Kaaaaaboooom... Something BIG is underway... You were warned Marky Boy, Greed is NOT GOOD...
In May 2011 investors were told that Collingwood Park was a 1000 lot subdivision valued at $82 million.
Which firm valued this property ???
And who originally owned it ???
The current investor preparing to buy the Collingwood Park site is having to jump through any number of hoops from council to the Federal department of Sustainability to get permission to clear vegetation from the site for approval to proceed.
Surely, Dudley Quinlivan would have had all of the approvals in place before he took the development proposal to Mark McIvor.
Surely, McIvors LANDSOLVE would have insisted that all approvals were in place before Equititrust investors' money was handed over.
Who originally owned Collingwood Park, and got paid all the money ???
As NO TRUST often asks " Where's all the money" ???
Who benefited from this sale to Quinlivan/ Equititrust.
Surely, there was no other motive involved that would risk the investors' funds ???
Kaaaaaboooom... Something BIG is underway... You were warned Marky Boy, Greed is NOT GOOD...
Kaaaaaaaboom....went our money. This is a fact and to the greatest extent the Conivor and Dudley Do Wrong's conspiracy and that of their pet valuer have furthered this fraud.
There is however a basic model in developements which could explain wherhe's one of the money went on the Ipswich project. By no means am I stating this as fact as I dont know the specifics but I do know the norm in this field
The raw land value in this region is calculated at approx $10k per possible lots. That is if the site can carry 1000 lots then it's worth $10mil. I believe this is what was paid for it. The Conivor and Do Wrong sought and were granted 2200 lots on this site hoping to make a killing and exponentially increas their profits. This particular site had many serious design issues which commercially could not efficiently carry this amount of lots and was uncommercial in this format. This didn't stop the greedy duo.
Now the cost to develope this land ordinarily runs to approx $65 k-$$75k per lot for services, roads paths and lighting. The bulk of the excavation on this site is an additional cost and this site is very steep with access issues and problems with road grades and sewer design. As I said an ill conceived design which was always going to blow up
Hence BDO selling it subject to approvals and the site being re configured back to 1000 lots.
There is a further cost to the site which may possibly yield a return to the investors and warrants investigation. The council charges a contribution on all new lots approved and this is customarily approx $26-26k per lot. This is normally paid upon approval and the plans being uplifted and before operational work commences.
On 2200 lots this would be approx $57mil. Now I can not confirm this has been paid but I can't see how it can't have been. Assuming it is and the new approval for the same site is for 1000 lots then at the very least council should return $27mil if not all of it because the argument is that the lots have not been created. In any event the $10mil the site has just been resold at, hopefully did not pass this benifit on to the purchaser as surely they are responsible for their own contributions.
My contention is that there maybe a substantial pile of money sitting at council which has not been looked at.
It would be a great Christmas present if it is and a tasty target to pursue.
What say you BDO
Word 75 it would be great if this were the case, however I do not think civil works even started on site. The head works contributions to council would usually be payable if the project proceeded and prior to completion.. In any event there may have been some performance bonds payable to the council.
It's definitely worth a look at.
That fact that the now bankrupt McIvor (although always morally BANKRUPT) dealt with "King Con" says it all... Birds of a feather fail together...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?