Category: News

MARK BOURIS

There’s something of a home loan ‘rate war’ going on at the moment, which can be great for borrowers. However, it can also creates pitfalls for the unwary.

Take some mortgage advertising I saw this week: it promoted a variable mortgage rate of 4.65 per cent, but beside it was a ‘5.21% comparison rate’.

Look at the difference: on a $300,000 25-year mortgage at 4.65 per cent your total interest bill is $207,941. But if you pay 5.21 per cent, your costs total $237,198. The difference between what’s calculated from the headline offer and the actual costs over the long term is around $30,000.

This type of advertising is a common marketing device. The low interest rate is merely an ‘introductory rate’ which in this case lasts three years. And after three years the home loan reverts to a much higher rate.

When comparing various mortgages, it is the ‘comparison rate’ you should be focusing on. As it shows you what the full mortgage will cost you, which is the total interest cost of$237,198.

Comparing apples with oranges

SInce it is the key to understanding the cost of your loan it is worth taking the time to understand the comparison rate.

The ‘comparison rate’ is a legislated requirement brought in by the federal government. It was introduced in 2003 at a time when ‘honeymoon rates’ were popular and advertised interest rates were not informing borrowers about the true long term cost of their home loan.

It’s quite difficult for average borrowers to calculate what they really pay over the long term if they pay one rate for, say, two years and then revert to a ‘true’ rate for the next 23 years.

So to resolve the confusion the government mandated a formula that all mortgage lenders must use in their advertising. It includes unavoidable fees and charges, and interest rates over a set period, which creates the comparison interest rate.

Because all lenders have to use the same formula, the result gives a borrower the means to compare the true cost of a loan before they commit to it, and it gives some reality to the headline interest rate.

This regulation set by the government is important, but it only goes so far. The law says that a comparison rate must be co-located with the promotional rate, and with the same prominence. A comparison rate is useless unless borrowers are looking at it and registering what it means.

In talking to people, I often find that consumers misinterpret the comparison rate as “X” lenders best rate compared to “Y” lenders best rate. This is what is implied by some advertisers by the wording they use to compare their introductory rate to the comparison rate. The fact are, though, that this is not at all the case.

The comparison rate on your loan, is the rate you should use to compare with other competing loans. And when you do that some interesting patterns emerge.

When you look up the most affordable variable rate loans (4.6%-4.8%) at a site such as RateCity, you see that those lenders with the best ranking have comparison rates almost identical to their advertised rates – that is, the rate they advertise is basically what the borrower will pay. But other loans only start at 4.6 per cent, before reverting to something much higher.

The advertisements imply that start up rate that is lower than the comparison rate is a big advantage, but the facts are the opposite.

Consumers are easily confused by the terminology and practices of the financial services industry. So if you’re searching for something as important as a mortgage, and a comparison rate gives you a chance to level the playing field, you really must pay attention.

The recall this week of thousands of kilometres of dodgy electrical cable across Australia underines the absolute madness of buying cheap products to save money. Local electrician, business owner and Westender columnist had just written a piece for us called Total Recall, which was rolling off the presses when the recall was announced.

The announcement from Fair Trade is available at the Westender website.

As tradesmen and electrical retailers argue with government about who will foot the bill for the testing of cables in the thousands of affected homes and retail premises, everyone tut tuts knowingly about the shonky Chinese importer who foisted the heat affected cable on us.

We all know that quality is cost effective but we are all guilty of buying on price. As Big Mal wrote in last month’s Westender, “We get angry when we purchase a ridiculously cheap product from a ‘Mega Store’, only to find when home, a part is missing, its already broken or it lasts for only two weeks.

“Did we actually want quality but didn’t want to pay for it? In our hearts I think we know it’s rubbish, but we buy it because it’s cheap. Unfortunately it wasn’t really all that cheap in the end, hey?

“Perhaps we should ask doctors and surgeons to offer a discount and see where that leads.”

You can read the full text of Mal’s prescient pontification right here.

It is a timely reminder that there is no joy in knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. That a disposable culture cannot last and that the worship of money is indeed a root cause of evil consequences.

Cliches are cliches because they encapsulate the truth. A stitch in time saves nine and as the guillotined man said, I’m getting out of here while I’m still a head.

Commissioner for Fair Trading in NSW Rod Stowe today announced a voluntary recall on faulty cables used for household electrical wiring.
The recall is for three batches of ‘Infinity’ brand insulated electrical cables. The cables are Thermoplastic Sheathed electric cable – commonly known as ‘TPS’. The batch numbers being recalled are INFH 190311, INFH 210912 and INFMEL 081112.
The cables that are being recalled have recently been subjected to laboratory testing and they failed that test.
Testing found the plastic-coated insulation could become brittle when exposed to high temperatures over time.
This can occur through exposure to heat generated by the copper wire itself or through exposure to external heat – such as in the roofs of homes in hotter parts of Australia.
Mr Stowe emphasised there had not been any reports of incidents or injuries to people or property resulting from the cable.
“While the cables pose no immediate threat to safety, the deterioration of the insulation on the cables over time could cause wires to make contact and short, potentially resulting in electrical shock or fire,” he said.
Mr Stowe advised homeowners they should not check wiring themselves.
“Any work on wiring or cable in your home should only be done by a licensed electrician,” he said.
“If you have recently had building work done that included wiring being changed or installed in your home, contact your builder or electrician and ask what cable they used. If it is this cable, you should talk to the builder or electrician about inspecting and replacing the cable.”
Mr Stowe said it was important all electricians checked their records to see whether they have undertaken work using the recalled cables.
“Electricians must always ensure they install electrical cabling that meets Australian standards on consumer safety,” he said.
The recalled cabling is clearly branded ‘Infinity’ and has been imported from China by NSWbased company Infinity Cable Co Pty Ltd.
The company has initiated this voluntary recall in co-operation with NSW Fair Trading.
The company is publishing recall notices in newspapers and writing to everyone it has sold the cable to, requesting them to return the recalled batches of cable to the place of sale.
The company has agreed to provide information to Fair Trading concerning the importation and sale of the recalled batches of cable and to provide ongoing reports to Fair Trading about the recall and disposal of the affected cables.
Fair Trading understands the cable has been on sale Australia-wide from 1 April 2012 to the present.
“Unused Infinity cables should be returned to the place of purchase by electricians, where they will be entitled to a refund,” Mr Stowe said.

Recently I read an article in one of my electrical trade magazines and was shocked by a new trend developing called Recall Insurance.
It seems tradesmen are now responsible for the dodgy products available on the market. I accept the logic. If I purchase products online from overseas and they are not approved for the Australian market, as a tradesperson, I should be liable if they break down or cause damage.
Products purchased in good faith in Australia, though, should be covered by the manufacturer for recalls or faults. But if a manufacturer goes belly-up then I am left holding the can for the costs to replace/repair the product with no means of recompense. How can that be fair? This supposedly is what this new insurance will cover.
We need to heed the advice ‘Buy from Reputed Suppliers’ and ask questions regarding warranty and replacement. There are good manufacturers and suppliers out there, just look a little bit harder and pay a little bit more.
Did you know that Recall Insurance is a major growth area for insurance companies? Crikey! Don’t worry about fixing the problem of faulty electrical products coming into Australia — hell no! Lets make folks pay for another insurance policy instead. This means we will have to keep putting up our prices to cover extra costs.
This doesn’t just affect us trade folk, but also retail and wholesalers will be forced to take out Recall Insurance if this madness keeps on spiralling out of control.
Be warned, electrical fittings purchased cheaply on the net will unlikely be installed by your electrician if the fitting isn’t approved for the Australian market, because the electrician will be liable.
By the way, I Googled Recall Insurance just to check that I wasn’t panicking about nothing — I nearly fell off my chair. I am off to investigate how much this insurance will cost, then I’ll need a walk I think, just to make sure I’m still living on planet earth.

When he came in with the shovel I realised he was going to kill me. He told me so. If Sammy had not blocked him at the doorway, I would be dead now.

I took the second of hesitation to jump across the kitchen table and run out the front door. I owe you Sam.

I abandoned my four little children. It was no use dying for them. They were his. He was not going to kill them. Though some dads do. Imagine. Imagine that.

I have no family here. We had met backpacking through Australia. I am an immigrant.

A part-time, registered nurse, I did not earn enough money to feed and house them. I was trapped.

The violence, though, was unbearable.

I felt embarrassed to tell anyone. I told lies. My medical colleagues believed the lies despite their training. It was easier. My best friends know all about my sex life but never the beatings.

A well-educated, professional woman does not get beaten up by her husband. What a naïve, elitist, stuck-up girl was I.

The police helped stem the flood of violence. My parents helped me buy a house. I started my own life and now this.

He did not have a key, so he raged outside until he found an implement that could smash the door and then me.

I was not going to let this bastard kill me. I had to break the cycle. But I did not know how.

An outsider, I did not know about court orders, ousting, women’s shelters or other agencies.

They hid me, and my children, for three months: While tempers subsided and I got my life on track. If it weren’t for that, I would be dead now. I owe you all.

The author wishes to remain anonymous. She still struggles with the injustices of a system designed to protect the status quo and the men, at all levels, who abuse it to protect their fellows.

When it comes to rape culture and its relationship to domestic violence, we unfortunately have a lot to talk about in 2014.

From August’s biased news reports regarding adult entertainment superstar Christy Mack’s brutal assault at the hands of her MMA fighter ex-boyfriend Jonathan ‘War Machine’ Koppenhaver; to the erasure of black womens’ role in the Ferguson, Missouri protests; to earlier this year when 22-year-old Elliot Rodger killed two female students at his university in Isla Vista.

Fueled by an online community of Men’s Rights Activists, or ‘MRAs’ who maintain the notion that his victims deserved to be attacked because of Rodger’s continued status as a virgin.As a young woman around Elliot Rodger’s age, I have no doubt that I am also within the age bracket of a number of these MRAs, who exist predominantly within password-protected communities on the Internet. It is terrifying to think that as a society, our median age of ignorance is gradually lowering itself to centre around men in their twenties.

Men whose parents were likely around for second-wave-feminism. Men who have the entire world at their fingertips underneath a Google search bar. Instead these men have chosen not ignorance, but active aggression and hatred towards women.

Many members of older generations will pass this online war against women off as unimportant. This however is in no small part due to a lack of understanding when it comes to just how much of our lives are now lived vicariously through computer screens.Rodger’s manifesto My Twisted World, a 141-page rant he posted online, detailed his misogynistic nature and homicidal desires towards women. It then becomes apparent just how quickly this dangerous mindset can jump from a laptop screen right down to the barrel of a smoking gun.

Men’s Rights Activism is a misnomer. The vast majority of MRAs are wholly aware of the privileges men hold within our society. Their efforts and emotions are largely focussed not on raising their own position, but on lowering those of women. Using women, even those in their own lives, as scapegoats for their personal failures and emotional trauma.

At the end of the day, what this comes down to is personal unhappiness. Elliot Rodger couldn’t come to terms with his identity as a young man who had never kissed a woman. Instead of trying to change himself, he lashed out against women – in no small part because the MRA community provided him with an outlet to do so.

The women Elliot Rodger shot dead had never personally rejected his sexual advances, but to him that wasn’t the point. An unfathomably large group of his peers had been encouraging the idea that women operated as a hive mind of sexual torment since his teenage years. Whether they thought he would ever go as far as he did is often brought into question, but it shouldn’t be. Similarly, the fact that he killed men as well does nothing to ameliorate his hatred of women. Ideas do not exist within the vacuum of the Internet, and neither does violence against women.

Like it or not, this online ‘activism’ is becoming more and more prevalent, with various subcultures latching onto Men’s Rights to further their personal agendas. Last month, MMA fighter Jonathan ‘War Machine’ Koppenhaver tried his absolute hardest to beat his ex-girlfriend Christy Mack to death, becoming the catalyst for a media shitstorm centring around the notion that the former adult star brought the attack upon herself by becoming involved with a man with a violent history.

This isn’t about men’s rights, this is about removing women’s bodily autonomy and the freedom to make our own choices; it’s about creating a culture where, when abused women do speak up, their stories are shrouded in doubt and suspicion.

I was raised in the 90s, and was expressly taught that my body was my own, that no-one was to touch it without my permission and I should scream and shout if anyone hurt me. As we continue to move backwards regarding our treatment of domestic abuse survivors, I wonder, what will the parents of my generation tell their little girls?