Many people believe that Australia`s house is a permanent property right, as long as the purchase of the entire land can be permanently owned by themselves, can continue to pass on.
In general, that`s true, but Australia has a lot of hidden rules on the house, and sometimes even if you buy a real estate, for a hefty price, it`s possible that with a ban on the government, all the good ideas go empty.
For example, a Chinese couple who spent 3.6 million Australian dollars on a real estate, now not only couldn`t live, it was sealed by government, and could face a fine of 1 million Australian dollars and a six-month prison sentence.
It sounds hard to accept, but it happened to Mr. Yang and his wife, an Australian Chinese. Long ago, Mr. Yang and his wife had been looking for a suitable house for themselves, until March last year, just in time for Sydney`s house price to fall, and a large house in Denistone, which covers 1600 square metres, became a target for them.
The house area is enough, the location is superior, the only thing that dissatisfied two people is that house itself is relatively old, after their own discretion, the husband and wife determined to buy the house, and then toppled down to rebuild, to build a modern villa.
At the auction, the two faced many competitors, forced to bid, and eventually sold the house for 3.6 million Australian dollars.
The excited two immediately started working on house`s renovation plan, and soon, as they envisioned, a detailed renovation plan was produced.
Mr. Yang first submitted the blueprint to the local council for review, when the couple thought that the approval document for council would be issued soon, because they had specially investigated the house when they bought it. Although the real estate has a history of more than 100 years, But does not belong to the protection of heritage, so it is allowed to overthrow reconstruction.
However, the development of the matter was completely different from what the two men had envisaged, and instead of waiting for the documents to be approved, there was a ban-the local Council believed that the house had the potential to protect the heritage, limiting all of Mr. Yang`s transformation of the house, and could not be overturned. No renovations are allowed, not even the flowers and trees outside house.
The ban, issued in September last year, lasts 12 months, during which time Mr Yang will face severe penalties, even a fine of 1 million Australian dollars and six months in prison.
Neighbor`s "report"
Mr. Yang was stunned when he saw the ban. When the house was auctioned, it was stated that it was an unprotected legacy. Otherwise, no one would pay a high price for an unrepairable old house.
As soon as he took over, and had not yet begun to rebuild, the ban came? Could house be the protection of heritage? Mr. Yang felt that someone targeted himself, through questioning, only then learned that it was the black hand of the neighbors around.
For some reason, Mr. Yang`s neighbors decided to unite boycott. He pushed down the idea of house, arguing that the house, which is more than a century old, should be respected and protected.
What`s the actual situation with this house? Because the whole is too old to live, Mr. Yang, when he submitted the renovation plan to council, began to retrofit the interior, which had been stripped out of the face.
Just as Mr. Yang was eager for a new house, his neighbors joined forces to submit an estate protection application to the local council, hoping that the government would ban any of Mr. Yang`s renovation plans.
As a result, when Mr. Yang`s renovation plan was stopped, Mr. Yang said he could not understand the absurd situation: after a buyer paid a high price for house, the government ban was imposed. Who dares to buy an old house in new state? This is tantamount to cutting off the trading prospects of the old house in the new state.
Indeed, the old house is too old to live, and if every buyer is taking over, a complaint from a neighbor is tantamount to harming the buyer.
If there is a complaint, it should be done before the house is traded to show the buyer what the actual value of the real estate is. Mr. Yang`s dilemma now is that house cannot live, and that the protection order will last from September until September this year, during which time even if he has just given house a waterproof cloth, he has been recomplained by his neighbors.
So that the entire house is now posted by government with a warning letter.
Independent MP Roy Maggio made clear his opposition to government`s interim estate order against Mr. house, saying it was an unfair process.
But another congressman, Cr Laxale, said the protection policy for the historic real estate should be seriously enforced, and Mr. Yang`s real estate was no exception.
After spending 3.6 million to buy house, I thought it would become my dream new house, but I didn`t expect that under the black hands of several neighbors, house was locked down and posted a warning letter.
Mr. Yang was forced to pay high home loans and wait for a long time, and if the government finally determines that the real estate is on the heritage protection list, Mr. Yang will spend 3.6 million Australian dollars completely in vain. And it`s going to cost a lot of money for house`s follow-up maintenance.
For this restriction, many Australians clap their hands, historical value of house, how can be arbitrarily destroyed, protection is necessary, restriction orders are correct, otherwise Australia will have a historical sense of house will be fewer and fewer.
But many Chinese say this is a potential discrimination that, if it is to be protected, should be protected before house is sold, rather than when it is bought by Chinese buyers and neighbors join hands.
Moreover, the land they buy, they can not completely control, even a single tree and grass can not move, an uninhabitable house, what is it used to do?
In order to meet the local community, the so-called unity of style, so-called beauty and sense of history, people need to pay a high price of 3.6 million Australian dollars for nothing? What do you think of this situation?
