equal opportunity?

Although I am not a termite, I am sort of related and I think it is mean the way we are treated.

Why do you reckon we are trying to get even?

[himzol]

1. front verandah doesn't slope so when it rains there is a big puddle on it ...right up against the timber front wall of the house.

Dam that sounds familiar, the house we are in had exacly the same problem.

I've spent the better part of the last 18 months fixing dodgy jobs like this. wound up having to dig 30 meters of drainage to aleviate the problem and because I didn't know what I might strike if I got in a ditch digger, it was all done by hand, well matock and spade. It wasn't too bad until I got through the top ten to twelve inches of top soil and hit sandstone and quartz rubble.

[jackiew]

[QUOTE=jackiew]
she might screw you for some of the money she shouldn't be able to screw you for all of it.
QUOTE]

:o shall i rephrase that - "she might be entitled to some of the money but she shouldn't be entitled to all of it".

[numbat]

Besides, if he complains, we'll just sic the Numbat on him!

Alastair

Mmmmmmmmm termites yum.

[gemi_babe]

I would live there. I don't know the victims so it wouldnot affect me. It's not like the guy is out raoming the streets is it?
It's not up to the real estate to say what happend there, more up to the buyer to research the area/house.

If anything I feel its the newpaper that should be sued for dragging up something that wasn't relevant and causing grief and unnessassary (OMG sp) suffering.
They should of just let these people get on with thier lives.

I would never pay $800,000 for a house no matter where it was and certaininly would not pay for a 700sqmtr block in the burbs... YUKO!

[Sturdee]

Or maybe I am just a wuss.


Wongo,

Ofcourse you are not a wuss because you wouldn’t want to live in that house, maybe you are more sensitive than me but Viva La Difference. It would be a dull world if we were all the same.

What really bugs me is the lack of personal responsibility by this buyer who then blames the seller’s agent. Sure often agent’s behaviour can be criticized but in this case it showed a clear lack of understanding of the agent’s role in a real estate transaction.

As you say it is probably one of the most horrifying murder cases in recent time. The way they were killed, the media coverage and the imagesand it happened only a couple years back thus it is still so fresh in peoples mind. So why did they not find this out from their own investigations?

Did they inspect the property? Did they look at the structural aspects? Did they check the physical boundary to check if it is as shown on title documents? Did they check with council if there were any order or planning and zoning restrictions? These were some of the things I used to check (independently from what was supplied by the borrower) whilst working in a bank before we would lend any moneys on a housing loan.

I would also expect that the buyer would look into the area they wanted to buy and live. Did they make inquiries as to the type of area and the facilities it had so that it would suit their lifestyle? Did they walk the streets in and around the neighbourhood, both during the day and at night, so that they were not moving in between two neighbours from hell :eek: with loud music and parties all night? Did they talk to people in the street about the property? Did they talk to the neighbours?

These are only some of the things a reasonable diligent person would do before forking out the biggest amount of money in their whole life. But no instead they expect the seller, through their agent, to tell them.

These aspects are what I mean with “Buyer Beware” not whether the property has the 7 year new house insurance, etc.


Peter.

[craigb]

I've just remembered that there was an episode of The Simpsons that canvassed these very issues.

Marge got a job as an estate agent and ended up unloading the local House of Horrors that nobody had been able to sell.

She ended up selling it to Ned Flanders if memory serves. :D

Any Simpsons fans remember it?

I think she ended up getting an attack of the guilts and giving him his cheque back.

Of course she lost her job. :(

[bitingmidge]

Been watching this debate fascinated by opposing sides - both of which I am in agreement!


Did they talk to people in the street about the property? Did they talk to the neighbours?
Before we bought or last place, neighbour on one side was a (literally) demented nasty old girl, on the other a gang of bikies. Absolutely perfect neighbourhood to raise three small girls!

Bikies agreed to "lend" me some power to use for construction work, and I happily gave them $50.00 in advance to cover costs...I didn't ask them if they were moving out the next day, so they didn't tell me.

Should I have been more diligent?

They didn't ask me if one of my very good mates was a Senior Sergeant in one of our "emergency" services and who had people very interested in talking to commercial propogators of a particular plant, and who found it very easy to track them down.

Should they have been more diligent?

When purchasing the current Home of the Biting Midge, the owner was a sort of aggressive reclusive person, known for his strong opinions and generally was avoided by neighbours. To make matters worse he was in the latter stages of a nasty terminal illness, and the place had a bit of an unpleasant aura.

We walked the neighbourhood (thankfully it wasn't magpie season), talked to neighbours on one side (an aggressive former Federal Police officer who would have made a great hermit, and the other, a very unfriendly "Property Developer" who in the fullness of time left in a big hurry when one of his apparently significant drug deals went wrong (he won't have to pay rent for a long long time ;) )

Both neighbours moved out within a few months, in fact seven of the eleven houses in the street changed ownership in a year, and we have a very pleasant community now...... the point I am making is that all the due diligence in the world won't really tell you about the history of the place if no-one volunteers to tell it.

If you were a neighbour, would you be in a hurry to point out the grisly history to prospective neighbours you hadn't met before?

I would, but then I'd be trying to buy it for half it's real value, sell it in five or six years (with the grisly tale as part of the sell) and make a different sort of killing.

In a recent life I had a six foot high sign erected along the boundary of one of my employers properties which read "a ten story building has been approved for this site" when marketing commenced on the site opposite, with photographs of the view across our single story building.

How else would the prospective purchasers have discovered before it was too late? Current approvals are not able to be searched effectively (here) without a search on every title, certainly beyond the means of most apartment buyers. The developer tried unsuccessfully to have the sign removed through legal channels, and we averted a situation where we would have been the bad guys by taking the "innocent" purchasers views.

Should we have not been concerned, if they had been more diligent it wouldn't have been a problem?

There is due diligence, and non-disclosure, and I am inclined to think the latter is what has happened in the house and the apartment incident.

Non-disclosure in these circumstances is just dishonesty with a sugar coating, and it isn't part of my language.

What would happen if we applied the same standard to other aspects of our daily purchases, like food labelling for instance?

Cheers,

P

[Iain]

Gemi, the difference between WA and Vic, we sold our 30 sq place for $900,000.00 two years ago in the outer eatern burbs of Melb to buy our place in the sticks, no ghosts in either, couldn't afford the extra's.

[Sturdee]

Been watching this debate fascinated by opposing sides - both of which I am in agreement!


Midge, so am I - what's more 54 posts and still on topic (must be a record) and no flame wars either.

Tonight on Today Tonight there was a follow up story about a WA couple renting a house where that state's biggest murder took place. Now they want out on their lease. Interesting story again confirming my view on agents responsibility.


Whilst you may not always find out the history of a property most of the time residents are willing to help a prospective purchaser. After all they probably will live next to them for a long time. Same as you felt it right to point out that development.

As to food labelling, there are laws to safeguard consumers. May be these kind of laws ought to be extended to real estate transaction.

If these purchasers had spent the same amount of time and effort in researching their purchase as we all do when we buy tools for our workshop I am sure they would have found out the history of that house.


Peter.

[Barry_White]

For those that may be interested this is the latest on the story in todays Daily Telegraph.

http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story.jsp?sectionid=1260&storyid=2048588

[journeyman Mick]

When you go to the hardware store you expect the person behind the counter to have some technical knowledge, when purchasing a stereo you expect the sales staff to be able to provide a lot of technical information. Yet people who sell houses (and manage properties) generally know next to nothing. From my perspective they get a lot of money for doing very little, whilst knowing nothing about the product they sell, and treating both vendors and buyers with disdain. I'm afraid I haven't dealt with any real estate agents that have given me any reason to change my view that they are all parasites that feed on the vendor/buyer and lessor/lessee transactions.

Mick

[AlexS]

Interesting questions. Some years ago, I owned a property that was rented out. Some years into the tenency, I found out that a previous owner had committed suicide in the house.
I doubt that the agent knew this, and it wouldn't have worried me even if I'd been going to live there.
Should I have told the tennants? ( I didn't, on the basis that what they don't know wouldn't hurt them.)

[Caliban]

When you go to the hardware store you expect the person behind the counter to have some technical knowledge, when purchasing a stereo you expect the sales staff to be able to provide a lot of technical information. Yet people who sell houses (and manage properties) generally know next to nothing. From my perspective they get a lot of money for doing very little, whilst knowing nothing about the product they sell, and treating both vendors and buyers with disdain. I'm afraid I haven't dealt with any real estate agents that have given me any reason to change my view that they are all parasites that feed on the vendor/buyer and lessor/lessee transactions.

Mick

Mick
You Have an uncanny ability to hit the nail on the head even if it resists.
The only good real estate agent is the one who gets me out of financial trouble by getting me a reasonable price for the investment property they were so ahppy to sell me three years ago. I also can't believe how things shangte when you become a vendor rather than a lessee. Thew ******** I had to endure as a tenant is about the same as I now endure as a landlord. The only happy one is the pond dwelling agent. (Read scum) I for one will be completely glad to be out of the loop permanently.
Anyone want to buy a nicve 4 bedroom split level in beautiful Kempsey for the bagain basement price of $240,000? that'll get me out of mortgage trouble and get you a really nice house,renovated by yours truely. Should I have added that last bit? Ethically, or sensibly????? Silent????

[bitingmidge]

Some years ago.......

I think that's the key.

If they hadn't been spooked to death up 'till that time, they were probably going to survive OK!

I think the same will happen with the house in question.

P

[Caliban]

unless the house self destructs like the haunted one on the Simpsons :D

[jackiew]

a friend just got a letter from the real estate agent he's been renting from for 6 years. They just came and did an inspection so he was expecting it to be connected with that. Nope. It was asking if he wanted to sell the property. He'd love to sell it except he doesn't actually own it.

Ok so it only cost them a 50c stamp, piece of paper, printing, and an envelope but multiply that by the number of properties they handle in their local area ( 200 ish I suspect) and they just threw a hundred bucks down the drain - never mind the properties they mailed out that are rented via different agents. I have to wonder whether such a blanket approach to advertising actually pays off.

[craigb]

Don't know about those mail outs. I mostly bin the ones we get.

However one of the agents sends us a quartley list of the properties that have sold in then area including a picture and description of the property and how much it sold for.

I find that pretty useful for keeping abreast of the market.

[himzol]

A friend of mine worked as a real estate agent for a while, didn't need to know much about the product just get the best and quickest sale and move on. He didn't like it when I told him that I considered real estate agents slimy leaches on society, since leaving that job he says he understands how I felt, - He's now a used car saleman, what can you say :confused:

[Wongo]

A friend of mine worked as a real estate agent.... - He's now a used car saleman, what can you say :confused:

These thing takes time but he is improving. :o

[oges]

1. According to what I saw on telly about it, they do not have to tell any prospective new owners of the history of a house. I guess it comes down to more of a moral thing. But it cant be the only place around Australia that has been sold where something has happened in it.

I read a book once on Australian murders and people had moved into the house where some of the Snowtown murders occurred and they did not get told of it either.

2. No I wouldnt move into the place, there isnt a lot to do in North Ryde :rolleyes: :D . Seriously it wouldnt overly bother me as long as the place was cleaned up. My wife had rented a place once where the previous tenant had hung themselves and there was nothing odd about the place .. apart from the neighbours :rolleyes: .. you could still see the marks in the stair railing caused by the clothes line wire that he dragged through to house and used to swing on.

[Barry_White]

I wasn't going to buy into this but have taken exception to the dispersions made about used car salesmen. I sold new and used cars for about five years and people trading in car were much bigger liars than any car salesman I ever knew.

The worst liars were the ministers and priests trying get more for their tradeins.

[Caliban]

Barry
I think you might have just killed this thread.