Should the purchasing party create the workspace?

[Jgal3]

While I know NSW contracts for Sale of Land requires the vendor to create the workspace, would it not be more efficient for the purchaser party to create the workspace?

The reasons for this are because the purchaser party has the vendor details, the land title details and the mortgagee registered on title is automatically linked to the workspace. The onus is on the purchaser to prepare the transfer, notice of sale and invite their mortgagee. By having the vendor representative create the workspace, they would unnecessarily need to enter in the purchaser details only to have the purchaser representative edit these details. 

If there is a logical reason for the vendor to open the workspace, I would love to hear it. 

[DandyCandy]

Hi @Jgal3

Not sure how others normally go about opening the workspace as a Vendor, but when we do it, we don't create the Purchaser party. We just invite the Purchaser's representative and they enter all their client's information when they accept, create the transfer, invite their bank, etc.

[Jgal3]

Hi @DandyCandy

Okay, so that removes the need for the Vendor to fill in details, but it still doesn't explain why the vendor is opening the workspace when the purchaser has the responsibility of preparing the documents for settlement.  

Additionally, receiving an invitation for a workspace which doesn't have purchaser details is more time consuming (especially when an OTP property registers) as you then need to determine who the client is. 

I guess my line of thinking is more like this: the onus is on the purchaser to provide the transfer and settlement documents in a paper transaction - so the onus is still on them to prepare the electronic equivalent. 

[TJ]

Hey @Jgal3,

From what I've observed and discussed with members, for the most part, you're correct in saying that it's easier and makes more sense for the purchaser's rep to create a workspace.

What's important to remember though is that's not always the case; sometimes, just being able to create the workspace earlier, as the vendor's rep, has the most benefit and is more likely to lead to a successful transaction.

It's because of the nuances and variation in transaction circumstances that we've provided flexibility.

[Jgal3]

Thanks, @TJ 

I do appreciate that PEXA allows for either party to create the workspace. I guess it's a case by case basis rather than a fixed rule. 

[Katelyn524]

In WA, our standard contracts require the buyer's side to open the workspace.  However, we use the Projects platform for our developer sellers and so in these instances, we have to open the workspace to benefit from the Projects platform.  Just one reason why a seller might open it

[SCTHornsby · Accepted solution]

Our office (NSW) believes it is the vendor who should create the workspace and invite the purchaser and discharging mortgagee (if applicable).

Not sure how the vendor's representative creates more work for the purchaser's representative if, vendor creates the workspace?  It's all the same information that needs to be entered.  We would only enter purchaser's surname...nothing to edit.

[Jgal3]

Okay, but  why do you think it is more efficient for the vendor to open the workspace? 

I didn't say it creates more work for the purchaser, I said it creates more work for the vendor who is effectively doubling up - on the assumption that the vendor rep is entering information relating to the purchaser. The purchaser rep would be entering information anyway so that makes no difference in terms of the amount of work being carried out by the purchaser rep.