<html><body>
Research firm SQM Research has released its top 10 most affordable properties in Brisbane. All are located within 30 kilometres of the Brisbane CBD, and all cost less than $300,000.

Predictably, almost all on the list are units, and all have been discounted. The first on their list, <a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-unit-qld-zillmere-118756355" target="_blank">1/368 Zillmere Road</a> in the northern suburb of Zillmere, has had its price cut by 32%, from $329,000 to $225,000.

<a href="https://www.realestateview.com.au/Real-Estate/136-granard-road-archerfield/Property-Details-buy-residential-8284800" target="_blank">136 Granard Road in Archerfield</a> (pictured above) has been on the market for the longest time, and was listed 2,022 days ago – that's five years ago. In that time, the vendors have discounted its asking price by 18%, from $330,000 to $269,000.

The three bedroom house on a 607 square metre plot is currently rented at $325 per week. If the home sells at $269,000, it will reflect a 6.3% yield. The vendors paid $267,500 for the house in 2007.

SQM Research's top 10 most affordable Brisbane properties:

<ul>
<li>1/368 Zillmere Road, Zillmere</li>
</ul>
Initial asking price: $329,000 
Now asking: $225,000 
Reduction: 32% 
Days on market: 85

<ul>
<li>1-12 McBain, Kallangur</li>
</ul>
Initial asking price: $280,000 
Now asking: $239,990 
Reduction: 14% 
Days on market: 273

<ul>
<li>1/69 Ormadale Road, Yeronga</li>
</ul>
Initial asking price: $299,000 
Now asking: $250,000 
Reduction: 16% 
Days on market: 469

<ul>
<li>136 Granard Road, Archerfield</li>
	<li>Initial asking price: $330,000</li>
</ul>
Now asking: $269,000 
Reduction: 18% 
Days on market: 2,022

<ul>
<li>43/32 Blyth Road, Murrumba Downs</li>
</ul>
Initial asking price: $347,000 
Now asking: $269,000 
Reduction: 22% 
Days on market: 155

<ul>
<li>12 Woods Court, Bellbird Park</li>
</ul>
Initial asking price: $329,000 
Now asking: $276,500 
Reduction: 16% 
Days on market: 85

<ul>
<li>Lot 24/113 Castle Hill Drive, Murrumba Downs</li>
</ul>
Initial asking price: $319,000 
Now asking: $279,000 
Reduction: 13% 
Days on market: 267

<ul>
<li>2/154 Goodfellows Road, Murrumba Downs</li>
</ul>
Initial asking price: $315,000 
Now asking: $297,995 
Reduction: 11% 
Days on market: 351

<ul>
<li>29/18 Holmes Street, Toowong</li>
</ul>
Initial asking price: $320,000 
Now asking: $280,000 
Reduction: 13% 
Days on market: 182

<ul>
<li>10905 8 Harbour Road, Hamilton</li>
</ul>
Initial asking price: $365,000 
Now asking: $290,000 
Reduction: 21% 
Days on market: 623

<h2>QLD properties selling now:</h2>

[smartcode_project:default project_id=26730]

[smartcode_project:default project_id=90553]

[smartcode_project:default project_id=22057]
</body></html>

jrichardson-uRX5hFdKfN

10 Brisbane properties under $300,000: SQM Research

<html><body>
As many property investors know, the city you currently call home isn’t always the best place to invest.

You’ve done your research – picked out the potential growth areas, drawn up your budget and growth expectations, and are now preparing to invest interstate. But there are many steps to the buying process, and they can differ from state to state. Here are some key differences in purchasing properties interstate.

Inspecting a property

Assuming that you’ve picked out the area and property type you want to purchase, the next step is inspecting potential properties. Victorian investors will be aware of Section 32, a mandatory vendor’s statement which provides buyers with a range of information about the property before the sale.

The Section 32 document is prepared by a lawyer or by the vendor under legal instruction – and if the vendor knowingly provides any false information, they have committed a criminal offence, and face fines.

The document will include any mortgages or debts charged against the land, planning information, disclosure of services connected to the property and any registered building work that has been carried out in the last 10 years. Registered building works will be covered under warranty for 10 years, even if the property has changed hands multiple times.

Section 32 is generally considered the most comprehensive vendor disclosure statement in the country, and must be provided before the auction or before a contract is signed in a private sale.

In New South Wales, sellers are required to provide Schedule 1 Prescribed Documents, but these generally only include mortgages on the property, deeds and restrictions on the use of land. NSW Fair Trading recommends that buyers carry out an independent pre-purchase inspection report.

Your inspection report should be carried out by a licensed builder, surveyor or architect – and make sure they have professional indemnity cover, in case you want to seek compensation for any errors they make. You’ll have to weather the cost of the report yourself, which will vary depending on the consultant and the size, age and condition of the property.

The report won’t cover information on any hidden or structural problems with the property, as it’s generally just a visual assessment. It also won’t cover electrical wiring, plumbing or gasfitting, or fireplaces and chimneys. If you are concerned about any aspect of the property in particular, you should engage a specialised inspector before purchasing.

Sellers in South Australia are required to provide a Form 1 disclosure statement to the purchaser, through the seller’s real estate agent. The Form 1 must be available to buyers before the auction date. If a property is being sold through a private sale, the Form 1 must be provided at least 10 days prior to the settlement date. The provision of the Form 1 also affects a buyer’s cooling off period. A Form 1 generally covers similar information to NSW’s Schedule 1 Prescribed Documents, so an independent inspection report is recommended.

Queensland currently doesn’t have compulsory disclosure statement for all residential properties. Body corporates should provide information for townhouses, apartments and units. Again, the Queensland Office of Fair Trading advises buyers to carry out independent inspections. The same goes for buyers looking to invest Tasmania, or in the Northern Territory after vendor disclosure legislation was dumped in 2012. Sellers in Western Australia aren’t required to provide a disclosure statement to any prospective buyers, but should prepare a Seller’s Disclosure Statement for their agent.

When selling property in the ACT, vendors are required to provide documents prior to sale including an assessment of the physical condition of the property, an asbestos assessment report, and any restrictions to development on the land. ACT vendors are also required to provide an energy efficiency rating statement, and a pest inspection report (neither of which are required in a Section 32 document).

Cooling off period

Not all buyers have the luxury of a cooling off period, with legislation changing from state to state. During a cooling off period, a buyer can change their mind about purchasing a property and only face a small fee (0.25% of the purchase price or less) so long as they provide written notice to the vendor or their agent.

In Victoria, there is no cooling off period for properties purchased at auction. There’s a three day cooling off period for private sales of residential properties of less than 20 hectares, but this is waived if the property is sold three days before or after a scheduled auction. The cooling off period is also waived if a buyer is represented by an agent.

The ACT, NSW and Queensland all have five day cooling off periods for residential property purchases at private sales, but not for auction sales. Generally the cooling off period begins from the day that the buyer or their agent receives a copy of the sales contract that has been signed by both the buyer and the seller.

South Australian property sales come with a cooling off period of two days. If a Form 1 is provided before the sale, then the cooling off period commences on the date the contract is signed. If the Form 1 is served after the contract is signed, the cooling off period begins on the day the form is served.

Investors buying in Western Australia and Tasmania aren’t allowed cooling off periods.

Stamp duty or land transfer tax

Don’t forget that stamp duty or land transfer taxes change from state to state, and depend your property’s intended purpose. Each state’s revenue office website has a stamp duty calculator that can help you estimate how much you’ll be charged.

Who can help?

Purchasing a property interstate can be a difficult task, especially if you’re not an experienced investor and you’re looking to invest in a state you haven’t lived in before. The best way to ensure you have all the aspects of your investment covered is to engage a local conveyancer.

A specialist lawyer, your conveyancer can prepare and lodge your legal documents, such as your contract of sale. They can also calculate your expenses, put your deposit in a trust account, and research the property for you. A conveyancer should also handle your property’s settlement, including liaising with your financial institution. As always, seek out a reputable conveyancer, and make sure their firm is not also representing the vendor of the property you’re hoping to purchase.

Purchasing interstate is a great way to spread risk across your property’s portfolio or capitalise on growth areas – just make sure you do your homework.

<h2>Recently listed properties:</h2>

[smartcode_project:default project_id=29947]

[smartcode_project:default project_id=29660]

[smartcode_project:default project_id=4939]                  
</body></html>

Buying interstate? The information you need to know

<html><body>
Comedian Andy Samberg and musician Joanna Newsom have bought an expansive LA home that once housed Hollywood legends.

The musical duo reportedly purchased Moorcrest for US$6.25 million in March. The home, formerly rented by Charlie Chaplin, seems a better fit for someone like a boss than a tramp - proving that Andy Samberg may not be such a normal guy after all.

While not <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODz2rUXpKWw">the 'Bu,</a> the house is still <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnuJ0UOn7w4" target="_blank">in California</a>, located in Beachwood Canyon. The home was originally built as part of the Krotona Colony, the national headquarters of the Theosophical Society, an esoteric philosophical group that hopes to "form a nucleaus of the universal brotherhood of humanity".

<img alt="" src="/images/2014/07/22/ac9dc480-0ea9-11e4-b0ef-7bb2bf6cff6e_andy-samberg-joanna-newsom-13-dining.jpg">

The decadent design of the home has Moorish, Gothic, Mission-revivalist and Art Nouveau elements. According to Jewish Business News, the vendors purchased the home for US$900,000 in 1996. They reportedly listed the home with US$9,989,000 million in 2006, then lowered the asking price to US$7.4 million the next year. Newsom and Sandberg apparently bought the home in an off-market deal.

<img alt="" src="/images/2014/07/22/Joanna_Newsom_-_Have_One_On_Me.jpg">

Newsom, a critically acclaimed songwriter, harpist, pianist and singer, may occasionally wish to lounge around among elaborate antiques with a stuffed peacock, as she does on the cover of her three-record release Have One on Me (pictured above). She now has the perfect living room - complete with peacock (below).

 <img alt="" src="/images/2014/07/22/903e6e70-0ea9-11e4-b7c6-ff743a0613c9_andy-samberg-joanna-newsom-9-living-area.jpg">

The four bedroom, six bathroom house was designed by Marie Russak Hotchener and built in 1921, when female architects were a rarity. 
The home also includes a glass-toped dome atrium (pictured below), where the couple can look up at the stars - <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWFsBQcexkg" target="_blank">on a good day</a> (or night, rather), Newsom may even be able to see <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGoNCvoZuYA" target="_blank">the Pleiades</a>.

<img alt="" src="/images/2014/07/22/9dc2d1d0-0ea9-11e4-b39b-e5f776518803_andy-samberg-joanna-newsom-19-atrium-top.jpg">

The huge kitchen has a raised fireplace, wrap around benches and central lonely island for serving boiled goose.

<img alt="" src="/images/2014/07/22/a0e6f530-0ea9-11e4-b39b-e5f776518803_andy-samberg-joanna-newsom-24-kitchen-wide.jpg">

There is also a substantial dressing room, perfect for Newsom's coats of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LgQhfusf_E" target="_blank">boucle, jacquard and cashmere</a>, and Samberg's <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogG2p_ZUaaQ" target="_blank">turtlenecks and chains</a>. <img alt="" src="/images/2014/07/22/094eab50-0ea9-11e4-816c-17b57f80985f_andy-samberg-joanna-newsom-44-sinks-vanity.jpg">

The listing photos, now removed from their website, show ivy on the walls (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qn7duAZjP8w" target="_blank">but not around the lettering</a>) of the incredible home, with lush gardens providing plenty of room for <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47yuiPK01kg" target="_blank">a sprout and a bean</a> to grow.

<img alt="" src="/images/2014/07/22/ivy.jpg">

There is also a pool, with a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQbgIy2bj9Y" target="_blank">bridge (but no balloons)</a>. The pool area also has a man-made cave, perfect for Hot Rod star Sandberg, who <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbaBoWQSGak" target="_blank">likes to party</a>.

<img alt="" src="/images/2014/07/22/148e00b0-0ea9-11e4-b0ef-7bb2bf6cff6e_andy-samberg-joanna-newsom-47-pool-bridge.jpg">

According to Hollywood lore, Charlie Chaplin rented the home in the early 1920s before it was purchased by the parents of Maltese Falcon star Mary Astor in 1925. They sold the house at auction for $21,500 in 1934.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=27406]

Newsom is known for her albums The Milk Eyed Mender, Ys and Have One On Me. Samberg is a comedian who currently stars in Brooklyn 99, was formerly a cast member on Saturday Night Live and is a member of The Lonely Island.
</body></html>

From Incredibad to Chaplin's pad - Andy Samberg and Joanna Newsom buy legendary Hollywood home

<html><body>
As a first home buyer, it's sometimes hard to figure out how you compare to others in the same position.

Are you spending way more than you should and overcommitting yourself? Or are you trying to scrimp and eyeing a property that most buyers, first timer or otherwise, wouldn't touch?

If you're planning on laying money down for your first purchase, you have to be realistic about how much you can spend. You may be able to save up for a deposit on a $650,000 house by eating baked beans every night for a year, but that's not a sustainable way to live.

Once your mortgage payment obligations start, they don't stop - not if you decide to get married, or have a baby, or get sick. So be honest with yourself about what you can afford.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=29048]

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) gathers data on different segments of the market, including first home buyers. According to the ABS, the average loan size for a first time buyer in July this year was $307,400.

Adding an assumed 10% deposit, that brings the typical first home buyer price to an estimated $338,140 (though remember, those <a href="/expert-insights/buying/34176-what-does-a-home-really-cost-for-a-first-time-buyer" target="_blank">aren't the only costs</a> associated with buying your first home). While the ABS figures can allow you to make a rough guess at what others are spending, remember - there is no one particular loan size, l<a href="/expert-insights/buying/35243-what-level-of-gearing-should-i-accept-for-my-first-investment-ask-margaret" target="_blank">oan to value ratio</a>, or finance scheme that fits everyone. 

It's important to note that our $338,140 is a national average, and prices vary from city to city. For a more specific breakdown, see what Property Observer's expert contributors <a href="/expert-insights/buying/31501-exclusive-first-home-buyer-picks-from-the-experts" target="_blank">picked around Australia</a>. 

[smartcode_project:default project_id=8082]

So what exactly will $338,140 buy you?

In Melbourne, that might get you a one bedroom apartment like <a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-apartment-vic-flemington-117540416" target="_blank">this one</a>, located three kilometres from the CBD in Flemington. The lowrise apartment pictured below sold for $340,500 in August.

<img alt="" src="/images/2014/09/19/1.jpg">

Showing just how much things change a mere 3,400 kilometres away, in Perth's Balga you can pick up a <a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-wa-balga-116930007" target="_blank">three bedroom attached house</a> for $340,000.

 <img alt="" src="/images/2014/09/19/2.jpg">

If the average first home buyer across Australia is paying around $340,000 for home, does that mean you should too?

Not necessarily. Prices, household incomes and living costs vary all across the country - what might work for your friend in Balga may not be such a wise decision in Sydney. You might be better off waiting until you can afford a property that offers good capital growth.

Perhaps you're wondering what the first home buyer market was like five years ago (or how much easier your older brother had it).

In July 2009, the average loan size to a first home buyer was $269,100 - meaning the average first home buyer commitment size has increased by 14% over the past five years. According to the ABS, the proportion of first home buyers in the market was higher then, with 25.7% of all homes financed in July 2009 belonging to first time purchasers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=28487]

First home buyers make up less than half of that proportion of the market now: only 12.2% of all dwellings financed in July 2014 were first home purchases.

Some think the apparent decline in first home buyers is the result of an increasing unwillingness to overcommit on housing - or to commit at all. Others believe the ABS needs to revise its methods.

There's no single number that represents how much a first home buyer should spend. But if you're purchasing your first home, be realistic and know your limit.
</body></html>

How much should you spend on your first home?

<html><body>
Following an investor complaint about Brisbane City Council’s differential rating system, Property Observer looks at the other Queensland councils that charge higher rates for non-owner occupied properties.

Last week, television host and Destiny Financial Solutions director Margaret Lomas <a href="/news/qld/31650-margaret-lomas-heads-campaign-fight-against-higher-council-charges-for-investors" target="_blank">launched a public campaign against the practice</a> on social media, urging investors to “band together to force these money- grubbing councils to stop targeting property investors”.

<a href="https://twitter.com/MargaretLomasAU" target="_blank"><img alt="" src="/images/2014/05/27/lomas-tweet-may-27.jpg"></a>

In Brisbane City Council, single residential properties are largely categorised as either “Residential – Owner Occupied” or “Residential – Non-owner occupied or mixed use”.

Owner occupied residences are described as: “residential dwelling houses and dwelling units where the sole use is as the principal place of residence of the owner/s. In this instance, eligible ownership is limited to individuals only and does not include premises owned or partially owned by a company, trust, organisation or any entity other than an individual. This is regardless of whether the premises are occupied by a shareholder or even the sole shareholder of that company, trust, organisation or entity.”

That rules out rental properties, holiday homes and anything that’s owned under your company’s name. These properties attract a rate of 0.3064 cents in the dollar, with a minimum general rate of $503.40.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=90087]

Category 7 or “Residential – Non-owner occupied or mixed use” properties are defined as “predominantly residential premises" where:

"(a)      the premises is not the principal place of residence of at least one person who constitutes the owner of the property; and/or "(b)      the owner or occupier conducts non-residential activities upon the property not in excess of [certain limitations that would see it defined as a commercial property]." 
These properties attract a rate of 0.3904 cents in the dollar, with a minimum general rate of $628.72 in Brisbane.

While Lomas has been tagging her posts on the topic with <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/equalratesforpropertyinvestors?src=hash" target="_blank">#equalratesforpropertyinvestors</a>, it is not just investors who see higher rates than owner occupiers. If you own a house in Noosa that you visit four times a year, you will be paying a higher rate than an owner occupier, even though you don’t generate income from your holiday home.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=94758]

A pensioner now living in a retirement community, but still holding on to her old house – perhaps to allow relatives to stay in it, or because she’s waiting for the right time to sell – will pay higher rates in Brisbane than an owner occupier.

There is no evidence to suggest that non-owner occupied properties present a greater burden on the council than owner occupied homes. In fact, when investor Andrew Hancock enquired about the rates to the Brisbane City Council, they offered the following explanation:

“This is done to ensure that properties that are the principle place of residence of their owners do not pay as much as those which are income producing. Income producing properties also have the advantage of being able to offset such expenses against taxation. Council’s principal motivation is to ensure, through its differential rating system, that the owner-occupied, single unit dwelling sector of the community contribute to a level that is affordable and value for money.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=29167]

The following Queensland councils charge higher rates for non-owner occupied homes than owner occupied homes:

<ul>
<li>Brisbane City Council </li>
	<li>Central Highlands Council</li>
	<li>Fraser Coast Regional Council</li>
	<li>Gold Coast City Council</li>
	<li>Ipswich City Council</li>
	<li>Logan City Council</li>
	<li>Moreton Bay Regional Council</li>
	<li>Mackay City Council</li>
	<li>Mount Isa City Council</li>
	<li>Redland City Council</li>
	<li>Noosa Shire Council</li>
	<li>Rockhampton Regional Council</li>
	<li>Scenic Rim Regional Council</li>
	<li>Somerset Regional Council</li>
	<li>Sunshine Coast Regional Council</li>
	<li>Townsville City Council</li>
	<li>Whitsunday Regional Council </li>
</ul>
So far, Property Observer does not know of any councils outside of Queensland who charge different rates for owner occupiers and residential investors. 
Earlier this year, a judge in the Supreme Court <a href="/expert-insights/finance/30828-mackay-investors-win-as-supreme-court-judge-refuses-extra-council-rates-for-rental-owners" target="_blank">ruled against the Mackay City Council’s decision to charge higher rates</a> for non-owner occupied properties in a civil suit launched by investors Ayril Paton and Peter Crossan. Judge Duncan McMeekin said, “To justify the categorisation the Council impermissibly took into account characteristics personal to the owners of the land and failed to restrict itself to characteristics of the subject land itself. It is simply a misuse of language to claim that the owner’s decision to reside on land, or not, is in some way a characteristic of the land.”

[smartcode_project:default project_id=27364]

Mackay City Council is reportedly appealing the decision.

Do you know any other councils that charge higher rates to non-owner occupied properties? Let us know in the comments below.

Update: As of yet, there is no sign that the councils will be required to refund rates to investors. This article mistakenly included South Burnett in the list of councils that charged different rates for investors. South Burnett does not currently charge a different rate for non-owner-occupied properties and owner-occupied properties. The article has been amended.

<h2>Properties you may be interested in:</h2>

[smartcode_project:default project_id=27638]

[smartcode_project:default project_id=29171]
</body></html>

The Queensland councils charging higher rates for investors

<html><body>
RE/MAX Western Australia’s managing director Geoff Baldwin has spoken out against potential changes to current stamp duty dispensations for first home buyers, saying that if the relief was decreased or abolished there would be dire effects across the market.
 “The negative affect the ceasing of stamp duty relief for first home buyers would be extremely damaging however, when this segment of the market stagnates it ripples up through all price ranges and the effect would be crippling”, said Baldwin.
“If you take a line through New South Wales and Victoria where subsidies have been abolished, first home buyer activity has dropped to 8% and 12% respectively, compared to the current 22% in Western Australia (RP Data).
“Historically, in a healthy market, first home buyers account for around 25 to 30% of all buyers.
“The established home market has already taken a massive hit through the government’s recent actions in changing the First Home Owner Grant whereby those building new homes receive $7,000 and people buying established only $3,000.
“To abolish first home owner stamp duty concessions would be extremely short sighted as it will a negative impact the whole market and hence the Industry, just at a time where we are again experiencing some prosperity in the property sector.”
 
</body></html>

Rumoured cuts to stamp duty relief for first home buyers would be “extremely damaging”: RE/MAX

<html><body>
Last month residential property stock on the market decreased to the lowest level seen since February 2011, according to SQM Research.
Nationally, there were 334,683 unsold properties last month, down 3.6% from the month before and 4.8% from July last year. <a href="https://www.sqmresearch.com.au/" target="_blank"></a>
<a href="https://www.sqmresearch.com.au/" target="_blank">SQM Research</a> says the market "remains in favour of sellers", with low stock levels pointing to an active market. However, the research firm also notes the rate of decrease has slowed, particularly in Sydney, which saw a yearly stock decline of 8.7%. There, annual stock declines between 15% and 25% were previously recorded.
Of the results, SQM Research managing director Louis Christopher says: "The national housing market overall remains buoyant with real estate listings being absorbed at a fairly fast pace and buyers moderately outnumbering sellers.”
<table border="0"><tbody>
<tr>
<td>City</td>
<td>July 2013 total </td>
<td> June 2013 total</td>
<td>July 2014 total</td>
<td>Monthly change %</td>
<td>Yearly change %</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Adelaide</td>
<td> 16,453</td>
<td> 15,819</td>
<td> 14,593</td>
<td> -7.8%</td>
<td> -11.3%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Brisbane</td>
<td> 26,150</td>
<td> 26,624</td>
<td> 25,615</td>
<td> -3.8%</td>
<td> -2.0%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Canberra</td>
<td> 3,555</td>
<td> 3,250</td>
<td> 3,140,</td>
<td> -3.4%</td>
<td> -11.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Darwin</td>
<td> 1,302</td>
<td> 1,531</td>
<td> 1,582</td>
<td> 3.3%</td>
<td> 21.5%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Hobart</td>
<td> 4,280</td>
<td> 4,137</td>
<td> 4,063</td>
<td> -1.8%</td>
<td> -5.1%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Melbourne</td>
<td> 46,748</td>
<td> 43,237</td>
<td> 41,432</td>
<td> -4.2%</td>
<td> -11.4%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Perth</td>
<td> 19,353</td>
<td> 21,220</td>
<td> 20,049</td>
<td> -5.5%</td>
<td> 3.6%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Sydney</td>
<td> 23,207</td>
<td> 22,504</td>
<td> 21,179</td>
<td> -5.9%</td>
<td> -8.7%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>National</td>
<td> 351,397</td>
<td> 347,074</td>
<td> 334,683</td>
<td> -3.6%</td>
<td> -4.8%</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
 Source: SQM Research
The largest monthly decrease was recorded in Adelaide, where stock on market fell by 7.8% to 14,593 homes. On a yearly basis, Canberra had the greatest decline, with an 11.7% decrease to 3,140 homes on the market. Darwin was the only capital city where a monthly increase in stock levels was recorded. Stock on market climbed 3.3% in July to 1,582. The city also saw the biggest yearly jump of stock on market, of 21.5%. The firm also recorded a small month-on-month decrease in asking prices for houses, of 0.2%. Unit asking prices saw an increase of the same proportion on a national level for July.
</body></html>

National stock levels down to three year low in July: SQM

<html><body>
The Northern Territory government has <a href="/expert-insights/buying/65-first-home-buyers/31152-northern-territory-s-fhog-directed-to-new-builds-only-from-2015" target="_blank">abolished its first home owners grant for established homes</a>, extending the grant only to new dwellings from January 2015.
While announcing the changes, Treasurer David Tollner acknowledged that first home owners grants have added upwards pressure on housing prices. The government cited economist Saul Eslake’s <a href="/news/28532-the-senates-inquiry-into-affordable-housing-six-submissions?start=1" target="_blank">submission to a Senate inquiry into affordable housing</a>. Eslake criticised the grant, saying that when applied to established homes, it "served to simply to exacerbate the already substantial imbalance between the underlying demand for housing and the supply of it."
According to Tollner, the unintended inflationary effects of the first home owners grant were a factor in the government’s decision to abolish the grant for established homes.
"That’s why the Territory government will direct the first home owners grant solely towards the construction or purchase of new homes from next year," said Tollner.
"By targeting the first home owners grant towards the purchase of newly built homes, the grant is more likely to contribute to growth in housing supply and employment in the construction sector."
The Territory government will maintain the payment for first home owners of established homes for eight months.
"...ultimately, we want this grant to encourage the construction of new homes, create more jobs in the residential construction sector and improving housing affordability by increasing housing stock." Tollner said.
"This is a far better result than merely creating a churn in existing dwellings that is widely accepted as having an inflationary effect on the cost of housing."
Eslake is not the first industry figure to criticise the first home owners grant. Writing on the grant last year, <a href="/expert-insights/buying/65-first-home-buyers/23442-wednesday-june-12-observer-slow-demise-of-first-home-owner-grant-schemes-wakelin" target="_blank">observer Monique Sasson commented</a>:
"The scheme is meant to make property more affordable for first home buyers. Unfortunately, experience shows that the grants don’t achieve this end.  Instead, the nominal increase in purchasing power it delivers to first home buyers transmits directly into higher prices for the properties they hope to buy.
"The real beneficiaries are the vendors of properties that first timers buy."
The Northern Territory follows Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland and the Australian Capital Territory in its removal of the first home owners grant for established properties.
 
 
</body></html>

Northern Territory government acknowledges that FHOGs for established houses have "inflationary effect"

<html><body>
Investors should seek an independent second opinion when investing their super savings in property, according to the Real Estate Buyer’s Agents Association of Australia (REBAA).
The industry body’s president Jacque Parker urges investors to question advisors offering inflated property values and guaranteed rents.
“The real estate industry has always attracted its fair share of ‘shonky’ selling agents and it’s disappointing to hear advisors accepting kickbacks from developers under the guise of “financial advice” and taking advantage of innocent investors,” says Parker.
REBAA’s warning comes amid reported claims of advisors receiving higher than standard commission payments for recommending off the plan residential apartments as self-managed super fund investments.
Earlier this year, property commentator <a href="/expert-insights/investing/29276-standby-exclusive-tips-from-the-experts-on-how-to-spot-a-dodgy-operator" target="_blank">Neil Jenman told Property Observer</a> that "property spruikers are getting commissions ranging up to $50,000 per property".
Parker advocates engaging an accredited buyer’s agent for a second opinion on property investments. Buyer’s agents do not sell real estate but specialise in finding, evaluating and negotiating property purchases on the behalf of buyers.
 “The old saying ‘if it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is’ certainly applies here,” said Parker.
“If you are an investor who is considering investing your superannuation in property, then we would highly recommend you get an independent second opinion from a buyer’s agent.
“Independent buyer’s agents do not sell real estate or accept any kickbacks from other sources for doing so.
“If they do and they don’t disclose this to the buyer then they are contravening Section 47 of the Agents Act.”
Parker claims that using a buyer’s agent can save investors thousands of dollars.
 
</body></html>

Don’t be lured in by “one stop shop” SMSF advisors: REBAA

<html><body>
Last night's episode of Location Location Location Australia showed buyer's agents Veronica Morgan and Bryce Holdaway helping out two relocating couples.
Though one couple was upsizing and the other downsizing, they were both forced to negotiate the tricky realities of moving far from home.
Veronica was working with retirees Sue and Barney. After living in Port Macquarie for 16 years, they wanted to relocate to Wagga Wagga, where their son and his young family lived.
The couple, who have been married for 47 years, raised their own family in Wagga Wagga before moving northward to the beach.
For their return to Wagga, they wanted a three bedroom house with a double garage and a shed, which was close to the grandkids.
Their move, which they think might be their final one, had to be done on a tight budget of $350,000.
With limited stock on market in Wagga, Veronica was tasked with finding them the perfect final home among very few options.
She started by taking the couple to their preferred area of <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">Turvey Park</a>, in the heart of Wagga and only minutes from their son Ben. The three bedroom house, on the market for $329,000, had three bedrooms, a shed and a backyard.
The recently renovated home was a lot smaller than what Sue and Barney were used to, and the couple believed it would take a lot of hard work to make it worthwhile. It was immediately struck from the list despite its great location and the search continued.
The second house they inspected was in <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">Kooringal</a>, south of Turvey Park but only four kilometres from their son's home. The bigger house, with three bedrooms, only had a single car garage and the shed was on the small size.
While Sue loved the brick bungalow with an open plan kitchen, Barney was pretty skeptical. At $339,000, the house fell under their budget - but only just.
The third home they inspected was in <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">Bourkelands</a>, four kilometres from Central Wagga. The former site of a military base, developers have recently taken a liking to the area, with new builds popping up.
The house, which also had a $339,000, had a double garage, an open plan kitchen and living room layout. The master bedroom came with a walk in robe and ensuite, which also appealed.
With somewhat shabby bathrooms, the house (pictured below) would require a little bit of work. It <a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-bourkelands-116920539" target="_blank">remains on the market</a>, with its asking price now at $332,500. 
<img src="/images/2014/09/24/1.jpg" alt="">
After visiting three homes, none of which ticked all the boxes and all a step down from their dream home in Port Macquarie, the true reality of downsizing began to set in.
Sue and Barney showed just how difficult it is to downsize, especially from a home you love. Though they both wanted to be closer to their family, they weren't quite ready to make the final purchase of their life - especially if it meant settling for a home they weren't happy in.
In the end, although they couldn't find the perfect home, Sue and Barney decided they needed to be in Wagga. So they sold their Port Macquarie home and set out to rent a house in Wagga while waiting for the right home to come onto the market.
This article continues on the next page. Please click below.
<hr class="system-pagebreak">
 Bryce teamed up with Melbourne couple Ben and Amelia, who had the opposite move in mind.
They were planning to migrate northward, to the Gold Coast. After watching prices skyrocket in Melbourne, they decided they wanted more warmth and luxury for their dollar.
The upgraders, who want a family home they can grow into, had a budget of $1 million. They've been searching for a home in the Gold Coast for some time, but were finding the interstate property inspections a little impractical.
Enter Bryce. He was tasked with finding them a four bedroom home with a minimum of two bathrooms, a pool and canal views. Ben and Amelia wanted something close to the beach, with plenty of entertaining space.
Bryce was optimistic about their prospects, especially on their budget. The property market's downturn means that homes are more affordable than before, and it's a buyers' market.
According to Bryce, good capital growth potential can again be found in the Gold Coast, with high price growth in the southern states spurring on upgraders just like Ben and Amelia.
Their hunt began in <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">Broadbeach Waters</a>, at a home situated right on the canal. The four bedroom, four bathroom house had a pool and a six car garage. Unfortunately, it required some renovations - but with a price of $800,000, there was plenty of money leftover in the couple's budget for that.
It seemed, however, that Ben and Amelia had other things in mind. They weren't interested in extensive renovations, and wanted at least two living areas.
So house number one was a bust, and they moved along to house number two: a <a href="https://www.urban.com.au/property-observer" target="_blank">Mermaid Waters</a> house with two open plan living areas. The contemporary tiled house had four bedrooms, four bathrooms and a spot to tie up the boat.
There was also an outdoor entertaining space by the pool. On the market for $995,000, it was within their budget, and made a good first impression.
But Ben and Amelia, it turned out, wanted a home with a better indoor-outdoor flow. So house number two was also out.
The <a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-qld-broadbeach+waters-116288195" target="_blank">third home they inspected</a> was one on main road, which caused some concern. But its huge contemporary interior space and layout, pictured below, won them over. The home, on a wide plot, also included a pool and spa facing the canal, with its own jetty.
<img src="/images/2014/09/24/2.jpg" alt="">
While the home's bedrooms weren't amazing, the outdoor entertaining area was enough to win them over.
The house had a $1 million asking price, but it turned out that the vendors had accepted a $950,000 offer previously, and finance had fallen through.
They inspected a final house, a single storey home with two large living areas and four bedrooms in Broadbeach. The house, which the couple wasn't keen on, had an asking price of $950,000.
The price gave Amelia and Ben a point of comparison, and solidified their preference for the third home.
Knowing that the vendors had accepted a $950,000 offer, Bryce proposed a $930,000 to $950,000 price for the home. Amelia and Ben decided to put in a $920,000 bid, and were happy to play the waiting game.
However, so was the vendor, who rejected the bid. Amelia and Ben pushed up their offer to $945,000 - which, after a few days of waiting, was accepted by the vendor.
By knowing the previous offers put in on the house, Amelia and Ben were able to gauge the vendor's needs, securing the home for $55,000 under the asking price.
</body></html>

Jessie Richardson

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News