since
19-04-2018
Friday
Karolidis_and_C
Frequent Contributor
At Karolidis & Co we specialise in cost effective legal and accounting services to startups and small business. Our award winning team provides the highest quality in legal and accounting services.
About Karolidis_and_Co
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Wednesday
Hi Sarah Are the two parties holding the 99% jointly or are they holding 49.5% each? If the former, they will be joint tenants of the 99/100 shares (need to select the dropdown when entering this into TOL), with the other party 1/100. If the latter, I believe you'll need to have 495/100 shares, 495/100 shares, 10/100 shares. Regards Nick
... View more
a week ago
1 like
Hi Paul I would suggest engaging a lawyer/conveyancer to undertake this process on your behalf as it'll be more efficient and less likely to result in errors. Regards Nick
... View more
3 weeks ago
1 like
Yes - we've processed a few. From memory I believe you need to create two entities as one is acting in its capacity as executor and the other personally. Regards Nick
... View more
4 weeks ago
1 like
Hi Marcus I don't understand the issue - when opening the workspace and inputting title details, PEXA provides title details as at that point in time. Meaning if there are other proprietors/interests registered on the title, caveats, etc. they are shown. Any recent activity will be shown on the title (unless an interest was for example registered and then removed prior to creating the workspace). Can you please provide any further details regarding the issue to help us identify where the risk/problem can arise? Regards Nick
... View more
a month ago
1 like
That does seem strange, I don't see how that is an efficient way to proceed as the caveat should be removed prior to proceeding to settlement... Agree that the system should not allow settlement to proceed to Ready/Ready in this scenario.
... View more
a month ago
1 like
If of the same firm - yes I believe so. If the authorisation form was signed for a previous conveyancer, no a new CA form would need to be signed.
... View more
a month ago
Yes this sounds like a bug in the system. I would suggest calling PEXA support if not resolved yet and have them take a look at this behind the scenes!
... View more
20-02-2019
01:54 PM
2 Likes
I don't see this as an issue if both parties are on the title separately each party should be able to separately represented. Each representative will need to be invited into the matter and select the relevant party they are representing. Regards Nick
... View more
18-02-2019
01:57 PM
Hi there Unlike a bank transfer, my understanding is that with a BPAY transfer, if the reference number (as opposed to the BPAY number) is incorrect, the transfer will still occur - bank transfers generally bounce if the account # is not correct as the BSB is not associated with that account generally. I expect the way to resolve is with the relevant institution quoting the mistaken reference number and the correct reference number and they should be able to re-allocate the amount to the correct account. Regards Nick
... View more
15-02-2019
11:14 AM
9 Likes
To celebrate the achievement of workspaces progressing to Ready/Ready - can someone with creative skills add a fireworks or champagne animation? My staff and I feel this would give everyone a kick!
... View more
Category:
15-02-2019
11:11 AM
1 like
Hi there Not sure if a separate upload of the settlement statement would help in your situations, it appears that the purchaser's representatives are not uploading the correct funds required to settle which is causing your issues. If parties upload the correct funds required to settle it should be an easy process for you to determine whether the loan funds + linked account are sufficient or whether there is a shortfall. That being said, I have noticed banks sometimes forget that we cannot see the lodgement fees for the banks until they prepare the mortgage, hence the "Total funds for settlement" that we can provide does not include these extra lodgement fees (and therefore once the banks add their docs, total funds required will likely need to increase for these fees). Regards Nick
... View more
15-02-2019
11:04 AM
1 like
Agree that there should be a 'one click' option for downloading a PDF however in the interim, you can "Print as PDF" instead of printing (quicker than printing and scanning and also saves paper!) Regards Nick
... View more
05-02-2019
12:33 PM
Yes, I believe this is possible. The representative for the sale will need to send a link request to the trailing workspace (i.e. representative for the sale) and the dates and times need to sign. See below link which should help; https://community.pexa.com.au/t5/Help-Centre/How-to-Complete-a-Simultaneous-Settlement-in-PEXA/ba-p/2470 Regards Nick
... View more
30-01-2019
12:25 PM
1 like
Hi Clara I believe what is meant is that you can enter the council rates, etc. as purchaser destinations OR vendor destinations. I do not agree that this is the best approach as if they are vendor destinations, it is much easier to confirm that the balance payable to vendor matches vendor destinations and therefore the correct totals are being paid. Some representatives believe the purchaser should be adding these items (and therefore they end up being purchaser destinations), requiring a manual additional of vendor destinations + some of purchaser destinations to check that they total = the balance due to vendor. I would prefer if PEXA updated their view that instead of these being "shared items" they are more properly referable as vendor destinations and therefore all items which reduce the balance due to vendor are in the correct section, allowing quick and easy reconciliation. Again, just a viewpoint, there may be a good reason this is not implemented that I am not aware of.. Regards Nick
... View more
29-01-2019
02:42 PM
1 like
This loan (despite it being a related party loan) would likely be considered an asset. In this situation I believe you may be required to obtain probate to discharge the mortgage (or it would be prudent to do so even if not required). Regards Nick
... View more
29-01-2019
02:39 PM
1 like
Given the urgency and specific nature of the query, I would suggest calling PEXA Support to resolve over the phone / allow them to investigate the file promptly.
... View more
29-01-2019
02:36 PM
1 like
Hi Jessica There is no way to bypass as we understand this information is passed on to the relevant state revenue body (of course if exempt from stamp duty it should not change anything). That being said, you may have already resources relating to value, such as a council notice of land tax certificate. We normally use the council notice or an online market value estimator such as Domain / Real Estate.com.au, etc. Regards Nick
... View more
23-01-2019
11:32 AM
1 like
I believe you still have to undertake the training sessions online for the system to recognise you as PEXA certified, regardless of the number of transactions: https://community.pexa.com.au/t5/PEXA-Certified/ct-p/GettingStartedwithPEXA
... View more
19-12-2018
10:11 PM
Not sure Re the technically correct answer however if not legally required it is good practice to ensure an appropriate paper trail and authorisation to conduct the matter is in place.
... View more
14-12-2018
02:28 PM
I don't think there is a way around this. The system will not let you lodge otherwise.
... View more
12-12-2018
04:55 PM
3 Likes
Completed now. Missed it earlier somehow!
... View more
12-12-2018
10:11 AM
3 Likes
Hi there That is my understanding of the process. Re timing - if Financial Settlement has occurred, funds are on their way. It is then subject to bank clearance times, however from experience most of our clients receive the funds within 24 hours.
... View more
16-11-2018
05:43 PM
I don’t see an issue with this. We’ve had trustees transfer (VIC) to other trustees for no consideration and don’t see a SMSF making any difference. I do note that stamp duty verification may take longer as (at least in VIC) the exemption is treated as “complex” and needs to be manually assessed.
... View more
16-11-2018
05:34 PM
Hi Neala Last time we checked subdivisions must be lodged outside of PEXA and there were no immediate plans to add this feature. Regards Nick
... View more
16-11-2018
05:30 PM
1 like
Great to hear about your experience! Must say that having to call a few days earlier to obtain indicative figures shouldn’t be necessary. Let’s hope that becomes a standard disclosure via PEXA soon as the process should remove the need to make those calls...
... View more
15-11-2018
12:14 PM
This appears to be covered here: https://community.pexa.com.au/t5/Ask-the-PEXA-Community/User-Workspace-Notification/m-p/13301#M4323 "the Subscriber Manager will still receive the email / notification even if/when the user adds their email address. Adding in the email address will ensure they receive the email as well, however, as the Subscriber Manager is the greatest level of authority within the PEXA System, and are responsible for monitoring the overall use of PEXA, they will always receive the notification as a default. Thank you"
... View more
15-11-2018
12:12 PM
Happy to be corrected however it seems that the party who adds adjustments is the only party that can amend - we assume this is to prevent version control issues..
... View more
12-11-2018
12:12 PM
2 Likes
Acceptable methods of destruction or invalidation The subscriber can elect to either securely destroy a pCT or render it invalid. An appropriate secure destruction method would be to shred the pCT and securely dispose of the shredding. The appropriate method of rendering a pCT invalid is to stamp the pCT as ‘INVALID – CANNOT BE USED FOR ANY LEGAL PURPOSE’. If a client requires the return of the invalidated pCT for sentimental or other reasons, the subscriber will be responsible to ensure that the pCT is invalidated in such a way that it cannot be used.
... View more
Latest Tags
No tags yet
Likes From
