Caveat on property

[Pins]

Hi all,

I recently bought a PPOR in Coburg, Vic (hooray). We settle at the end of July.

A notice came from the lawyer recommending we place a caveat over the property which protects us if anyone else lodges an interest in the property ($200).

It seems like one of those lawyerly things and I'm wondering if it's something we really need to do or whether we can save our $200? Have only recently moved to Melb so not familiar with the process here.

 

[Aaron_C]

It is a good idea - prevents the seller selling to someone else between now and settlement.

 

[Peter_Tersteeg]

Just make sure you let your broker or banker know about it, otherwise it causes a slight delay in obtaining the finance.

 

[jrc]

It is a good idea - prevents the seller selling to someone else between now and settlement.

As well as that it also means a creditor of the Vendor cannot get priority over you

 

[Ausprop]

A notice came from the lawyer recommending we place a caveat over the property which protects us if anyone else lodges an interest in the property ($200).

As annoying as lawyers are, if your lawyer makes a recommendation to you it would be for good reason

 

[Pins]

Consider it lodged. Thanks all

 

[scha9799]

Sometimes I wonder if it is a real cost or the lawyer find a way for charge extra by providing some additional service.

 

[Ausprop]

Sometimes I wonder if it is a real cost or the lawyer find a way for charge extra by providing some additional service.

in this case there isn't a lot to lose unless it was a bargain or you are emotionally attached to this particular property. however $200 is hardly expensive. I think it is also an assertive message to the vendor

 

[Terry_w]

do a search on black v garnot. in this case a creditor of the vendor placed a writ on title approx 1 hr before settlement happended. this meant the creditor had priority over the purchaser and got the house. settlment coudnt occur ( actually settlement would have happened but transfer couldnt be registered so settlement had to be undone). if the purchaser had lodged a caveat then they would have had priority.

 

[Tigerboy]

do a search on black v garnot. in this case a creditor of the vendor placed a writ on title approx 1 hr before settlement happended. this meant the creditor had priority over the purchaser and got the house. settlment coudnt occur ( actually settlement would have happened but transfer couldnt be registered so settlement had to be undone). if the purchaser had lodged a caveat then they would have had priority.

Terry just read the case. I think I'll now lodge a caveat on all purchases and insist on a title search half an hour prior to settlement.

Thanks for that Terry.

 

[RPI]

Also the $200 may not be lawyers fees. In QLD it costs us $181.50 to lodge the caveat with the titles office.

 

[Tigerboy]

do a search on black v garnot. in this case a creditor of the vendor placed a writ on title approx 1 hr before settlement happended. this meant the creditor had priority over the purchaser and got the house. settlment coudnt occur ( actually settlement would have happened but transfer couldnt be registered so settlement had to be undone). if the purchaser had lodged a caveat then they would have had priority.

Terry just read the case. I think I'll now lodge a caveat on all purchases and insist on a title search half an hour prior to settlement.

Thanks for that Terry.

 

[Terry_w]

Terry just read the case. I think I'll now lodge a caveat on all purchases and insist on a title search half an hour prior to settlement.

Thanks for that Terry.

Black v garnock in the case. I spelled it wrong
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2007/31.html

Its an interesting case isn't it.

In summary:
the final title search at 9am.
Writ was registered at 11.53am and
settlement was at 2pm.