About GeorgePolus

Hi Nicola   For now the response from all jurisdictions is that the mortgage must be discharged from the existing title in full and re-applied across the 'new' post registration of plan title.      In NSW for example, the plan can be lodged in conjunction with the discharge, transfer (for example when procuring a new lot from a new plan - e.g. lane way) and new mortgage.   But in reality the plan is lodged and registered separately and the dealings completed on the 'new' titles.   I am aware that many councils will lodge the plan and require consolidation.  As a result, Discharge, Transfer and Mortgages in this scenario are forced to paper.    I know this sounds confusing- let me know if you need more info    Regards, George ... View more

Hi Vanessa   PEXA is most certainly capable of supporting this scenario.   The Mortgagee on Title would create a single Discharge of Mortgage across all eight titles.  In VIC, if the MoT (or their representative) is the CT Controller of each of the eight titles and is Participating in the transaction, then no Nomination will be required.    Each incoming Mortgagee would create a Mortgage across the four titles which accord with their client signed loan agreement and Mortgage.   Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you have more questions.    Regards George  ... View more

Hi Susan,   PEXA most certainly supports the creation of multiple transfers in the same lodgement case (within the same workspace).     Navigate to the Land Title Screen to ensure that all titles have been added to the workspace.   If all titles share the same vendor, and purchaser then each title may be included in the same transfer.   Alternatively, after creating the first transfer, from the Document List screen select Create Transfer to create the second (or more) transfer document.    Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you have more questions.    Regards George ... View more

Hi Judith   I need more information to be able to assist.     Please send me a private message with details of the title reference, and if you feel OK to do so the PEXA WSID and I will investigate for you.      If you have other questions please contact me @GeorgePolus at any time.    Regards George  ... View more

Hi Georgina   Today on PEXA in VIC you can deal on a title being either Life Estate or Estate in Remainder, but you cannot create a Life Estate on PEXA.   Land Use VIC are currently working through how the creation of Life Estates will work via the electronic channel.      Regards, George ... View more

Hi Monica   You most certainly will be able to complete this transaction in PEXA.   Please note.  In NSW the legal entities (being the trustees of the trust) may only be entered as transferee.   The fact they are trustees of a trust is not relevant to NSW LRS.    You may do so in one of two ways, depending upon how the sale contracts are set up. Because one Mortgage must be over both titles, you will need to complete the transaction in a single lodgment case.   OPTION 1   Create a single transfer of land which references both titles.    Only a single stamp duty reference will be required, but will be required to reference each title.  OPTION 2   Create two separate transfer documents in a single lodgement case.   Two separate stamp duty reference numbers will be required.   Please let me @GeorgePolus know how you go.   Please come back to me if you have more questions.   Regards George  ... View more

Hi Erika At present, electronic Caveates in VIC are WHOLE of Land only.   To lodge a caveat of Part of Land, you will need to lodge in paper, making sure to fully describe the part of land affected.    Regards, George  ... View more

Hi Cathy   When you create the workspace in the role of Caveator in Title, be sure to select 'with financial settlement.   Once the workspace is created, invite the Participant representing the Proprietor(s) against whom the Caveat applies.  This participant will come into the workspace in the role of  PoT.   No documents needs be prepared by this participant, only completion of a source funds line item with sufficient funds to cover the claimed amount, plus any professional fees, lodgement fees and PEXA fees.  In your role. you will create a few Destination line items: Claim pay-out amount.  For this line item, you will need to select the Line Category 'Other' and then either your firms Trust Account or your clients Account (as you see fit). Your firms professional fees  (If these are to be paid by your client, you will need to have your client deposit funds into your firms trust account or the PEXA source account if you do not have a trust account. PEXA will create line items payable by your firm (as you will be the lodging party)  to LUV for Lodgement Fees. PEXA will create a destination line item for Withdrawal of Caveat with Settlement against your firm.  In your role you will also crate the Withdrawal of Caveat. The PoT representative, will be required to to enter Source Funds to balance the Settlement Schedule.   Once your firm and the PoT rep have agreed settlement date and time, balanced and signed the Settlement Schedule and your firm has signed the WCav and Lodgement Instructions, the workspace will be Ready for Settlement at the agreed settlement date and time.   Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you have more questions.   Regards George ... View more

Hi Carmelo   Right now, PEXA has an issue in NSW when transferring fractional interests where a Party relinquishing is the same Party as the Party receiving.   The reason is that in NSW, OSR expect that PEXA completes the arithmetic difference between Party Receiving and Party relinquishing, but in other jurisdictions OSR prefer to complete this arithmetic calculation.    PEXA will rectify the issue in NSW in R9.1 Feb, 2019.   Provided the Party receiving is different to the party relinquishing, PEXA can handle fractional interest transfers in NSW today.   Regards, George  ... View more

Hi Larraine,   There may be many reasons why a dealing accepted for lodgement may not immediately be registered on title - most of which are not technology matters.   This is why when a Lodgement Case advances to 'COMPLETED' the user must not assume this means dealings are 'REGISTERED'.   All it means is that the Registrar has completed examination.   To view the results of examination the user must navigate to the Document List screen to view the DOCUMENT STATUS.   Unfortunately, without knowing the specifics of your matter I am unable to comment on this particular case.   However,  I will be pleased to investigate for you.   If you wish that I investigate for you, please 'Private Message' me the details of the matter:   Name of subscriber dealing, and; PEXA WSID, or Land title Reference, or Matter reference used in the workspace. Regards, George     ... View more

Hi Deborah   I checked with LUV and received the following.   'The Caveat mandate applies to those being created under section 89. Other forms of Caveat within other sections can continue to be created and lodged in paper.'   I am advised that the LUV web site provides a special form Caveates under Sect 61 of the TLA.      Please note the paper Caveat for Sec 89 is identical to the PEXA form (PEXA builds all forms in accordance with requirements specified by the jurisdictional registrar).   So, you will need to find the correct S61 form.    Please also note that support for S61 Caveats via PEXA will be enabled inthe second half of calendar year 2019.   Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you have more questions.    Regards George  ... View more

Hi Johnny   The advice you indicate that was given by SRO is not correct based upon the information you have provided in your question.    In DOL, you will need to:   Find the PEXA transaction Edit the transactio Navigate to 'Acknowledge' the transaction, then Certify the Transaction If you are unable to view the 'Certify' function in DOL, you will need to review your permissions, or find someone in your firm who is authorised to Certify a DOL transaction.    Once the transaction is certified in DOL you may manually initiate Stamp Duty Verification (SDV) in PEXA, or allow PEXA to do so.   PEXA will automatically initiate SDV 5 days prior, then 2 days prior, moringin of and one hour prior to settlement.    Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you have more questions.    Regards George   ... View more

Hi Greg,   If the court has ordered that (A+B) transfer to B, then this transfer may be completed in PEXA (however the issue below will arise).  Both A+B need to be represented and a non monetary transfer citing Court Order specified.  NSW LRS require no evidence of the Court Order.   Also, the signatory for your firm will be signing on behalf of A + B under a CAF.  the signatory for your firm will not be signing on behalf of the court.    This transaction (despite the issue below) could be performed in PEXA today, provided you speak with SRO and they allow it through.   SRO NSW are most helpful and co-operative regarding the issue below.    To clarify the issue we have at present  (which will be rectified in Feb 2019 (R9.10): The issue with the Transfer from (A+B) to B would present itself in a single transfer Workspace also.    The problem is, due to a misalignment between PEXA and the NSW OSR and arises ONLY when a Party on title is receiving in addition to their current holding.  (A+B) transfer to B   (B on title having 1/2 and following transfer has 1/1 however they received in this transfer only 1/2) In NSW, EDR expects PEXA to perform the arithmetic and send only the fraction received.  In other jurisdictions, the OSR expects that PEXA will send the share fraction to be recorded on title and the OSR will perform the arithmetic to calculate the share fraction received, in this case subtracting the share fraction received by B from B's original holding.  Until we rectify this issue  in Feb 2019, PEXA will advise NSW OSR that B is receiving 1/1 and not 1/2 in this example.    Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you have more questions.    Regards George     ... View more

Hi Greg,   My understanding of the scenario is as follows.   (A+B) as Joint Tenants transfer to A as Sole Proprietor   A, as Sole Proprietor transfers to (C+D) as Joint Tenants.   The Property is comprised of 7 lots.      One Mortgage from ABC encumbers all 7 Lots An unknown number of other Lots are encumbered by a second Mortgage (one or more) from ABC bank Three Lots are encumbered by Caveats   There is a question if all of the Lots are eligible for electronic lodgement.    If I am correct with the above then:   (A+B) transfer to B. Today in NSW we have an issue between NSW OSR and PEXA which could lead to an incorrect Duty Assessment for B.   In short, SRO will see B as receiving 1/1 shares rather than 1/2 shares.  So this dealing will need to be completed outside of PEXA, which in your case may force both transfers to paper.  This issue will be rectified in PEXA 9.10 in Feb 2019. Had this issue not been in place, the entire transaction would be completed in one workspace.  Simultaneous Settlement would only be required if vendor surplus from the first transfer was to be used as purchasers equity in the second transfer.   Below is how your workspace might be set-up. In the single workspace: Use Land title reference verification at workspace creation to ensure all 7 lots are eligible for electronic lodgement If yes - proceed to create workspace.   If no - check with NSW LRS.   They will advise.  Assuming Yes: Following workspace creation invite Participants  ABC Bank as MoT Caveators as CoT Purchaser Rep for second transfer from B to (C+D) Incoming Mortgagee - XYZ Bank  (probably invited into workspace by Purchasers Rep of (C+D). Create documents Discharges for ABC bank  3 x Withdrawal of Caveat (the Caveator should also create Disbursement line item for any funds owing) Transfer 1  (A+B) to B transfer 2 B to (C+D) Mortgage to XYZ In the Settlement Schedule: accumulate Sources from (C+D) plus any from B with Loan Proceeds from XYZ; accumulate Disbursements to A and B and Loan Payout to ABC (for all Mortgages) plus payments (if any ) to Caveators Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you need more information.    Regards, George ... View more

Hi Megan   May I please confirm the scenario first.   Single Title; One or more current proprietors, but IMPORTANTLY (please see note below) all Proprietors are relinquishing their shares to a new set of Proprietors;   The Transferees are A, B, C and D ( each may be represented by a single Rep Subscriber, or each by their own Rep Sub, or a combination of both); The Transferee shareholding will be:   A (1/2) as Tenant in Common with (A+B+C+D) 1/2 where (A+B+C+D) are Joint Tenants   Assuming I have correctly interpreted the scenario then you may most certainly specify this in PEXA.    Here is how you would do so.  In the Transfer Document:   Select Tenancy Type of Tenants in Common; Add Party A; Select Add Tenant in Common; Add Party A (again)   each will default to a shareholding of 1/2; On the Action Cog of the second Party A, select Add Joint Tenant; A new JT will be added, ensure to select Party B; On the Action Cog of Party B, select Add Joint Tenant; A new JT will be added, ensure to select Party C; On the Action Cog of Party C, select Add Joint Tenant; A new JT will be added, ensure to select Party D;   The screen should now show A (1/2) as TIC with (A+B+C+D) 1/2   PLEASE NOTE:  Currently in NSW, we have an issue between PEXA and EDR, where if a Transferor is also a Transferee, an incorrect Duty assessment will result for the share fraction received by the Transferee.  If your scenario involves one or more Transferors as Transferee, then you must go to paper.    This issue will be rectified in PEXA R9.1 (Feb 2019).   Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you have more questions.    Regards George  ... View more

Hi Nicola   The response does vary by jurisdiction.   I will gather some responses and get back to you.    Regards George ... View more

Hi Katherine,    Thanks for responding so quickly.    Today, we have an issue in PEXA in NSW where if a Party is relinquishing Part of their tenancy AND remaining on title, then the reconciliation with EDR of the share transferred is not correctly reflected.  (This means Duty Verification will not be successful)  So, the transaction as you describe must go to paper.   The issue I am referring to will be rectified in 9.1 (Feb 2019).   That said, today you can act for both Vendor (PoT) and Purchaser (IP) Parties.   While the transaction we are referring to in this discussion will have to revert to paper for now because of the duty verification issue, I hope the below will assist you with other matters.    To do so: click 'Workspace Settings', at the top left hand corner of the screen; In the top tight hand corner of the role settings screen you will see an edit box.  Click Edit; Select a new Role from the drop down list; Click 'Add Role' Select the radio button of the role in which you wish to act and click save.    Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you have more questions.    Regards, George    ... View more

Hi Katherine,   My response below assume the dealing is a NSW dealing.   Please allow me to confirm the scenario.   A is currently on title.   A may be on title as a Sole Proprietor or as Tenants in Common with B or even more parties.  For the example, let us assume A + B are on title as Tenants in Common.    A will relinquish 1/100 of their current share to C.    PEXA will support a transfer of 1/100th of A's share to C in NSW.      As for the Re-FI component - am I correct that what is really occurring is that Bank X currently holds a Mortgage over the folio with A and B as Mortgagors.   Following the update of the share holding from A + B to A + B + C either Bank X or Bank Y will create a new Mortgage with A + B + C as registered Mortgagors.   If so, then the PEXA workspace will contain three documents:   Discharge of Mortgage - Bank X relinquishing Transfer (Part Tenancy where Party A as Transferor relinquishes 1/100 of their share to Party C as Transferee) Mortgage - Bank Y (or Bank X) receiving as Mortgagee with A + B + C relinquishing as Mortgagors. It follows that, yes, you will need to invite the current Mortgagee and the new Mortgagee into the Workspace.    Please let me @GeorgePolus know if I have misunderstood or if you have more questions.   Regards George ... View more

Hi Shelly   Apologies for the delayed response.   I have been travelling.   This is a great questions and I understand why you are asking.   PEXA collects data that it requires to effect electronic lodgement and to ensure compliance to jurisdictional SRO data requirements as well as VOI requirements.   Date of Birth data for all Party records is collected for the following reasons:   Collection of DoB provides an assurance that VOI has been completed; PEXA does not enforce a specific orchestration of any transaction.  At the point of Party creation / edit it is unknown if DoB data will be required for a given transaction.  Rather than force users to navigate around the platform to populate DoB data, PEXA collects DoB data on the Party screen; Specifically on a Mortgage, for Mortgagee or indeed Mortgagor, if two or more Parties share the same name (John Smith and John Smith for example), PEXA presents the DoB adjacent to the Party Name so that the User may select the 'correct' Party.   This is important as each Party is assigned a unique ID which is specifically used by PEXA, LR's and SRO's to understand which Party is being referenced in a given Document / Transaction. PEXA is a national platform.  PEXA endeavors to provide a consistent user experience no matter which jurisdiction a user is transacting in.   Please let me @GeorgePolus know if you have more questions.   Regards, George ... View more

Hi Nicky   I will write to Landgate and ask for an explanation of this warning message and specifically, why they fell it important to provide it.     I have also spoken with @AngellaC We will both follow up with Landgate and do our best to obtain a response.   I hope to respond to you soon.    Regards George ... View more