Dodgy Estate Agents

Cantab.

MorningStar wrote:

To be honest it sounds like you were a little nieve. Up to 10K on fixtures and fittings is standard around the lower stamp limit. The tax office know about this as common practive.
Your solicitor should have told you this was standard practice. I have paid a lot of money for terrible furniture over hte years. How much did this cost you in the end? €10K?

I have managed to get see property first and then buy it for a €100 tip on seeing the property first. Not that is a lot less moral than fixtures and fittings.

€100 tip?! Try adding about two zeros to the end of that sum - if the seller's a sucker (not very unusual - after all it's the estate agent who'll be able to tell you this), you'll make this money back several times over.

€5000 cash up front and €5,000 on sale is usually the way it works (so I've been told).

MorningStar

Cantab. wrote:

€100 tip?! Try adding about two zeros to the end of that sum - if the seller's a sucker (not very unusual - after all it's the estate agent who'll be able to tell you this), you'll make this money back several times over.

€5000 cash up front and €5,000 on sale is usually the way it works (so I've been told).

€100 tip is just to see the place first not for the house deal that is different. Fixtures and fitting is standard to the majority of 2nd hand sales is all I am saying. There is of course other corruptions and as I pointed out the dodging deal there actually cost the buyer €10k or theres abouts.

Andrew Duffy

MorningStar wrote:

Up to 10K on fixtures and fittings is standard around the lower stamp limit. The tax office know about this as common practive.
Your solicitor should have told you this was standard practice.

For a professional landlord who preaches from high every day on this board, you seem very willing to screw the rest of us by evading tax*. Any other things you don't pay your dues on?

* Unless, of course, you obey the law and use the total value of the transaction to calculate the stamp duty band and the value of the property to calculate the stampable amount. Since this would save less than €1,000 given a drop of €10,000 at any stamp duty rate, I doubt it's what you're talking about.

MorningStar

Andrew Duffy wrote:

For a professional landlord who preaches from high every day on this board, you seem very willing to screw the rest of us by evading tax*. Any other things you don't pay your dues on?

* Unless, of course, you obey the law and use the total value of the transaction to calculate the stamp duty band and the value of the property to calculate the stampable amount. Since this would save less than €1,000 given a drop of €10,000 at any stamp duty rate, I doubt it's what you're talking about.

Ring the tax office and see if it is legal. I avoid tax legally it is to evade tax that is illegal.
If you want to say something say it don't whisper it. I suggest you read what I said and stop trying to judge me incorrectly. If you don't like my beliefs add me to your ignore list
Did you ever manage to get that great place you wanted or have the prices effected you?

Cantab.

MorningStar wrote:

Ring the tax office and see if it is legal. I avoid tax legally it is to evade tax that is illegal.
If you want to say something say it don't whisper it. I suggest you read what I said and stop trying to judge me incorrectly. If you don't like my beliefs add me to your ignore list
Did you ever manage to get that great place you wanted or have the prices effected you?

lol, good on ya Morning Star! He's just a begrudger!

HashSlinging

A house I am interested in buying has been on the market for over 2 months, the estate agent has "lost" the keys and has been waiting for the vendor to replace them, this has been going on for over 2 months now, the house has had a lot of interest and the last time I called they had 40 people waiting to see it, also there have been bids made on the house, up to 325k by people who havent even seen the inside of it. This is crazy! :eek: it is advertised at 275k. Why cant the agency remove the listing and when they have the keys re-list the property, dirty tricks and I hope all estate agents rot in hell.

Here's the place :

http://www1.myhome.ie/search/property.asp?id=254710&np=&rt=search&searchlist=

MorningStar

HashSlinging wrote:

: it is advertised at 275k. Why cant the agency remove the listing and when they have the keys re-list the property, dirty tricks and I hope all estate agents rot in hell.

It will go fo more if you ask me. A nice big place with expansion posibilities in a nice area

I don't think any agent would loose keys as a trick. More likely we are talking about vendors who aren't in the country or inherieted property. I can't think of any logical trick to make up the loss of keys unless they really are trying to keep the price down.

Actually that is with Remax and I know friends in the US that actually had the quick sale motto mean the estate agent didn't show people the house. Call into a neighbour of the house and ask them to contact the owner and tell them what is going on. My friends found notes the day they signed which showed people trying to see the property and complaining about the estate agent.

GeorgeBailey

HashSlinging wrote:

Here's the place :

http://www1.myhome.ie/search/property.asp?id=254710&np=&rt=search&searchlist=

Oooh looks good. Must put in a bid of 330k. That should put the other bidders off.

homeOwner

MorningStar wrote:

I have managed to get see property first and then buy it for a €100 tip on seeing the property first. Not that is a lot less moral than fixtures and fittings.

This sounds suspicious to me. The estate agent is not acting "properly" by allowing someone to pay them to see the place first. You are implying that you gained an advantage by doing this (hence why would someone as experienced as you pay 100euro for nothing). Surely even if you saw it first, anyone else would have been allowed to view it after you and put in a fair bid.

The implication of what you have said is that only you saw it and then put in a bid that was accepted, thereby taking it off the market before the sellers had any idea if there was someone else interested and perhaps willing to pay more and this does not sound legal to me. The estate agents behaved in a very questionable manner here. Surely there is a moral issue here even if you didnt break the law. And at the very least the estate agents seem to have not acted in the best interests of the seller.

If this is not what you were implying can you clarify this as I dont get what the 100euro was for.

MorningStar

homeOwner wrote:

If this is not what you were implying can you clarify this as I dont get what the 100euro was for.

I paid to see the place first or be made aware of property as soon as it came on the market. How the estate agent acts after that is not my affair. I act completely legally and morally. I add an incentive to keep me informed nothing more or less. You know when you watch "location,Loaction, Location" and they see a property first that is becasue there is something in it for the agent. Mainly publicity in that case or maybe it is becasue there is a relationship with the presenters. Offering cash is no different. If you find it against your morals don't do it but you don't have a house yet and have complained about guide prices versus selling prices right? Maybe you need to realise the game you are playing and not expect it to work the way you want it to. Peace cost himself stamp duty due to "morals" but a normal legal method was avilable to him. Which do you want to think you did the right thing and pay €10k or follow reasonable business practice and not pay €10k?

Sponge Bob

I look forward to a declining market where the estate agent pays ME €100 to view the house first

homeOwner

MorningStar wrote:

I paid to see the place first or be made aware of property as soon as it came on the market.

I do understand that it is a "game", but I am asking you what the 100euro was for. Did they allow you to bid first and not let anyone else see it and go sale agreed on your bid OR did you just get to see it first, and then all the other sellers got to see it after that.

Allowing only one person to see a house and taking their bid (and I am assuming the bid was a reasonable one or else the sellers wouldnt have accepted) is illegal. Not on your part but on the part of the estate agent, although the fact that you paid them to act illegally, to me, would seem that you were a participant in their illegal activity. If on the other hand you paid them just to see it first and subsequently they let other people see it, I dont see how that is advantageous and I would like to know how it is.

As you pointed out I am looking for a house currently and I am trying to see what I am up against and what other people might be doing. The more info I have the better.

MorningStar

homeOwner wrote:

I do understand that it is a "game", but I am asking you what the 100euro was for. Did they allow you to bid first and not let anyone else see it and go sale agreed on your bid OR did you just get to see it first, and then all the other sellers got to see it after that.

I do not know what the estate agent does after I see the property all I know is I don't trust a word they say.

homeOwner wrote:

Allowing only one person to see a house and taking their bid (and I am assuming the bid was a reasonable one or else the sellers wouldnt have accepted) is illegal. Not on your part but on the part of the estate agent, although the fact that you paid them to act illegally, to me, would seem that you were a participant in their illegal activity. If on the other hand you paid them just to see it first and subsequently they let other people see it, I dont see how that is advantageous and I would like to know how it is.

I told you what I paid them for so stop suggesting what I do is illegal. The estate agent is hired to sell the house and I think you will find very few laws actually govern them. So state the law that says they must show the house to more than one person and tell them of all offers. I think you will find they are a self governing body and therfore not illegal to do many things people think are. As pointed out €100 isn't going to get a deal and if you don't understand the advantage of being the first bidder you are having serious problems understanding buying a house.
I suggest you never stop looking even when sale agreed or bidding. When you stop the estate agent know you are pinning hopes on the place and use that aginst you.

homeOwner wrote:

As you pointed out I am looking for a house currently and I am trying to see what I am up against and what other people might be doing. The more info I have the better.

THen I suggest you understand what the estate agent can do legally check what self governing sactions they have also. I may not in the market so I am not the threat in fact most investors are staying well away from property due to rent yields.

MorningStar

Sponge Bob wrote:

I look forward to a declining market where the estate agent pays ME €100 to view the house first

live in hope and on the promise of revenge I hear it is a healthy way to live:D

patrickolee

I know this is going against the general mood of the thread but I found a good estate agent. Bought my house off them last May, they were straight and honest. They let me know that it would be a slow sale as the current occupants had not found somewhere else to move to. Sale agreeded within 2 weeks. No coming looking for higher offers, which has happened to me with other estate agents similar to that mentioned earlier in this thread. Their good name....

Glavey auctioneers, crumlin. They sell a lot of houses in the Crumlin/Drimnagh area.

They aren't all bad out there, hope the good ones stay in business.

jdivision

Sponge Bob wrote:

Certain parts of Clondalkin are ONLY called Lucan because Liam Lawlor bribed the post office years ago. The post office are investigating this ...for at least 3 years but have not concluded the investigation yet . As the issue is still under investigation it is misleading of Gunne to call Adamstown 'lucan' although calling Adamstown 'adamstown' on its own is correct .

That investigation concluded nearly two years ago. From The Irish Times:

Fri, Aug 13, 04
An Post says staff did not change address
Tim O'Brien

The An Post investigation into whether former Fianna Fáil TD Mr Liam Lawlor was able to have a postal address changed in return for a financial contribution from a property developer, has exonerated An Post staff.

The investigation into claims by the property developer, Mr Séamus Ross of Menolly Homes, that Mr Lawlor asked him for more then €50,000 (£40,000) also found An Post made no decision to change the address of a housing estate from Clondalkin to Lucan.

The details of the investigation have been forwarded to the Mahon tribunal by An Post. It is understood An Post concluded that if the details of the alleged payment were correct, it was an unfortunate misunderstanding on Mr Ross's part, and one which had a happy outcome for Mr Lawlor.

Mr Lawlor has denied he ever received the payment or made any improper representations.

Victor

Please make sure

[/quote] codes are done correctly

Please attribute articles.

Andrew Duffy

MorningStar wrote:

Ring the tax office and see if it is legal. I avoid tax legally it is to evade tax that is illegal.
If you want to say something say it don't whisper it. I suggest you read what I said and stop trying to judge me incorrectly. If you don't like my beliefs add me to your ignore list
Did you ever manage to get that great place you wanted or have the prices effected you?

I have spoken to a professional about it, and it is illegal. The stamp duty band is determined by the total consideration, and you can consturct the deal such that the duty is paid at the full rate on just the price of the building for a very small saving. Paying under the counter, while being legally dubious for you and a tax problem for the seller, would also be viewed as a transaction designed to avoid paying tax and as such is illegal.

I bought a new 800 sq.ft. two-bed apartment in Dublin 4 with parking. Work out how much it cost if you like.

MorningStar

Andrew Duffy wrote:

I have spoken to a professional about it, and it is illegal. The stamp duty band is determined by the total consideration, and you can consturct the deal such that the duty is paid at the full rate on just the price of the building for a very small saving. Paying under the counter, while being legally dubious for you and a tax problem for the seller, would also be viewed as a transaction designed to avoid paying tax and as such is illegal.

I bought a new 800 sq.ft. two-bed apartment in Dublin 4 with parking. Work out how much it cost if you like.

Well ask the tax office like I said. Your "professional" doesn't sound very well informed or you did not explain it right. I bought expensive furniture and fitting becasue I liked them I just happened to buy the house off the same people. Two seperate deals. I wouldn't buy the furniture without the house becasue I would have no where for it.:D

I can work out your place isn't what you said you were going to be able to buy like I said. I am sure you spent a lot on it but I doubt it was worth it and I dislike appartments as a home. Of course I am not into flash and no bang but that is taste which some people never can buy. :cool:

lomb

Morningstar, paying cash for 'fixtures' that are attached to the property are part of the consideration. this includes carpets,curtains, fitted kitchen, fitted wardrobes, the toilet seat, the light holders, chandeliers etc.
if u paid 10grand for a sofa and u got away with it its not right, and u know it, and it is tax fraud. the fact that ireland has a history of protecting home owners and land owners means u will get away with it most proberly, but i can assure u its fraud.

MorningStar

lomb wrote:

Morningstar, paying cash for 'fixtures' that are attached to the property are part of the consideration. this includes carpets,curtains, fitted kitchen, fitted wardrobes, the toilet seat, the light holders, chandeliers etc.
if u paid 10grand for a sofa and u got away with it its not right, and u know it, and it is tax fraud. the fact that ireland has a history of protecting home owners and land owners means u will get away with it most proberly, but i can assure u its fraud.

The lights in my house took me a long time to find and when I move I will take them with me. They range from the 40s to the 70s. One of them is worth €5k as it is signed by the designer. If somebody wants the fixtures in my house it will cost over €40k otherwise they come with me.
To clarify as I was including furniture and did say furniture and fittings last. a cooker is a fitting by the way. My kitchen table is cost €5k and worth €10k to the right collector.
I can assure you it is not fraud. The tax office are fully aware of the practice and it is expected and understood. You want to get on your moral high horse and tell me it is wrong fine. Irish law however favours the renter so at least get it right. I can't remeber are you a homeowner or just bitter?
I pay a lot of taxes and avoid them where I can. Check with the tax office as I said.

whizzbang

MorningStar wrote:

The lights in my house took me a long time to find and when I move I will take them with me. They range from the 40s to the 70s. One of them is worth €5k as it is signed by the designer. If somebody wants the fixtures in my house it will cost over €40k otherwise they come with me.
To clarify as I was including furniture and did say furniture and fittings last. a cooker is a fitting by the way. My kitchen table is cost €5k and worth €10k to the right collector.
I can assure you it is not fraud. The tax office are fully aware of the practice and it is expected and understood. You want to get on your moral high horse and tell me it is wrong fine. Irish law however favours the renter so at least get it right. I can't remeber are you a homeowner or just bitter?
I pay a lot of taxes and avoid them where I can. Check with the tax office as I said.

If you are so confident give us your real name and PSI number and we'll ask on your behalf

iguana

whizzbang wrote:

If you are so confident give us your real name and PSI number and we'll ask on your behalf

Why the hell should he do that? What he is doing is standard practice. I am purchasing a house in the UK at the moment. I was up against 2 other bidders. Both of whom bid £250k as that is the stamp duty threshold where it goes from 1% to 3%. I bid £250k for the house but also put in an offer of £2k for the furniture and fittings.

I would guess that the seller had no intention of taking the things that I am buying for the £2k so if I hadn't bid for them whoever got the house would have gotten them anyway. But if that option hadn't been open to me I would have bid £250k and the seller would have had to have chosen whichever bidder was in the fastest position to buy but could be the most flexible about completion.

Why exactly is the government more entitled to £5k for doing nothing than the seller is entitled to £2k to give me a dishwasher, washing machine, curtains, shed etc?

whizzbang

iguana wrote:

Why exactly is the government more entitled to £5k for doing nothing than the seller is entitled to £2k to give me a dishwasher, washing machine, curtains, shed etc?

because they make up the rules, its called "the law"

iguana

whizzbang wrote:

because they make up the rules, its called "the law"

Except that the law allows for bids on fixtures and fittings. It is completely legal. If it wasn't it would be done under the table and not included in the contract and mortgage application.

MorningStar

iguana wrote:

Except that the law allows for bids on fixtures and fittings. It is completely legal. If it wasn't it would be done under the table and not included in the contract and mortgage application.

They won't beleive me. Andrew Duffy asked an "expert" and has bought one property so he know more about it:rolleyes:

It's just sour grapes from people who can't buy property or think they were ripped off. They blame everybody but themselves for their own lack of knowledge.

Considering the tread is about dodgy estate agents I think they are missing the points that yes there are dodgy practices but this is not one of them.

Sponge Bob

iguana wrote:

Except that the law allows for bids on fixtures and fittings. It is completely legal.

These contracts to avoid clashes with stamp duty ceilings are common, its because in a rising market there is a tendency for properties to push against the bands from below. They have always been there. The rebanding of the old £150k / €190k FTB band caused a massive surge in prices which had been held around that threshold in some rural areas although the rebanding from €190k to €317k was actually done a few years back to recognise reality in the larger towns where that threshold had been burst anyway . The problem thereafter was that the larger towns then surged to €317k from around €250k in a very short time.

First time buyers in Ireland struggle around €317,000 because they pay either 0% stamp duty or 3% , thats €10k in cash or nothing . As well as that there are many bidders in a very compressed price range around , and just below, €317k trying to DIFFERENTIATE themselves from each other . Consequently there is no such thing as a €320k property unless the buyer is a total muppet .

The €317k threshhold is also an important step for the investor ...6% to 7.5% or about €5k cash..... and brings the FTB and the Investor (who is more clued having had a property before ) into direct conflict. The investors should be pushed towards the same band as trader uppers in the interests of equity .

A more gradualistic scale where stamp duty was incremented in 0.1% steps would probably result in less grief for everybody and a more effective conversion of real property prices into real revenue for the government . A difference of 0.1% Stamp Duty here or there is not an incentive to anybody to duck and dive a difference of 1.5% or 3% is.

Trader uppers are equally very aware of the €381,000 band where they pay 6% or 7.5% , consequently there is no such thing as a €382k house ...again unless the buyer is a muppet

The bands are detailed here

In the UK the fixtures and fittings is recognised as a separate valid transaction by the revenue but not aggregated .

In Ireland it is not, were the revenue 'aware' of this contract it would be aggregated into the house price for stamp duty calculations.

As YOUR solicitor is an agent of the revenue in Ireland, for the collection of stamp duty, and said role supecedes their obligations to you as your solicitor therefore YOUR solicitor cannot help to deal with this 'separate' contract or be in any way 'aware' of it .

Therefore you must organise this 'fixtures and fittings contract' yourself with no help from the solicitor.

iguana in this instance is both right and wrong

MorningStar

Sponge Bob wrote:

Consequently there is no such thing as a €320k property unless the buyer is a total muppet .

SO you are saying Peace was a muppet for doing what he did which is what I was saying politley

Sponge Bob wrote:

In Ireland it is not, were the revenue 'aware' of this contract it would be aggregated into the house price for stamp duty calculations.

Can you show this somhow becasue Irish law and UK law are generally the same on older things such as property transfers etc... I have used the term Furniture and fittings out of a habit but I might do it for a reason.

Sponge Bob wrote:

As YOUR solicitor is an agent of the revenue in Ireland, for the collection of stamp duty, and said role supecedes their obligations to you as your solicitor therefore YOUR solicitor cannot help to deal with this 'separate' contract or be in any way 'aware' of it .

The solicitor at no point is an agent of the state but cannot be involved or aware of illegal transaction. Furnitre purchases can be handled by a solicitor if you wish for definite

Sponge Bob

MorningStar wrote:

Can you show this somhow becasue Irish law and UK law are generally the same on older things such as property transfers etc... I have used the term Furniture and fittings out of a habit but I might do it for a reason.

I will show YOU precisely nothing unless you pay me cash up front .

The solicitor at no point is an agent of the state but cannot be involved or aware of illegal transaction. Furnitre purchases can be handled by a solicitor if you wish for definite

Uh DuHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Agent of the Revenue is what I said not Agent of the State . I have nothing to add bar a pro forma invoice for €250 and yes I take Paypal .

Andrew Duffy

MorningStar wrote:

I can work out your place isn't what you said you were going to be able to buy like I said. I am sure you spent a lot on it but I doubt it was worth it and I dislike appartments as a home. Of course I am not into flash and no bang but that is taste which some people never can buy. :cool:

I bought it with 100% finance because I was bored with where I used to live. Also, I'm really sure your taste is esquisite because:

MorningStar wrote:

One of them is worth €5k as it is signed by the designer. ... My kitchen table is cost €5k and worth €10k to the right collector.

... sound like really tasteful, understated items. They will come in useful when paying your penalties and interest to the Revenue Commissioner after your prosecution for tax evasion.

While Internet links are no substitute for real advice, try these two, from the IAVI and Revenue Commissioners respectively:

http://www.iavi.ie/pv/Winter%201997/pv_winter_97-28-30.htm (search for "stamp")

http://www.revenue.ie/leaflets/sd1e.pdf (search for "contents")