First Home Owners Grant Questions

Re:

"When did you purchase this property ?

Did you ever live in it ?"

Sim,

I first purchased the property in May 2008 when I was workin interstate in Western Australia. During this time the property was rented out over a 6 month lease between June-December 2008. I then relocated to NSW for work however I have not lived in the house as I am away for work.

The property is not currently being leased as I am aware I that it needs to be my principal place of residence for 6 months within 12 months of purchase.


"Are you talking about applying for the FHOG for this property, or for buying a second property?"

Yes this is my first property and yes I did recieve the FHOG when I purchased in May 2008. My concern is that whilst I am working away I am renting a different property and not residing at my property that I recieved the FHOG for. However my property is not currently being leased and all utilities (rates, water, electricity) are still in my name.
I believe from the elegibility rules for FHOG that I have not done anything wrong however my father insists that the fact my car remains registered interstate is enough to prove I am ineligible for the FHOG and that I will have to repay the full amount.

Hope that all make sense....

 

Confusd homebuyer

Hi

I was seeing if I could get some advice I have check out so many web sites and as yet haven't found much that applies to my situation.

I purchased a joint property with my brother, my part in it was as an investment with him claiming the FHOG as he was a first home owner.

I help him out by going on the loan 50/50 so that he could purchase the property, I have also put my name on the application for the FHOG due to the clause on the front of the FHOG application doc, what I am trying to find out is if I wish to purchase a property am I still able to claim the FHOG as I haven't lived in the property and don't intend too or have forgon my rights to the fhog.

Can anyone please help with some advice, thanks for taking the time to help me out with my little dilema..

 

Straight answer is no.. You have applied before. In all reality you have recieved it for your share as the investment part of the house.

 

That is the truth. I got my sister's name in the first house I bought. In hindsight, this was not a good move as she lost the FHOG - she is currently looking for a place to buy with her husband.

No such thing as FHOG when we got that property though.

 

Claiming FHOG

I want to buy my first property and claim the FHOG.

The only thing is....

Can I live overseas during that time and not actually live in the place if I have all bills etc in my name and dont recieve any rent from the place, in fact do not rent it out. It will be my primary place of residence as if the oversaes situation changes its a place I can come back to and live in straight away.

However I wont actually be sleeping there... Maybe can stay there for about 2 months out of the year...

Advice really appreciated!

 

In reality maybe you could away with it, but you are pretty much lying to the relevant authority in your state and if you were found out i'm not sure what penalty there'd be (minimum losing grant id imagine)

Cheers,
David

 

Firstly thanks for such a prompt reply! Its appreciated.

Hmmm thats sort of my thinking. Though I'm really not sure of the extent of lie. Is this actually okay, do they check with immigration which will show I have left the country, but if I'm not collecting rent, does that matter?

Its a tough one! Need some expert advice really.

 

Probaly need to speak to a lawyer as i would imagine on the FHOG application it probaly asks if you are going to stay in the house for the 6 months and if you tick yes and then don't you are breaking the contract, so yeah professional advice would be a good idea

 

So much more information is being computerised these days, I don't think you need to stretch the imagination too far to think that institutions like the ATO would cross reference immigration data, and pass on information as neceassy...

I think it's the downside of the IT movement, it's just so much harder to get away with petty crime.

 

I am looking to buy in Wollongong before the end of next month to take advantage of the FHOG. Thing is I have a job in Canberra. Would taking 1 day off a week at work (I have plenty of holidays saved up) and going up to Wollongong every single weekend (staying at my new place of residence Friday - Sunday) for a good 6 months satisfy the 'principle place of residence' provision (see below). I would be staying in a Lodge type arrangement in Canberra Monday - Thursday.

Oh and I will definitely ensure all the gas and electricity bills are changed over to my new Wollongong address and the license plates will be changed over to NSW ones...

Great forum by the way - really impressed with the knowledge here!


Residency requirements - NSW Office of State Revenue
How long must I reside in the property to establish it as my principal place of residence?
An applicant must reside in the home as their principal place of residence for a continuous period of 6 months commencing within 12 months of completion of the eligible transaction. The onus is on the applicant(s) to prove that they have lived in the property as their principal place of residence, when requested by the Office of State Revenue.

 

That kind of sucks, that a person as myself who purchased an investment property prior to July 1, 2000, and also sold that investment property, not for a gain, but barely break even, before 2000, for peanuts compared to its market price at todays value. And yet having never built or owned a live in residence property previously, I am still deemed ineligible for a first home owners grant. where is the decency and equity of fair mindedness and even play when compared to another who is eligible for FHOG who has purchased and possibly even still owns a much higher priced property than I ever did, where only difference is it was purchased after 2000.
Seems to me the person more eligible would be the one who bought and owned a cheaper property sold before 2000 and not the person who afforded the more expensive post 2000 investment property!

 

I never received a first home owner grant or any concessions and would t qualify for anything now either.
That’s how it works. Doesn’t matter if it is more equitable this way or not but not something I can change so I don’t think about it

 

I’ve got a question if anyone can please help on this thread. I can’t seem to find another thread similar to this circumstance.

My parents after uni (this is post 2017) purchased a property for investment but in the meantime allowed me to live in it and provided me with 1 share in the apartment which is 10% on the title. Instead of rent I assist with the maintenance payments as they live overseas.

The eligibility criteria for the FHOG is to have not part own a property or if a part owner must not reside in it for more than 6 months. My dilemma is how I’m penalised on this technicality when it’s not my own first home and hard to afford anywhere in VIC without the stamp duty concession as a young professional.

Does anyone have a similar experience or advice? Can this be appealed somehow?