Flat Chat Forum From the Front Page Current Page

  • This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 2 months ago by .
  • Creator
  • #55482

    It’s been almost two years since the residents of Mascot Towers were told their building was to dangerous to live in. Just last week they were advised to sell the block to a developer to demolish and rebuild, but if they do so, they will lose up to 80 per cent of their value.  …

Viewing 1 replies (of 1 total)
  • Author
  • #55483

    Great analysis. There’s many issues, so I will confine myself to two.
    1) Under the Australian Consumer Law, the ACCC is able to obtain compensation orders for consumers and fine company directors personally if they are ‘knowingly concerned’ in breaches of the consumer law. A good recent example is the car rental company, Australian 4WD – this is the ACCC Media Release https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/penalties-of-1223m-against-australian-4wd-hire-and-ex-directors-vitali-roesch-and-maryna-kosukhina
    Why isn’t this made to apply to consumers who purchase apartments under state Fair Trading Laws?
    2) The NSW Government should definitely be providing financial assistance to the OC of Mascot Towers to pursue the owner and developer of the adjoining property through the Courts. It should be a no strings attached undertaking to contribute towards the legal fees, not a loan.

Viewing 1 replies (of 1 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Flat Chat Forum From the Front Page Current Page