Some real estate dickhead just rang my mobile (which is not advertised anywhere) saying they were ājust in the areaā and wanted to do an appraisal on a house we own in <suburb name>.
Itās an agency we donāt use for any purpose, have never used for any purpose, and have never approached for any reason.
Is there some sort of legal issue with some smarmy sales knob looking up property owner details and cold calling them?
Makes me feel all gross that their grubby mitts are pawing through my deets somewhere in the hope of being able to stick a tongue up my bum and get a taste of some back door cash.
There should be a law against owning properties you donāt live in.
That said fucking with real estate agents I can get behind so do whatever on that front. Maybe consider not being a landlord though.
I can think of a few exceptions. But I think owning multiple properties in the same location for more than a specified amount of time should be illegal or heavily taxed.
For example, you buy a home and are still trying to sell an old one. You might own two houses for some time. You might inherit a house and need to sell it.
You might have family in multiple parts of the country or work in multiple parts of the country/world and need a place to live.
A friendās mom had severe asthma and was told to leave her home state during the winter and live in Florida.
But I have a friend who owns like 3 hours in the same neighborhood just as rental properties. That should be illegal/heavily taxed.
But I have a friend who owns like 3 hours in the same neighborhood just as rental properties. That should be illegal/heavily taxed.
Laughing at the person calling Mao a dictator, guess their comment was blocked in here. Popular support and being elected mean nothing because he wasnāt white. āAuthoritarianā is even better. And then they yap some nonsense about living in someoneās head when they were the ones crying because you posted a Mao emote.
Whyās there a murderous authoritarian dictator here? Thatās some real tankie chud shit.
Ironic that Mao is discussed and the biggest culprits in the housing market are (allegedly) Chinese nationals.
Reportedly, in certain Chinese cultures, men (and young men) do not have access to women and you women unless they are a land owner. It doesnāt matter if the land they own is a single-room apartment that has room for half a single bed and never has any tenants, they own land so they get a root. This also explains all those huge ghost cities in China which are all unoccupied high-rises.
Wow! this is some of the stupidest shit I have heard in days. There are more citizens of the USA and UK that own property in Australia than Chinese citizens.
Your āreportedlyā statement is made up bullshit and the āghost citiesā were a lie. they are now full of people. Our backwards ass government canāt conceive of infrastructure until a decade after its needed and then they get bent over the barrel with budget blowouts that cost the taxpayers double the original stated costs. Meanwhile China spent a bunch of money during the financial crisis when materials and labor were cheap to build infrastructure and you act like it is a bad thing.
https://www.thebureau.news/p/fake-chinese-income-mortgages-fuel
It is continuing to happen overseas.
I am not an economist, so I do t know how valid this is, but it certainly is plausible.
There should be a law against owning properties you donāt live in.
Iām trying to picture what this looks like. Who do we rent from if we canāt afford to buy a house in this alternate vision of the future? There is no way that 20-year-old me working at servos had the capital to buy a house. I had zero savings and a low income.
I see you invoking the Maoist uprising in another comment, but Iāll be honest - the years following that uprising were hard for a huge swathe of the population (not to mention fatal for Millions more). I would not want to live through a Chairman Mao. Modern China happened despite Mao. Not because of him.
You literally cannot conceive of a reality wherein a home does not have to be rented from a parasitic landlord?
You cannot conceive a future wherein you donāt have to afford a home?
Also Mao is a beloved figure for many because he lifted millions out of poverty and ended the brutal feudal system that preceeded him. He also famously said āno investigation no right to speakā and you clearly need to do some investigating.
This is akin to a freed slave asking āwho do I serve then?ā
I canāt conceive the land not belonging to someone, no. Thatās not how our society works. And before you break that, Iād want to take a good look at what youād replace it with. Because the objective facts are that this system is the best thing tried so far.
Mao did none of those things. He was a destroyer, not a builder. He dabbled and experimented through the Cultural Revolution, and was directly responsible for millions of deaths as a result. After killing everyone with an education he could get his hands on, he used Soviet know-how to start moving from an agricultral to Industrial nation. Forgetting in the process that those agricultural practices were feedign his population. Whoops!
I have no idea why he has such a following. Is it because he tore the whole system down? Is it because he wrote some essays? China didnāt start developing until years after Mao left office.
I see you invoking the Maoist uprising in another comment, but Iāll be honest - the years following that uprising were hard for a huge swathe of the population (not to mention fatal for Millions more). I would not want to live through a Chairman Mao.
If you think it was hard to live under Mao, you should see what it was like before him.
I donāt think China was better under Mao than it was at any point before him. And it was worse under Mao than at several previous points.
I see you invoking the Maoist uprising in another comment, but Iāll be honest - the years following that uprising were hard for a huge swathe of the population (not to mention fatal for Millions more). I would not want to live through a Chairman Mao. Modern China happened despite Mao. Not because of him.
What was it like to live in China before 1949 compared to after 1949? Please support your assertions with relevant statistics.
I donāt know what your point is. China was a shitshow. Both before and during Maoās time. I donāt live in such a place though. And I absolutely would not want to go from where I am now to being under Mao. Heād kill me for being an āintellectualā for a start.
The practice of ārentingā needs to die in a goddamn fire. Single family homes should never be ārentedā. Temporary (6-month to 5-year) occupancy of a single family home should be done under a āland contractā.
Basically, the occupant starts making mortgage payments (principal, interest, taxes, insurance) but title stays with the landlord. The landlord receives only the āinterestā part of the payment. The āprincipalā part of the payment is held in escrow, in an interest-bearing account. This is the occupantās equity in the home.
If the occupant stays through the term of the contract, title transfers to the occupant, the escrowed principal payments transfer to the landlord, and the contract converts to a private mortgage. If the occupant leaves before the term of the contract, the principal payments are returned to them.
Land contracts build tenant wealth and drive people toward home ownership. 20-year-old you, with no capital and working a minimum wage job, should be able to enter into a land contract and start building wealth.
To drive us toward such a system, we can provide significant property tax advantages to owner-occupants. Investors can only get those advantages by getting the occupant of a property to qualify as an āownerā. A renter would not qualify, but a tenant under a land contract would.
Basically, we phase in an increase in property taxes, and a commensurate (or greater) owner occupant credit. Current owner-occupants will pay the same (or less) than they currently do. Investors who adapt, and convert their ātenantsā to ābuyersā, will also pay the same (or less) than they currently do. Investors who refuse to convert will pay higher property taxes, while also serving a smaller pool of tenants with better options.
Iām sort-of following the idea here - and I appreciate that there has been actual thought behind it.
Iām missing a couple of points though:
- Why would a landowner enter into this arrangement instead of just selling the property to someone with the finances to buy it outright from them?
- Who underwrites this? Even a Banks with Billions of dollars in their reserve will make me commit a decent percentage of the propertyās value in the form of a deposit. If you take that away, the landowner is taking a huge risk by entering into this contract. I guess that feeds back to point #1, but assuming an altruistic landowner who just wants to help people - theyāre gambling their most valuable assets against my ability to slowly dribble money at them. If their tenant loses their job or something and canāt afford payments, what happens?
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-04/vienna-s-social-housing-and-low-rent-strategy/102639674
Good quality, cheap housing.
Meanwhile the roof in my kitchen has almost fallen out (huge hole in it) and when I reported it to my landlord they instead arranged for a āroutineā house inspection next week.
Who do we rent from if we canāt afford to buy a house in this alternate vision of the future?
The government. Also if the 10% of homes that were empty on the night of the last census were suddenly dropped onto the market it would cause a massive drop in prices so more people could afford homes.
Yeah, itās a pity there isnāt a law against it I guess. If I sold that one extra house Iām hoarding the housing crisis would be pretty much over tbh.
I get what you are saying about this not being a matter of personal individual responsibility, but coming on here and complaining about a telemarketer that you could just ignore is pretty fucking insensitive to all the unhoused folks that you could be helping by just not being a rent-seeking parasite.
The Maoist uprising against the landlords was the most comprehensive proletarian revolution in human history and resulted in nearly totally equal distribution of land among the peasantry.
not sure we go that far (in a sane system rentals have their place) but absolutely start taxing the ever loving shit out of anything over the PPR. The more houses the more tax. More. More. MOOOOOOOOOORE. They speak the language of money, make it snarl at them.
And ban corporations / companies / business entities from owning standalone housing and land.
Literally the only way to achieve this is through some sort of revolution. Reformism is impossible under the dictatorship of capital.
Mmm, you talking like the sexual revolution or like the Russian revolution? 'Cos you can miss me with that latter shit, change wrought of violence leaves people confused, unthinking and ends up with a new pack of cunts in charge doing the same shit in a different hat.
People who call for violent revolution in the western world tend to pull their playbook out of goddamn religious idealism. Specifically that whole weird apocalypse obsession. One big final war and then all things will be well!!!
Nope.
There is no final goal to be kicked here. There is no final deciding victory. Thereās just the unromantic never ending work of improvement. Deal with it.
Itās unsolicited and its purpose is marketing.
https://www.donotcall.gov.au/consumers/consumer-overview/making-a-complaint/
Or you can always sign their mobile up to services. Usually youāll find it on a billboard next to the mugshot of them sporting a shit-eating grin.
Or you can always sign their mobile up to services. Usually youāll find it on a billboard next to the mugshot of them sporting a shit-eating grin.
Or just in my recent call historyā¦ Looked it up and theyāre the āfounderā of the company along with like 4 other people. All claiming equal rights. I wonder if they fought over who got their name first?
And they do indeed have a shit-eating grin. All of them. Why do they always look like that?
Damn, they called from their own number? I donāt know why Iām surprised lol. At least you know you can block it and thatās probably that.
You can also write a complaint to the other four founders and reference your formal complaint to the gov in it. Iām sure thatāll stir the pot if thereās any power struggles currently going on š
Australia has a Do Not Call Register. A telemarketing call (which includes where the purpose is āto offer to supply goods or servicesā or āto advertise or promote goods or servicesā) is generally illegal if it is made to a number on the Do Not Call Register. There is an exemption if they submitted the number called to the Register to check if it was listed up to 30 days before the call, and it didnāt come back - so generally complaints are only possible if the number has been on the register for longer than 30 days. Consumers can get listed on the DNCR, and submit complaints if they receive a telemarketing call more than 30 days after listing at https://www.donotcall.gov.au/. The legislation can be read here: https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2006A00088/latest/text
In addition, Australia has commonwealth legislation about processing of personal information (the Privacy Act). However, it currently doesnāt apply to āsmall businessesā - businesses which made less than $3,000,000 of revenue in the previous financial year, unless they are in the credit reporting, health, or data broking business, or supply to the commonwealth. For organisations the Privacy Act applies to, they are only allowed to use personal information for direct marketing in a few circumstances - they obtained it from a person who would reasonably expect them to use it in those circumstances, and they provide an easy way to opt out, and they havenāt opted out. They can also obtain it from someone else with the personās consent (or if it is impractical to obtain the consent). If asked, they have to disclose what information they hold, and the source of the data. The text of the Privacy Act can be found here: https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A03712/latest/text. The government has announced plans to tighten it up, likely including covering small businesses and increasing penalties.
Disclaimer: IANAL, not intended as legal advice, your individual circumstances might vary, consult a lawyer.
I donāt know but if I had to guess Iād say no such law exists.
They canāt āharassā you, but a once off call isnāt that.
Even if you could prove they had gotten your personal details through some nefarious means, no one would care. If you complained to their professional body I can almost guarantee they wouldnāt understand what the problem is.
They canāt āharassā you, but a once off call isnāt that.
Found the non-Millennial! I would say all phone calls are harassment. š
fuck off this person is whining about cold calls while people are literally dying because people like them are hoarding surplus housing.
this person is whining about cold calls while people are literally dying
Jesus mate, thereās a reason people donāt take you seriously.
Think you need to chill out. Saying āNo thanksā and hanging up doesnāt take a whole lot of courage or effort.
Also, who answers calls from numbers they donāt know? That shit can go to voicemail.
Here in VIC, its also completely s*** there arenāt any junk mail laws.
Myself (and I heard this from others) plan to shred up any crap they put in my mailbox though from now on, and scatter it in their office. If everyone does that, it makes it unprofitable for them to do dodgy junk mail drops at least. Itās also likely totally legal, because youāre returning their litterā¦ At the moment, they ignore NO JUNK mail signs because there are no repurcussions, but, even shoving it under their door at their office might be enough to make them stop. Everyone really needs to start thisā¦
I generally add their number to every callback number I can find on the internet, so they have to deal with dodgy phone calls. As they are distributing their mobile number wanting people to call them, I make sure as many people call them as they request
