Go to content Go to menu
 


Here are some summaries of the valuers and how they changed their valuations.

Valuation has always been thought of as a science, however from the evidence below it appears to be no more accurate than a guessing game conducted by drunks down at the local pub on a Saturday night. If the industry is to be taken seriously and have credibility it needs to have accurate methodology.

Herriots were particularly erratic as to the accuracy of their valuations, the real interesting one was the Valuation accepted by the QOFT while the Federal Court accepted a very different Value of the same property. The real question is, were the valuations Fraudulent or just wildly inaccurate and who profited from these valuations. The Federal Court found the sale price of $164,900 to be the accurate Value of the property, Mr Herriot valued the property at $90,000 and the property sold shortly for $175,000 and that was very soon after the QOFT sent the clients a Cheque for $125,000. Hard to believe that the property increased in value from $90,000 to $175,000 in such a short period of time?         

Rivergum Drive Nerang                                                                                                       

  1. Herriotts              13/8/1999                    $159,000                                                       
  2. Herriotts              15/12/1999                  $120,000     
  • Now this is a drop of $39,000, did the market drop by 25% in 4 months? 
  • Which one should we believe?
  • Which one is correct?
  • If you bought in August 1999 did you pay to much?
  • If You bought in December did you get a bargain, please Mr Herriot tell us all which one is correct?

 

Ridgeway Avenue Southport                                                                                                                

  1. Herriotts               8/3/1999                        $208,000                                                                        
  2. Herriotts              31/7/1999                       $190,000                                                                     
  3. Again which one is correct, or did the market drop 10% in 4 months?

So Mr Herriott which valuation is correct, did the people who bought with your original valuations pay too much? If so will you refund the $18,000 and $39,000 to them, there was probably only 100 units here, that's only $5 Million?

Why don't you disclose how you came up with all these different valuations over such a short period of time?

Heron Todd White (HTW). They valued a property next to the Southport Hospital for the developer at $220,000 per unit so the developer could get $20 Million worth of development finance.

NAPC started selling the property at $220,000 as per the valuation done by HTW. A financier asked HTW to value the property for Mortgagee purposes to gain finance for the new purchaser at the HTW recommended $220,000 price, they now valued the property at $170,000 in a rising market. The CEO Mr Lacey was asked about this and he said he was sorry but they had "made a mistake and the $170,000 was correct". Other valuers valued it at $220,000. How is it you can make a mistake on a Valuation which takes weeks and costs $20,000 and yet correct that mistake when doing a valuation that takes 2 hours to do and costs $200?

We are confused how this can happen. How is it that a valuer can make a mistake of 25%, and how can a purchaser know which one is correct. How is it that a variation of $50,000 or 25% be acceptable when the public believe that a Valuation is what a property is actually worth? How can this happen?

Ecleston Fraser. They valued a property at Carrara at $147,000 when it was sold by PRD for $149,900, this was for a local City Councillor and Lawyer who bought two homes for investment. NAPC sold the property next door for $149,900 to a purchaser from Victoria, it was Identical, it valued at $132,000. Mr Fraser, when asked as to the reasons, he said "your purchasers do not understand the values here", Chris responded that this was correct and that is why they had showed them his valuation so they could be educated, he kept the valuation at $132,000 and refused to make it at the same price as the local purchaser. How can the address of the purchaser buying a property affect a Valuation? Mr Fraser stood by his decision to value a home differently because the purchaser lived in a different location, how does that work? It is ridiculous to suggest a homes value changes because of the location the buyer lives, either the home is worth one price or another, it is not variable. 

So did the Local City Councillor who bought 2 Properties through PRD pay $34,000 too much?