Developers...scum or poor losers?

[JimO]

A mate of mine has had "issues" in the past with developers. He states (in writing) at the beginning of the contract, that items that he has made will remain HIS property untill full and final payment has been received (regardless of whether the item/s are fixed in place on-site).
Previous problem clients have had to be visited on-site to uplift a cheque.
Other times he has a very simple method...
A long-bar chainsaw with an old, but very sharp, blade...
Leaving the site with his property back on his ute and the developer with a fucking big ragged hole in his building, studs and lintels all chopped through.

Quite simple and also quite effective. Dunno why?

i think you will find thet legally once its fitted in the building you cant remove it

[Boob Johnson]

Precisely.

'Property developers' roll big dice for big returns. I have absolutely no sympathy for the snivelling wretch reported on in the Harold.

The schadenfreude of watching speculators crash and burn during recessions is one of the few tasty treats left for those of us at the bottom of the pile who do our best to pay the bills by creating real economic value.

Not sure what all the fuss is about with this chap, if anything feel sorry for him, he backed himself, hasn't hidden assets in trusts (which are not always the last bastion of financial security btw). Property Development IS a high risk high return game, he took too greater risk at the wrong end of this cycle (which was a long one as far as property cycles go) & lost out. Hard to lay 100% of the blame on him entirely. He sure as eggs didn't make the financial policy's with which the NZ/Global markets are mis/managed. The some what violent swings in our economies are designed that way for the rich to get richer & the poor to get poorer, simple as that. They don't HAVE to be that way.

As mentioned he could of washed his hands & walked away clean, but he didn't. Some may call him an idiot, some may say well there's a man with honourable intentions that backed himself. Every subbie/contractor etc knows the risks too

The schadenfreude of watching speculators crash and burn during recessions is one of the few tasty treats left for those of us at the bottom of the pile who do our best to pay the bills by creating real economic value.

Building houses provides NO economic value you say???


Stick to tinkering with PC's Dan

[Boob Johnson]

I have worked for quite a few developers, and every one of them was a corner cutting, greedy, short sighted, slow to no paying, corrupt, dishonest rat. This includes close family friends who I have known my whole life.

I have yet to come across one that cares anything about what they are doing as long as they
1)make as much money as possible
2)make as much money as possible.
3)flee the scene with as much money as possible.

Again welcome to the REAL world of big business. You guys talk like this is the only industry this type of thing happens in lol.


Wake up

[The Stranger:Me]

i think you will find thet legally once its fitted in the building you cant remove it

Caution, bush lawyer here.
From memory, the type of clause refered to is valid, however falls over if say an electrician puts such a clause in his quote, the main contractor accepts it, but is working for a client (say the developer).
Should the main contractor or client fall over, the electrician can not rely on his clause.

Though what happens in practice may well be another matter.

[Boob Johnson]

A good post you coffee drinking tent-occupier but I wish the pitfalls of the above were always explained to those who are encouraged to spend their cach on 'development', some have no idea of the risk.

And who's fault would that be? They say a fool and his money soon part aye?


If you go in to something with YOUR eyes shut, then you will HAVE to except whatever the dice land on. There is risk & there is calculated risk, if you don't fully understand the risk's & you still go ahead then you are an idiot in most peoples book. While im not devaluing responsibility away from the developers, you can't & shouldn't expect to have your hand held all the way.

Bullshit.
Everyone makes their money somehow and there are arseholes in every area of endeavour.
I work almost exclusively for developers and there are good and bad.

Oh thank the LORD there are some sensible people in here


Ive worked for & with developers & will 100% agree there is good & bad. And like ANY big business, there are sharks & that is a fact, so many getting all bent out of shape about how it works, the majority of doom n gloomers here probably never had anymore responsibility than a 9 to 5.

This guy in question here is interesting because he hasn't protected himself very well, either by design or not, who knows. I would suspect he backed himself in (what was) a bull market. Now some of you here (majority it seems) are calling for his testis to be removed. What would of been worse? This guy having the Dev. in a shelf company, all his assets ring fenced then goes bust leaving the entire debt to sink with the ship? Or taking it on the chin PERSONALLY like he has.

Good ol Kiwi mentality, drag that tall poppy down




Bet very few of you have the balls or the nouse to do half of what he has

[jrandom]

Building houses provides NO economic value you say???

No, speculation provides no economic value.

Building houses in the hope that somebody will, in future, want to buy them and live in them is speculation.

Again welcome to the REAL world of big business.

Hmm. You're so entranced with the spine-tinglingly exciting idea of being 'wealthy' that you forget the importance of things like honesty and decency.

Stick to tinkering with PC's Dan

Don't call me if your PC's broken; I'm no 'IT guy'. I wouldn't know a cronjob from a corncob.

Regardless of what my actual profession is, though, why would I want to bother myself with it in my own time, when the internet is so full of people with mediocre intellects who don't quite grasp the essence of various matters?

I find slapping those people down infinitely more amusing than bringing my work home with me.

[The Stranger:Me]

No, speculation provides no economic value.

Building houses in the hope that somebody will, in future, want to buy them and live in them is speculation.

But of the many thousands of spec houses built and sold without anyone going bust hasn't the sparky, the plumber the suppliers etc etc benefitted?

PS, I would have to concur with speculation based entirely on the greater fool theory.

[jrandom]

But of the many thousands of spec houses built and sold without anyone going bust hasn't the sparky, the plumber the suppliers etc etc benefitted?

For sure.

I'm trying to look at it at a macro rather than a micro level, though. Certainly no value is created in an economic sense when speculative 'property development' projects are kicked off at the wrong time or in the wrong place.

Which is why I'm saying that the speculation and value-creation are two different things. If people don't rock up wanting to buy the houses, there's no value. It's not until after the project's done that you get to find out for sure whether you might as well have just spent the financier's money on booze and hookers.

Of course, that applies to everything, not just 'property development'. You get to find out whether 'value was created' when a speculative project either makes a profit or goes bust.

I think that the confusion between concepts I'm talking about is at the root of a lot of waste in the world; people fallaciously think "economic value results from doing stuff, I am doing stuff, therefore I am creating economic value".

[Swoop]

i think you will find thet legally once its fitted in the building you cant remove it

As a one-man-band, he honestly couldn't give a fuck.
He does top notch work for some of the best designers in the country... but don't piss him off.

[JimO]

As a one-man-band, he honestly couldn't give a fuck.
He does top notch work for some of the best designers in the country... but don't piss him off.

yea but what happens is he (1) doesnt get paid (2) gets to reinstate the bldg at his cost

[Swoop]

yea but what happens is he (1) doesnt get paid (2) gets to reinstate the bldg at his cost

I don't believe that he has had to cross that bridge.
Luckily, now he appears to attract the decent designers. Payment problems have almost disappeared.

[Timber020]

As a one-man-band, he honestly couldn't give a fuck.
He does top notch work for some of the best designers in the country... but don't piss him off.

Yeah it does happen, legal or not. There was a roofer who turned up to a job with his whole crew of guys (about 10 at the time I think) and said he was there to take the roofing and guttering back on 3 houses.

Fuck legal, the developers have enough time and money to hide behind whats legal while they screw people just legally enough to get away with it. Maybe we have a bad lot of them in wellington. Of over a dozen of them I have worked for or know of only one has been in any way close to being ethical.

[Brett]

A mate of mine has had "issues" in the past with developers. He states (in writing) at the beginning of the contract, that items that he has made will remain HIS property untill full and final payment has been received (regardless of whether the item/s are fixed in place on-site).
Previous problem clients have had to be visited on-site to uplift a cheque.
Other times he has a very simple method...
A long-bar chainsaw with an old, but very sharp, blade...
Leaving the site with his property back on his ute and the developer with a fucking big ragged hole in his building, studs and lintels all chopped through.

Quite simple and also quite effective. Dunno why?

My understanding that under contract law, this is not legal. While I agree with it, and indeed agree that it makes it a helluva lot harder for him to be pushed around, my understanding is that in court he would loose. Sucks, but that is the way the law is set up.
Any lawyers care to counter??

[pete376403]

I'm not a lawyer but I think you're referring to the Romalpa clause which is pretty standard in sales contracts (that I've seen anyway)
http://www.retail.org.nz/downloads/Retail%20Support.pdf

[slowpoke]

I dunno why developers per se are being singled out apart from jealousy/envy which is no more attractive a trait than the greed people seem to have a problem with. Property "speculation" where houses are bought and sat on in the hope that the value rises is one thing but actually developing land and building houses seems to me to be a far more creative endeavour.

I didn't see the report but I take my hat off to anyone who has got the balls to have a go. Whether it works out or not, whether they've made smart decisions or not they have shown more courage than most "employees", me included.

Yep, I hate this stereotyping "developers are scum", "cops are wankers", "motorcyclists are idiots" type shit. We are all individuals and should be treated as such.

You'd be over the moon if someone opened a bike shop just down the road wouldn't you? How is "speculating" that someone wants to buy a motorcycle any different to "speculating" that someone wants to buy a house or section? Taking this one step further, you could open and stock a bike shop in probably a couple of months if you used a pre-existing building so you have a pretty good idea of the economic environment you will be dealing in. Developing say a subdivision could take years when dealing with the various levels of buraucracy so the economic environment is a guess at best. Given that the risks are therefore greater it's only fair that the returns are possibly stellar. The flip side, as this bloke found out, is that failure can be equally spectacular.