Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
There are tax issues if transferring major assets to children rather than spouse. There are no stamp duty or capital gains liabilities for the transfer of real property to the OP pursuant to divorce, but your kids could face such a burden if you gift the house to them...Kaz

Plus some very real risks. Kids can become greedy and want to take the assets for their own use prior to you wanting to hand them over.

But the absolute worst I have seen was when the asset ( family home and farm that had been in family for nearly 100 years) were given to the son but parents still lived in it so they could get pension. and then the son and his wife ( with a bunch of young kids) divorced very bitterly and the wife got 82% of the family assets. She then kicked out the parents as well ( now essentially destitute) and sold their farm!

 

 

  • Agree 3
  • Informative 1
  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Nothing further from the truth!. Super is just another asset with no protected status.All it takes is a court order and its cut off and redistributed by the fund.

Superannuation: with bankruptcy there is no protection ................................. in relation to other litigation - superannuation is protected - is this perhaps correct ?

 

'Interestingly, superannuation has statutory protection from creditors if you are a small business owner. “Unless the business owner makes an unusual contribution to defeat the creditors when they know litigation is on the cards, super is protected,” says Balalovski.'

 

 

  • Informative 1
Posted
Sure does O.K. And here is a copy of the indemnity provided to you as a current member of RAAus ...Bob

Thanks for that.

 

I'm going to print it out and keep a copy in the hangar...... I've had several people ask about it.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Posted

Work once used them.

 

I injured my back and was in pain.

 

"They" jerked me about something shocking.

 

It came dowm to: GET BACK TO WORK NOW OR ELSE!

 

Wouldnt trust them at all.

 

And I have had issues with other ones as well.

 

They are head and shoulders the worst.

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1
Posted

My daughter had a household claim with CGU which was denied. After a year of work, she got the Vic ombudsman to say their grounds for refusal did not hold water. Instead of paying the claim, they changed to a new objection and it took another year of arguing to finally get paid. This was on a fairly simple case where a tree branch blew down in a storm and damaged what it landed on.

 

 

  • More 1
Posted
My daughter had a household claim with CGU which was denied. After a year of work, she got the Vic ombudsman to say their grounds for refusal did not hold water. Instead of paying the claim, they changed to a new objection and it took another year of arguing to finally get paid. This was on a fairly simple case where a tree branch blew down in a storm and damaged what it landed on.

I presume there's a financial incentive for the staff of insurance companies to limit or prevent payout- by any means. Not the sort of thing they'd include in their advertising. If we had politicians with backbone, insurers would be forced to publicise their payout statistics.

 

 

  • Helpful 1
Posted
I presume there's a financial incentive for the staff of insurance companies to limit or prevent payout- by any means. Not the sort of thing they'd include in their advertising. If we had politicians with backbone, insurers would be forced to publicise their payout statistics.

I believe it's called "maximizing profits", and in a capitalist society any non-charitable company does it to get the biggest bang for their shareholders etc.

 

Insurance companies are not there to be nice and sympathetic, they are there to make the biggest profits they can. Not sure this is ever going to change.....

 

 

Posted
I believe it's called "maximizing profits", and in a capitalist society any non-charitable company does it to get the biggest bang for their shareholders etc.Insurance companies are not there to be nice and sympathetic, they are there to make the biggest profits they can. Not sure this is ever going to change.....

My business runs on the basis of "large opportunistic profits results in less longterm profit and more expense due to having to find more suckers (sorry, customers) to replace the pi**ed-off ones you have just lost ...." There are a few other organisations who follow this ethic, but it seems the bigger they are the the easier to justify the bastardry and stupidity. Mind you, they are supporting a big advertising industry, a big legal industry, a big accounting industry, and a big tax minimisation industry, so I suppose those who can't actually do anything useful are "gainfully" employed ....

 

 

  • Agree 2
Posted

Where are the growth sectors in "advanced" societies? When left-leaning parties get elected they employ more people to impose ever-more complex rules in an effort to get people to behave decently. Meanwhile, private enterprise employs ever-increasing numbers to get around those rules.

 

When the revolution comes, how many of us will be found to have actually been productive?

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted

Today, the paper said that the "add-on" car insurance business took in $500 million in premiums a year and paid out $50 million in claims.

 

Not often you see that figure. I was told many years ago that one third of premiums went to pay claims, so obviously some types of insurance fleece you better than this.

 

 

Posted

So has anyone actually heard from Allianz or their broker in regards to this?

 

I received my invitation to renew for another twelve months and intend paying it tonight but just wondered what the real story is.

 

 

Posted

Superannuation:

 

NZ, Labor put it in & it was law for employer's to pay into it, But the next pollie in power Maldoon, told the employer Not to pay their share, as he would, and, did get rid of Superannuation:. I suppose it means any government (greedy) can get rid of Superannuation any time it wants, just by changing the law.

 

spacesailor

 

 

 

Posted

here is a message I got from an insurance broker .............. might shed some light on it

 

I can confirm that the Australian Allianz office for aviation will no longer be offering renewals or quoting new risks from the 1st January 2017. However, the head underwriter from Allianz will be starting up an agency (Agile) on the 1st January with the intention of continuing to write aircraft programmes just like the one we have arranged for aircraft based at xxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Although Allianz is withdrawing from the Australian aviation market on the 1st January, a number of their underwriters and their claims manager will remain until the 31st December 2017 ensuring changes to policies and claims are processed smoothly. When the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx aircraft programme and Hangarkeepers liability policy falls due for renewal next year we will approach the market (QBE, Catalyst, AIG, Swiss Re) as well as Agile for terms.

 

 

  • Helpful 1
Posted

At South Grafton we have our Hangar Keepers & Aerodrome public liability insurance with Allianz via a broker (Aviation Insurance). Last year it was with QBE. It is reviewed annually & we go with whoever offers the best deal with the best terms. In terms of hull insurance, I carry my own. As an amateur builder a large part of the cost is my own labour.

 

As for going to those cheap outfits mainly for cars, house & contents, check the policy, find out who is the underwriter (often it is Allianz or AIG) & check with customers if possible. We have all our policies with one of the cheap outfits saving over $1500.00 in premiums from the previous company. We have had one claim & it was easy. No forms, choice of repairer & no further questions asked.

 

 

Posted

yes - if you are lucky ? enough to have an aero club 026_cheers.gif.2a721e51b64009ae39ad1a09d8bf764e.gif at your strip - multiple hangars and planes can be lumped into one policy (hangars and planes separate) and you can get good / great savings on insurance premiums

 

 

Posted

yes - club members planes (in various hangar locations on the strip) and club members hangars BT (local Council insists on hangar keepers insurance - hanger sites are leased from Council)

 

I'd be guessing we would have 10 hangars and say 12 planes covered this way

 

Also, I don't know if 'the club' is the mechanism - could be 'a group' of persons might be able to achieve the same result

 

 

Posted

Hi All,

 

I have a question on Insurance, I started my Learning to Fly Journey In Jan 2016 as a RAAus Student Pilot and thought it prudent to get some life insurance, chose a mob, gave full disclosure on why I wanted the cover for, agreed on a monthly fee, bob's your uncle, done,

 

Now after paying the same mob monthly premiums for the past year, my policy came up for renewal, but noticed they had stopped taking the monthly premium, after contacting them and asking what's happened, explaining my concerns if I was still indeed covered as I am a pilot

 

I have now been informed that being a Pilot is not covered in my policy, so after taking my money for the past year, I told them to stick it and now need to look for a new insurer, could anyone give me some advice on insurers that do cover pilots, well in my case a Student Pilot

 

Thanks, Brent

 

 

Posted
Superannuation:

NZ, Labor put it in & it was law for employer's to pay into it, But the next pollie in power Maldoon, told the employer Not to pay their share, as he would, and, did get rid of Superannuation:. I suppose it means any government (greedy) can get rid of Superannuation any time it wants, just by changing the law.

 

spacesailor

 

Employees got all their superannuation money back after that change. it is not compulsory in NZ to pay into superannuation funds, but everyone including billionaires over the age of 65 gets the pension regardless of whether they have their own superannuation fund. It is not means tested. Now in the lucky country a lot of those getting some pension from the government will have it removed or reduced on 1 January 2017. That doesn't seem very lucky to me.

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...