Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Woman banned from her property

CCH news item in latest December Issue 205

Woman banned from her property

The Herald Sun reports a woman attempting to retain her home following a separation with her partner has been banned from her property after pointing out defects in the home to potential buyers.

The Federal Magistrates Court heard the woman was emphasising structural problems and minimising the works done an attempt to devalue the property so she had a chance to retain it.

Her former female partner was granted exclusive occupation in July 2012 on the condition she pay the mortgage and organise to sell the house for a reserve price of $925,000

The property went to auction in September 2012 and was passed in on a single vendor bid of $800,000

Real Estate Agents have re-assessed the value of the property at about $100,000 below what they originally expected. There is a current offer to buy the property at $810,000.

The Federal Magistrates Court heard about the women's "enthusiasm" to tell prospective buyers about structural faults and had taken place two years earlier.

The women's lawyer claimed she was "merely discharging he obligation as a vendor" and denied she was acting to bring down the price of the house to increase her chance of keeping it.
Federal Magistrate Tom Altobelli said
The woman had emphasised the problems and and minimised the repairs.

One cannot, in all the circumstances, help but draw the inference that the respondent is using the structural problems with the home to her own advantage.
The woman is appealing the first court judgement ordering the property to be sold by her ex and was seeking orders to let her ex and was seeking orders to let her move in while waiting for the appeal to be heard.

The court heard that both parties were holding firm to their positions, with one wanting the property sold and the other resolutely wanting to retain it.
Federal Magistrate Altobelli said
The women were unable to cooperate on any aspect of the property
He banned the woman from going within 500 metres of the property and ordered the reserve price to be revised down to $825,000.

Executive Secretary - Shared Parenting Council of Australia
 Was my post helpful? If so, please let others know about the FamilyLawWebGuide whenever you see the opportunity
This situation is close to my heart as I am going through a similar situation, whereas my Ex wants to sell a property if she cannot get an "agreed" value, but i wish to retain it.
The value she has put on it (and using a valuer) is easily $200,00 over what the market would pay.

I note the judge ordered it be sold with a reserve.
How does that happen?  Surely it should be a no-reserve Auction, thus truly "market value"?

I have seen houses for "sale by tender" whereby a marketing campaign takes place then all perspective buyers submit their bid in an envelope by a certain timeframe.
At an agreed time after all offers are received, the envelopes are opened and the property goes to the highest offer.

The additional spin, I'd like to put on it would be, I submit a bid myself and IF my bid is in excess of the highest offer, I get the property at the highest offer PLUS an amount (say $10,000).
The reasoning is that I should not have to bid against myself

In my property orders we have clauses stating that if we couldn't agree on a property value that the Real Estate institute would provide a binding value. If, even after that, it didn't sell within 12 months, it would then go to auction with a reserve again set by the institute.

Interesting to see a judgement with such specific instructions/bans relating to property & the selfish behavior of one party however in other cases involving children & more selfish behavior from one party e.g. letters and birthday cards only... the Magistrate went a very different way.

"I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realise that what you heard is not what I meant."

I think if you ex sell that property you can claim on your ex only if you have any agreement about the profit sharing or any thing else.But you have not any that type of agreement than you are not able to sue him for selling that property.
1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets