GRIFFIN ONLINE: 19 April 2011



Article in Sunshine Coast Daily Friday 14 April 2011 by Kieran Campbell (kieran.campbell@scnews.com.au)

A claim about ocean views from luxury penthouses has cost a Sunshine Coast Developer and two real estate agencies almost $1 millon.
A court ruled this week that misleading information about views from Sunshine Beach apartments meant that two couples who bought them off the plan deserved compensation.
Gary and Carol Avis and Grant and Lynette Brecht both bought apartments in the Number One Park development at Sunshine Beach in 2003 with the guarantee that they would have unimpeded views of the ocean from their balconies.
They were told another building, which was to be constructed between Number One Park and the beach, would not impact their views.
Unfortunately for the couples, the new building did create some obstruction.
The Supreme Court ordered the apartments' developer Mark Bain Constructions to pay one couple $283,917 in compensation and the second couple $216,483.
The real estate companies that sold the apartments, Laguna Real Estate and Dolphin Bay Real Estate, paid an out-of-court settlement of $200,000 to each couple.
The total combined payout is $900,400.
The principal of one of the real estate companies involved in the litigation said the landmark cause would impact on agents.
Laguna Real Estate principal Oliver Miller said the agent who sold the property to one of the couples has not been trying to mislead.
Ms Miller said the result of the case meant agents selling off the plan could not rely on information from third parties.
"Certainly we are selling in good faith and not making myths or false statements.  We were dealing with what we believed was true."
Ms Miller said Laguna Real Estate has sold up to 3000 properties off the plan in the past 30 years and this was the only situation that ended up before a court.
Both couples have since sold their Sunshine Beach penthouses.

GRIFFIN ONLINE: 13 April 2011


 

On 4 April 2011 there were three amendments to the Retail Shop Leases Act 1994.

The  first amendment means that if a retail shop lease contains a ‘ratchet rent provision’ the provision is no longer enforceable.
 

 A Ratchet rent provision is a clause which says that the rent cannot decrease on a market or Consumer Price Index (CPI) review even if the market rent or Consumer Price Index has gone down.   

The second amendment extends the provisions about landlords paying compensation to tenants for  false or misleading statements or misinterpretations in Lessor disclosures to assignees.   

 The third amendment says  that –

1.                  if the parties cannot agree on the amount of compensation payable then the 
                amount is to be decided by way of a dispute resolution process; and

2.                  if a lease or an assignment of lease  contains a clause limiting the amount 
                of compensation payable this clause is no longer enforcable.

Please call us if you would like to discuss the effect of these changes on you.

GRIFFIN ONLINE: June 25th 2008

FAMILY AGREEMENTS

There is a growing trend in the community generally and among our clients for older members of families to be cared for by their children or others rather than going into retirement villages or nursing homes.

This will continue in increasing numbers in the future because the demand for retirement village and nursing home places will greatly exceed supply forcing the price of entry beyond the financial capacity of many older people.

A number of our clients have instructed us to prepare “Family Agreements” which provide for –

• The financial arrangements between the person being cared for and the people providing the care.
• The type and range of care to be provided and how it is to be provided.
• What happens if the relationship breaks down or if one or more parties want to end the relationship?

These agreements are being approved and signed off by other family members. This prevents disputes between family members when the care finishes or the person who is being cared for dies.

A Family Agreement is a far better option than a family dispute and the potential litigation which can arise.