Relationship Property

Forums › Off topic › Relationship Property - Separation

1 | 2 | 3

458 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141

#1636576 20-Sep-2016 15:05

I would sell it while you can. You should get a good price and be able to sell it quite quickly. Some say a crash may be around the corner. If so, then it would drop in value and be hard to shift. If you then move on, find a new partner or want to use the money for another property you will be joined to your ex and unable to move on. It's too risky - sell and move on.

trig42

5889 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2094

ID Verified

#1636594 20-Sep-2016 15:20

If it is in Auckland, and bought last year, there should be a decent capital gain in it. If you half the proceeds from the sale you should do OK shouldn't you?

I mean they are saying that in the last year, Auckland house prices have risen by about 15% (maybe more), so if you bought at median (say) then you would have increased the value by about $130,000. Divided by two, plus getting your equity back out that you put in to start with should leave you pretty close to another deposit shouldn't it?

Of course, I do not know your financial circumstances and whether or not you would have the income to support a new mortgage on your own, but you could invest until you are ready to buy again (or buy an investment property in Hamilton or Tauranga, or even the Hawkes Bay or Wellington where Median prices are a lot less than what they are in Auckland (but rising - especially Hamilton and Tauranga).

As others have said in this thread - IMHO you are best to sell the house outright (or at least make sure that she buys it for a fair price from you).

My wife and I went through a similar thing, but it wasn't a break up - we had a third party on our mortgages and he decided to move away (all very amicable). We got the properties valued, he was happy with the values and we bought him out of the mortgages by refinancing with our bank. He ended up with a fairly decent chunk of cash, which he is looking to use to purchase an IP in Wellington/Lower Hutt.

mattwnz

20520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4797

#1636601 20-Sep-2016 15:32

trig42:

If it is in Auckland, and bought last year, there should be a decent capital gain in it. If you half the proceeds from the sale you should do OK shouldn't you?

That depends though if they paid over the top for it or not. You then have to add on agents fees adding about 3-4% to the price it needs to sell for. Also may depend on the area and how it is affected by the unitary plan as to value. The value is likely to be more in the future potential of the land that the actual house, as to how many shoe boxes can be crammed onto the site.

But would they not be required to pay capital gains tax, due to selling within two years of purchasing, under the bright line test?

Wheelbarrow01

1784 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2638

Trusted

Chorus

#1636613 20-Sep-2016 15:49

mattwnz:

trig42:

If it is in Auckland, and bought last year, there should be a decent capital gain in it. If you half the proceeds from the sale you should do OK shouldn't you?

That depends though if they paid over the top for it or not. You then have to add on agents fees adding about 3-4% to the price it needs to sell for. Also may depend on the area and how it is affected by the unitary plan as to value. The value is likely to be more in the future potential of the land that the actual house, as to how many shoe boxes can be crammed onto the site.

But would they not be required to pay capital gains tax, due to selling within two years of purchasing, under the bright line test?

Chapter 5 of the bright line test specifically excludes your principle place of residence:

5.2 ......the property is the main home of the vendor. Excluding a person’s main home from the bright-line test is consistent with the current land sale rules, which generally exclude the sale of a person’s principal residence.

5.4 The main home exception applies when:

the land has a dwelling on it;
the dwelling is occupied mainly as a residence by the owner; and
the dwelling is the main home of the owner.

throbb

675 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 167

#1636626 20-Sep-2016 16:01

trig42:

If it is in Auckland, and bought last year, there should be a decent capital gain in it. If you half the proceeds from the sale you should do OK shouldn't you?

I mean they are saying that in the last year, Auckland house prices have risen by about 15% (maybe more), so if you bought at median (say) then you would have increased the value by about $130,000. Divided by two, plus getting your equity back out that you put in to start with should leave you pretty close to another deposit shouldn't it?

Of course, I do not know your financial circumstances and whether or not you would have the income to support a new mortgage on your own, but you could invest until you are ready to buy again (or buy an investment property in Hamilton or Tauranga, or even the Hawkes Bay or Wellington where Median prices are a lot less than what they are in Auckland (but rising - especially Hamilton and Tauranga).

As others have said in this thread - IMHO you are best to sell the house outright (or at least make sure that she buys it for a fair price from you).

My wife and I went through a similar thing, but it wasn't a break up - we had a third party on our mortgages and he decided to move away (all very amicable). We got the properties valued, he was happy with the values and we bought him out of the mortgages by refinancing with our bank. He ended up with a fairly decent chunk of cash, which he is looking to use to purchase an IP in Wellington/Lower Hutt.

If I sell I should come out with plenty for another deposit. But I guess im more in it for the house and a home, large double garage with a workbench and room for all my tools lol

I guess if she is being motivated by $$$ alone, I guess I could persuade he to sell depending on how the valuation comes back.

mattwnz

20520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4797

#1636631 20-Sep-2016 16:07

Wheelbarrow01:

mattwnz:

trig42:

If it is in Auckland, and bought last year, there should be a decent capital gain in it. If you half the proceeds from the sale you should do OK shouldn't you?

That depends though if they paid over the top for it or not. You then have to add on agents fees adding about 3-4% to the price it needs to sell for. Also may depend on the area and how it is affected by the unitary plan as to value. The value is likely to be more in the future potential of the land that the actual house, as to how many shoe boxes can be crammed onto the site.

But would they not be required to pay capital gains tax, due to selling within two years of purchasing, under the bright line test?

Chapter 5 of the bright line test specifically excludes your principle place of residence:

5.2 ......the property is the main home of the vendor. Excluding a person’s main home from the bright-line test is consistent with the current land sale rules, which generally exclude the sale of a person’s principal residence.

5.4 The main home exception applies when:

the land has a dwelling on it;
the dwelling is occupied mainly as a residence by the owner; and
the dwelling is the main home of the owner.

But are they both living in it now, for it to be considered their principal residence? Or is their main residence currently somewhere else? Also it comes down to the reason of intending to buy and sell. eg the OP did say that they wanted to hang onto it to benefit from the capital gains and rent, but presume they would both live elsewhere and rent it out. So would that mean that the bright line test would then apply? Also the clause does say 'generally' excluded the sale of the persons principal residence, so there are obviously grey areas. It is a complex situation, so they need legal advice over it. I know someone who purchased a house to live in, they lived in it for about 1 year, and then were given a house to live rent free by their work, so moved into that. They rented the house out for about 10 years, then they sold it. They had to pay tax on the capital gain when they sold it, as it was mainly used to rent out, and not live in. This was a few years ago, so we do have a capital gains tax in place.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Kiwifruta

1425 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 337

ID Verified

#1636650 20-Sep-2016 16:25

michael001:
Sell to her:

Get a couple of private independent valuations done.

Talk to the ex and agree to her terms based on an independent valuation.

Get a valuation done by a valuer you both agree on / pick at random.

Talk to the valuer in advance and mention the valuation you are hoping for (for a bank loan) is the highest of the previous valuations + 20%.

She pays you out half of that valuation.

If the valuer has scruples (he won't, never met one that did) then fall back on your previous valuations if he comes in wildly low and re-negotiate.

Buy another house.

As an ex-banker, can I add that banks know who the dodgy valuers are? We won't let on that we know but we do know.

So don't waste your time with dodgy valuers.

throbb

675 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 167

#1636657 20-Sep-2016 16:29

mattwnz:

Wheelbarrow01:

mattwnz:

trig42:

If it is in Auckland, and bought last year, there should be a decent capital gain in it. If you half the proceeds from the sale you should do OK shouldn't you?

That depends though if they paid over the top for it or not. You then have to add on agents fees adding about 3-4% to the price it needs to sell for. Also may depend on the area and how it is affected by the unitary plan as to value. The value is likely to be more in the future potential of the land that the actual house, as to how many shoe boxes can be crammed onto the site.

But would they not be required to pay capital gains tax, due to selling within two years of purchasing, under the bright line test?

Chapter 5 of the bright line test specifically excludes your principle place of residence:

5.2 ......the property is the main home of the vendor. Excluding a person’s main home from the bright-line test is consistent with the current land sale rules, which generally exclude the sale of a person’s principal residence.

5.4 The main home exception applies when:

the land has a dwelling on it;
the dwelling is occupied mainly as a residence by the owner; and
the dwelling is the main home of the owner.

But are they both living in it now, for it to be considered their principal residence? Or is their main residence currently somewhere else? Also it comes down to the reason of intending to buy and sell. eg the OP did say that they wanted to hang onto it to benefit from the capital gains and rent, but presume they would both live elsewhere and rent it out. So would that mean that the bright line test would then apply? Also the clause does say 'generally' excluded the sale of the persons principal residence, so there are obviously grey areas. It is a complex situation, so they need legal advice over it. I know someone who purchased a house to live in, they lived in it for about 1 year, and then were given a house to live rent free by their work, so moved into that. They rented the house out for about 10 years, then they sold it. They had to pay tax on the capital gain when they sold it, as it was mainly used to rent out, and not live in. This was a few years ago, so we do have a capital gains tax in place.

We both lived in it (up until last week anyways) now I live in it.

trig42

5889 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2094

ID Verified

#1636663 20-Sep-2016 16:35

No hope of reconciliation? One week is a short time (unless it had been brewing and stewing for a while before the move out).

Sorry to hear by the way - very stressful.

throbb

675 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 167

#1636666 20-Sep-2016 16:38

trig42:

No hope of reconciliation? One week is a short time (unless it had been brewing and stewing for a while before the move out).

Sorry to hear by the way - very stressful.

The break up happened at the start of August, she has been living in spare room since then. It's been hard. The breakup definitely wasn't my idea and came out of the blue for me. I haven't discussed reconciliation with her, once she sets her mind to something if you try and change her mind it will only make her dig in more.

Batman

Mad Scientist
30014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6217

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1636722 20-Sep-2016 18:14

Kiwifruta:
michael001:
Sell to her:

Get a couple of private independent valuations done.

Talk to the ex and agree to her terms based on an independent valuation.

Get a valuation done by a valuer you both agree on / pick at random.

Talk to the valuer in advance and mention the valuation you are hoping for (for a bank loan) is the highest of the previous valuations + 20%.

She pays you out half of that valuation.

If the valuer has scruples (he won't, never met one that did) then fall back on your previous valuations if he comes in wildly low and re-negotiate.

Buy another house.

As an ex-banker, can I add that banks know who the dodgy valuers are? We won't let on that we know but we do know.

So don't waste your time with dodgy valuers.

Can you define a dodgy valuer or how you know they are dodgy?

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Kiwifruta

1425 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 337

ID Verified

#1636725 20-Sep-2016 18:20

joker97:
Kiwifruta:
michael001:
Sell to her:

Get a couple of private independent valuations done.

Talk to the ex and agree to her terms based on an independent valuation.

Get a valuation done by a valuer you both agree on / pick at random.

Talk to the valuer in advance and mention the valuation you are hoping for (for a bank loan) is the highest of the previous valuations + 20%.

She pays you out half of that valuation.

If the valuer has scruples (he won't, never met one that did) then fall back on your previous valuations if he comes in wildly low and re-negotiate.

Buy another house.

As an ex-banker, can I add that banks know who the dodgy valuers are? We won't let on that we know but we do know.

So don't waste your time with dodgy valuers.

Can you define a dodgy valuer or how you know they are dodgy?

Word gets around of who's valuations to reject. Also we had a fair idea of what was the market value of a property because we were always financing properties, checking GVs etc. Credit managers will reject a valuation or reduce the LVR on a property if they think the value is too high.

I was in business banking and our decisions were mostly made locally, could be different for someone going through a branch where the decision maker could be in a different city and unfamiliar with the local prices.

I won't elaborate further.

mattwnz

20520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4797

#1636726 20-Sep-2016 18:20

Prior to the last GFC in 2007-08, a lot of these apartments were supposedly being significantly over valued. I had a valuer in to provide a market value on a property I was interested in purchasing , and they valued it for half of what it eventually sold for. I thought it sounded really low. From my experience valuations can be very inaccurate. So get a few different opinions.

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
9334 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6203

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1636729 20-Sep-2016 18:22

Kiwifruta:
michael001:

Sell to her:

Get a couple of private independent valuations done.

Talk to the ex and agree to her terms based on an independent valuation.

Get a valuation done by a valuer you both agree on / pick at random.

Talk to the valuer in advance and mention the valuation you are hoping for (for a bank loan) is the highest of the previous valuations + 20%.

She pays you out half of that valuation.

If the valuer has scruples (he won't, never met one that did) then fall back on your previous valuations if he comes in wildly low and re-negotiate.

Buy another house.

As an ex-banker, can I add that banks know who the dodgy valuers are? We won't let on that we know but we do know.

So don't waste your time with dodgy valuers.

As another ex-banker, I can vouch for this. The bank I worked for had a private blacklist of valuers for varying types of property (residential, commercial, etc) and the bank would not accept valuations from those guys. The valuers themselves would not necessarily know they were on the blacklist.

Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1636786 20-Sep-2016 19:11

I know you said you will get a lawyer but two things you should never ask for advice about on a tech forum, legal or medical matters.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

1 | 2 | 3