obiter | ByLawyers News and Updates

Purchasing off the plan – All states

by

To assist practitioners advising clients who are purchasing off the plan, new precedents have been added to the By Lawyers Purchase of Real Property guides in all states.

The two new precedents for practitioners advising potential purchasers are:

  • Initial letter to proposed off the plan purchaser; and
  • Enclosure – Considerations when purchasing off the plan.

The Enclosure is designed to be provided to clients who are considering buying off the plan. It provides plain language information about:

  • What ‘off the plan’ means.
  • The risks of purchasing off the plan.
  • The advantages of purchasing off the plan.

All the pertinent considerations for a client looking at entering into a contract to buy a property off the plan are covered. Importantly, the potential risks are clearly explained, including:

  • Being locked in until the sunset date.
  • Potential for loss if the market deteriorates between the day of sale and the settlement date.
  • Special conditions that operate in the developer’s favour.
  • Possible dissatisfaction with finished product.
  • Changes to the building.
  • Additional legal costs being involved.

Both new precedents can be found in folder A. Getting the matter underway, on each Purchase of Real Property matter plan.

These helpful new precedents were created in response to a request from a By Lawyers subscriber.

Off the plan contracts – NSW

by

Significant changes to off the plan contracts commenced 1 December 2019.

The changes arise from the Conveyancing Legislation Amendment Act 2018 (NSW) and the Conveyancing (Sale of Land) Amendment Regulation 2019 (NSW). They place further disclosure obligations on vendors. They also create new remedies and stronger protections for purchasers when entering into residential off the plan contracts.

Changes to off the plan contracts – summary:

  • Certain prescribed documents must be attached to residential off the plan contracts. These include a prescribed Disclosure Statement, a draft plan prepared by a registered surveyor and other draft documents, as set out in clause 4A of the Conveyancing (Sale of Land) Regulation 2017.
  • A purchaser can rescind the contract within 14 days if the Disclosure Statement, draft plan or relevant prescribed documents are not attached to off the plan contracts exchanged on or after 1 December 2019.
  • There is an ongoing obligation on the vendor to notify purchasers of changes to material particulars using the prescribed Notice of Changes form. Purchasers may be able to rescind or claim compensation if there is a change to a material particular.
  • The cooling-off period for residential off the plan contracts is extended to 10 business days.
  • The final registered plan must be provided to the purchaser at least 21 days before settlement.
  • Deposits must be retained by the stakeholder in a trust or controlled monies account.

An off the plan contract is defined in the amending act to mean a contract for the sale of a residential lot that does not exist at the time the contract is entered into.

The following are not caught by the amendments:

  • The sale of a commercial property off the plan.
  • The sale of a residential lot off the plan if it is sold at the point when the title is registered but an occupation certificate has not been issued.
  • Contracts arising out of the exercise of an option that was entered into before 1 December 2019.

Updates to By Lawyers publications

  • The By Lawyers Conveyancing Publication, including Sale and Purchase Guides and 1001 Conveyancing Answers, all contain dedicated commentary regarding off the plan contracts. These commentaries now cover the new requirements in detail.
  • The By Lawyers Contract for Sale of Land has been amended as follows:
    • Statutory cooling off notice – 10 business days;
    • Statutory attachments table includes Disclosure Statement;
    • Price and deposit clause addresses the requirement for deposit and instalment payments to be held as trust or controlled money;
    • New clause 16(d) ‘Residential off the plan contracts’; and
    • Off the plan settlement changed to 21 days after notice of registration of plan.
  • All precedents making reference to cooling off periods have been updated to accord with the new period.
  • Disclosure Statement and Notice of Changes forms are available on the Sale matter plan.
  • New notices for rescission and compensation claims have been added to the ‘Claims, disputes and notices’ folder. Precedent letters serving these notices on the relevant parties have also been added.

By Lawyers are proud to assist subscribers to understand and comply with these amendments. Like all By Lawyers publications, our Conveyancing Guides provide all the necessary commentary and precedents in one place. Enjoy practice more!

 

 

Conveyancing Victoria – Seven reasons to use the By Lawyers Contract of Sale of Land

by

The By Lawyers Contract of Sale of Land for Victoria is gaining more fans among Victorian lawyers and conveyancers all the time, as it simplifies the conveyancing process.

For those still wondering what all the fuss is about, you can read below Seven reasons to use the By Lawyers contract – or you can listen to this lively and informative podcast:

 

Seven reason to use the By Lawyers Contract of Sale of Land:

  1. The contract and the vendor’s statement are combined into ONE document, with the vendor’s statement, logically, coming FIRST. The vendor’s statement is formatted to deal with the obligatory disclosures first, then to group the optional fields in a way that makes removal of those fields simple if they are not required. Part 2 general conditions in PDF form removes the need for ‘standard’ special conditions. Any genuinely special conditions can be added.
  2. Clear new approach – all pertinent details are set out in Part 1 to enable anyone to quickly understand the deal by referring to this Part.
  3. Particulars of sale include a “sunset date” for off the plan approvals. No more searching through mountains of special conditions to work out this crucial date.
  4. Non-derogation warranty. The general conditions can be amended by any special conditions BUT not so as to reduce the rights created by the general conditions. No more contracts that say one thing on page 1 and reverse that on page 15! This contract is fair to both parties.
  5. General Condition 12 – deposit release – establishes a clear protocol for early release, by requiring timely objection to title. Title objections actually have very limited relevance to the Torrens system, as title is part of the disclosure in the contract. General Condition 12 allows 28 days to object to title. This offers protection to purchasers, while allowing the vendor to have use of the deposit. Again, this process is fair to both parties.
  6. General Condition 14 – loan condition – extends the time for approval to 21 days and allows for extension, subject to vendor’s ability to end the extension by notice.
  7. General Condition 25 – losses – removes any disputes relating to default losses from the settlement process and allows the parties to resolve these issues after settlement. Unless there is a legitimate objection to title, the matter is settle and disputes relating to quality and inclusions etc, follow after settlement. This removes unnecessary settlement delays.

The By Lawyers Contract of sale of Land is available to LEAP users and By Lawyers subscribers via the Conveyancing & Property – Sale matter plans, or for purchase on the By Lawyers website.

VIC – State Revenue Office amendments

by

From 1 July 2017:

  • exemption of transfer duty for transfers between spouses is only available for principal place of residence. Transfers following breakdown of relationship are unchanged and the exemption continues to apply to all properties.
  • off-the-plan duty concession is restricted to properties acquired by owner/occupiers who are eligible for the principal place of residence or first home buyer duty concessions.
  • First Home Buyers:
    • Who purchase a property to the value of $600,000 will pay no duty, with concessions available for properties between $600,000 and $750,000.
    • Who purchase in regional Victoria a new home to the value of $750,000 may apply for the First Home Owner Grant of $20,000. Criteria includes the property must be the applicant’s principal place of residence for a continuous period of 12 months, moving in within 12 months of completion.
    • From 27 June 2017 Australian Defence Force personnel enrolled to vote in Victoria on duty or on leave are exempt from the residence requirement for the First Home Owner Grant.

Land Tax

From 1 January 2018, vacant residential properties in the inner and middle ring of Melbourne will be subject to a vacant residential land tax of 1 per cent of the property’s capital improved value. A property will be considered vacant if it is unoccupied for six months or more in a calendar year. The six months does not need to be continuous. There are exemptions for many properties including for vacant land.

 

SA – Revenue SA changes from 22 June 2017

by

Off the plan apartments.

A $10 000 grant will be provided to eligible off-the-plan apartment purchasers where the contract is entered into between 22 June 2017 and 30 September 2017.

Off-the-plan stamp duty concession.

From 22 June 2017 the off the plan stamp duty concession no longer applies to foreign purchasers. Generally the concession has been extended until 30 June 2018 .

Land tax exemption

A five year land tax exemption will apply to eligible apartments bought off-the-plan where the contract is entered into between 22 June 2017 and 30 June 2018.

Foreign purchasers – From 1 January 2018

A stamp duty surcharge of 4% will apply to foreign purchasers of South Australia residential property.

Off the Plan Sales – Best Endeavours – Part 2

by

Summer2012_BuyingOffThePlan_landingThe April 2011 column considered the case of Joseph Street Pty Ltd v Tan, a decision at first instance reported at [2010] VSC 586. The case has now been reversed on appeal, reported at [2012] VSCA 113.

The effect of the Court of Appeal decision would appear to make the entering into of a s 173 Planning and Environment Act 1987 Agreement compulsory for developers in all circumstances where the municipal council is prepared to enter into such an Agreement.

The case involved a ‘villa unit’ style development of 6 single storey units in Box Hill.  Units were sold off the plan with settlement to be after registration of the plan in accordance with common practice.  The builder that the developer had contracted to undertake construction failed to do so and the developer was forced to find another builder.  As a result, construction was not completed within the time allowed by the contract for registration of the plan (the sunset period) and the developer rescinded the contract.

The purchaser refused to accept rescission and sued for specific performance of the contract on the basis that the vendor had failed to use ‘best endeavours’ to have the plan registered.  It had been established at first instance that this obligation consisted of both an express contractual obligation and also as an implied obligation.

The Full Court identified that registration of the plan could only be achieved when the council had issued a Certificate of Compliance, but that there were two methods by which the developer could obtain that Certificate and thus fulfill the contractual obligation to secure registration of the plan:

  1. the developer could complete all the building works to the satisfaction of all relevant service authorities; or
  2. the developer could enter into a s 173 Agreement with Council after entering into agreements with service providers.

Evidence given on behalf of the developer suggested that the s 173 Agreement option was limited to ‘greenfield’ developments and had not been contemplated by the developer as an option.  However evidence from the council suggested that s 173 Agreements were common in ‘smaller’ developments and indeed the planning permit issued in respect of the development had referred to the possibility of just such an Agreement.

The effect of the s 173 Agreement is to give the council the ability to register on the ‘parent’ title (the title to the unsubdivided land) the requirement that the development be constructed in accordance with the planning permit issued in respect of the development.  If council has the benefit of such an Agreement then, subject to the satisfaction of other relevant authorities, council is able to be satisfied that the development will be built in accordance with the permit and council’s planning responsibility in relation to supervision of construction is thereby satisfied.  If construction is not in accordance with the permit, council is entitled to enforce thes 173 Agreement against the developer and all subsequent registered owners.

The s 173 Agreement process appears to be a shortcut to registration of the plan, as a certificate of compliance may be issued by council well in advance of completion of all construction and infrastructure works.  The requirement that the developer enter into satisfactory agreements with infrastructure providers is a pre-condition to a s 173 Agreement and such arrangements may be tedious to negotiate, but once achieved registration of the plan can quickly follow.

This might cause concern for a purchaser if the only requirement on the vendor is registration of the plan.  As can be seen from the above, this could be achieved well before construction is complete, but no purchaser is going to want to pay for a half finished property.  Thus a purchaser needs to be satisfied that settlement will only be due after both registration of the plan and issue of a certificate of occupancy.  Whilst there is much to be said against a certificate of occupancy being a true reflection that all works have been completed, it is at least an objective confirmation that most works have been completed.  A better test is a satisfactory report from the purchaser’s building consultant, but few developers are prepared to countenance such a hurdle.

Whilst the Court of Appeal in Joseph Street may have identified a shortcut that was open to the developer, it is interesting to note that the developer was not aware of that possibility and there is no suggestion that the purchaser ever suggested to the developer that such a process was available, let alone that the developer refused to follow that course.  Apparently, the mere fact that the option was available and not taken was enough to satisfy the Court that the developer had failed to use his best endeavours.  A true case of ignorance is no excuse.

Whilst written for Victoria, this article has interest and relevance for practitioners in all states. 

See also: Off the Plan Sales – Best Endeavours – Part 1

Connect with us