Originally published on theconversation.com
Buying property is the largest personal investment decision most Australians will ever make. With pricing for standalone houses rising dramatically in many capital cities, more people are looking to buy apartments.
Buying an off the plan apartment can be one way to enter the property market.
Buying off the plan means consumers commit to buying a property, at today’s prices, before it’s built. Settlement happens once construction is finished.
This approach comes with risks and challenges — but following six key steps can help consumers protect themselves.
Three key challenges
If you’re an off the plan apartment buyer, you face three key challenges.
First, consumers are subject to quite biased and complex sales contracts that favour developers. This puts purchasers into an unequal bargaining position.
Secondly, many consumers are unaware of the property rights and obligations that arise from purchasing a strata title property.
Strata titling enables individual ownership of a lot (such as apartment) as well as shared ownership of the common property (such as the lobby, garages, driveways and gardens).
Lot owners are legislatively required to be involved in cooperatively managing and maintaining their apartment complexes with their fellow lot owners.
Our research reveals there’s room for improvement
We recently completed a research project examining the importance of information disclosure requirements of off the plan apartment sales contracts. We:
reviewed information disclosure requirements in a number of industries, to get a sense of what’s standard, and compared that with information disclosure requirements involved in off the plan purchases.
conducted in-depth interviews with 31 industry practitioners and stakeholders from around Australia, including lawyers, property developers, real-estate agents, policy managers, consumer policy advocates and off the plan apartment buyers.
did an online survey of 512 off the plan residential apartment buyers.
We found opportunities to improve the system, and outlined recommendations for key stakeholders:
We found most off the plan apartment buyers in Australia are typically “mum and dad” investors, but a growing proportion are owner occupiers.
Off the plan buyers tend to be mid to high income earners, well educated, working in professional or managerial roles, and between the ages of 20 and 44.
About 46% of off the plan buyers are Australian couples with dependent children. Nearly 69% of buyers were born in Australia. This contradicts a widely held perception that most off the plan apartment buyers are overseas investors.
Systemic change is needed
Our findings indicate there is limited consumer protection through regulations when buying off the plan apartments. Consumers need to educate themselves, effectively engage in the purchasing process and make sure they’re making informed decisions.
However, no amount of disclosure will cure problems built into the system such as a lack of accountability, the discretion on developers and poor quality products.
Specifically, consumers need to be protected from features within these contracts that are inherently harmful. These include the ability for the developer to cancel the contract, change the plan or floor structure, or include financial clauses that make it hard for a buyer to get their deposit back.
The purchaser may not have the financial literacy skills needed to understand the true cost of the fees associated with the property, relying on the developer to disclose this.
Policy change is needed to better protect buyers and put the onus on developers to make contract features such as these much clearer.
There is a glaring lack of government oversight of property contracts and the housing sector more broadly.
In other sectors, such as purchasers contracting for consumer goods (such as mobile telephones, whitegoods, insurance) there are distinct and clear roles for government oversight, accountability and consumer protection for non-compliance.
For example if you buy a fridge and it turns out to be faulty, the seller has to replace it or refund your money. But there’s no such legal protection in many off the plan contracts. Instead, the onus is on buyers to take the developer to court.
And many buyers may not be keen to terminate an off the plan sales contracts because they have already invested emotionally in the lifestyle “dream” of living in a complex with features such as a pool, a gym, and so on (without fully understanding what strata fees usually come with them).
Six steps to protect yourself
There are six critical steps purchasers must follow to protect themselves in buying their homes off the plan:
1) Evaluate the credibility of the builder. Google everything you can about them, and what’s been reported. What else they have built? Have their other buildings been around long enough for defects to show up? Are previous buyers happy? Can you search the developer’s building license number to see if any complaints have been lodged with regulators?
2) Anticipate market dynamics such as general economic conditions that might impact apartment prices. If the local market drops or becomes flooded with apartments, you could be left with a property worth less than you paid for it.
3) Get legal advice on contract documents — and make sure your lawyer knows what to check and examines the contract really closely.
4) Understand the rights and obligations associated with community living. All those extra features, like pools, usually come with extra fees.
5) Consider an independent building inspection. If issues are identified at that point, notify the developer immediately. Some defects may be fixable but others might not become apparent for years to come.
6) Know where to seek assistance. Usually that will be via the fair trading department in your state, so make sure you know how to contact them.
Sacha Reid receives funding from the Consumer Policy and Research Centre.
Melissa Pocock receives funding from Consumer Policy and Research Centre.
Savindi Caldera and Therese Wilson do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.