RP Data Equity Report

June Quarter, 2011

A quarterly assessment of equity accumulation across the Australian housing market

Released September 2011

RP Datas Equity Report provides a base level estimate of equity accumulation across the Australian housing market by measuring the difference between the original purchase price of a home and the current valuation for individual properties around the country. We call this a base level estimate of equity, as our analysis doesnt factor home owner debt levels into the analysis. At a minimum, Australian mortgage holders would be covering interest payments on their loan while the majority of mortgage holders are also paying down the loan principal. Additionally, home owners may have drawn upon their equity in the past which means their debt level may have increased relative to the property value. Australias residential housing market is worth an estimated $4.56 trillion; more than three-and-a-half times the value of the Australian equities markets which has a market capitalisation of $1.3 trillion. With residential property being the most valuable asset class in the country, home equity is clearly an important measure of wealth. The accumulation of value in ones home is often a key factor that a bank will assess when deciding whether or not to lend money. Australians have increasingly relied on value accumulation in their property holdings as a vehicle to leverage into other investments and purchases. The strong growth in Australian property values during recent years has been the major reason why most regions enjoy quite a strong level of equity. Over the five years to June 2011 capital city home values have increased by about 30%, providing a significant wealth boost to most home owners during this period. More recently the Australian housing market has softened and home values are down 2.7 percent between their October 2010 peak and June 2011. Recent buyers who purchased a home during this time have potentially seen the value of their home move below their contract price. The headline results from our equity analysis reveals that only 3.7 percent of Australian homes are currently valued at a lower amount than the price at which they were purchased. At the other end of the spectrum, about 45 percent of Australian homes are worth more than twice what their owners originally purchased them for. There is some variation between regions, with areas that have recorded a more severe downturn in home values in recent times now recording higher proportions of homes in negative equity. Northern Queensland and South Eastern Western????? Australia are showing more than ten percent of dwellings to be worth less now than the price at which the home was originally purchased. The findings also point to the fact that the length of tenure has a large impact on equity accumulation. As would be expected, homes held for a longer time frame have accumulated more equity than those held for a shorter amount of time. Similarly, those homes purchased after 2007 have a higher propensity to show negative equity as many of these homes were purchased after the significant housing market gains recorded between 2000 to 2004 and during 2007.

Notes on methodology For each property around Australia we have compared the initial purchase price with the current estimated value of the property to provide a base line measure of equity accumulation. RP Data collects virtually 100 percent of all property transaction details across the country, including purchase price and date, from individual State Government departments and directly from real estate professionals who are active in the market place. Our databases hold more than 17 million sales records across than 11.7 million properties nationally. Valuations data is based on RP Datas automated valuations models whereby the company provides an estimate on home values for residential properties across Australia. RP Data values more than 8.6 million dwellings each week via our automated valuation models. Based on weekly tests where the sale records for any recently sold home are compared with their automated valuation result, approximately 84 percent of the RP Data automated valuations used in the analysis are within plus or minus 15 percent of the actual sale price. The automated valuations used for the weekly tests are run in a blind environment where reference to the sale date or sale price being tested is kept hidden from the valuation model. Each automated valuation estimation provides a forecast standard deviation score that provides an indication of the accuracy of the automated valuation. Automated valuations where the range of potential values was deemed to be too wide (ie the forecast standard deviation was greater the 25) were excluded from the analysis.

Equity Overview
Typical equity position Despite the strong growth in property values during recent years, 3.7 percent of home owners across the nation are in a negative equity position where the current value of their home is less than what they originally paid for the property. This 3.7 percent is partly reflective of home buyers who have purchased in recent years within Queensland and Western Australia where home values have generally been weaker than other states. Additionally, buyers who bought near the recent peak of the market are also showing a higher proportion of homes with negative equity. National equity positions
50.0% 45.1% 40.0%

30.0%

20.0% 14.1% 10.0% 3.7% 0.0% 6.2%

16.2%

14.7%

Negative Equity

0 - 10%

10 - 25%

25 - 50%

50 - 100%

100% plus

The results also highlight that many households have a current property value of more than double the original purchase price, reflective of the strong growth in values up until recently. Just over 45 percent of homes across Australia are worth more than twice what the owner originally paid. State equity positions
State NSW Vic Qld SA WA Tas NT ACT National < 0% 3.3% 1.8% 6.3% 3.0% 4.9% 3.5% 4.4% 1.0% 3.7% 0 - 10% 5.3% 3.2% 10.3% 6.6% 8.3% 5.7% 4.2% 2.8% 6.2% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 15.7% 19.9% 14.2% 9.1% 14.5% 18.1% 16.3% 14.0% 11.8% 16.5% 17.9% 17.6% 16.4% 11.2% 12.1% 14.1% 15.7% 11.9% 11.8% 14.4% 19.4% 12.7% 20.3% 17.5% 14.1% 16.2% 14.7% > 100% 41.6% 53.3% 41.3% 38.4% 47.1% 49.1% 45.8% 45.7% 45.1%

Capital city equity positions

City Sydney Melbourne Brisbane Adelaide Perth Hobart Darwin Canberra Combined caps < 0% 2.9% 1.4% 4.1% 2.4% 3.9% 3.3% 4.8% 1.0% 2.7% 0 - 10% 4.8% 2.8% 9.4% 6.3% 8.4% 6.3% 4.6% 2.8% 5.4% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 15.5% 21.7% 15.4% 8.2% 13.8% 18.7% 15.3% 14.5% 13.7% 16.2% 17.6% 18.4% 17.2% 11.2% 12.0% 14.5% 16.0% 11.4% 12.0% 15.3% 18.4% 12.7% 20.3% 17.5% 13.4% 16.7% 16.0% > 100% 39.6% 55.1% 42.9% 39.1% 47.4% 48.5% 45.0% 45.7% 45.9%

Equity positions across each state On a state-by-state basis, Queensland has the greatest percentage of properties in negative equity at 6.3 percent followed by Western Australia with 4.9 per cent of properties. On the other hand, the Australian Capital Territory (1.0 percent) and the state of Victoria (1.8 percent) have relatively few negative equity households. In each state, households with 100% percent equity or more account for the largest proportion of homes as highlighted in the table above. In stating this, almost a third of Queensland households have less than 25 percent equity and almost 30 percent of Western Australian households are in the same position. Overall, Victorian households enjoy the strongest equity position with 71.4 percent of households having at least 50 percent equity in their property. Victoria, and for that matter, Melbourne, has recorded one of the highest rates of capital gain over the past five years (Melbourne dwelling values are up 51.5% over the five years to June 2011); a factor that has likely had a major affect on the high equity level across the state.

Equity positions across each capital city The equity positions of each capital city tends to reflect the state-wide results. In all instances, the greatest proportion of households have recorded an equity level of at least 100 percent or more. Also, in every instance negative equity accounts for the smallest proportion of properties. Darwin (4.8 percent) and Brisbane (4.1 percent) have the greatest proportion of negative equity properties while Canberra (1.0 percent) and Melbourne (1.4 percent) have the lowest proportion.

Across the combined capital cities, there is a lower proportion of negative equity properties than there is nationally and there is a greater proportion of properties with equity of 100 percent or more. This trend is likely due to a higher rate of capital gains that has generally been recorded across the capital city markets compared with many regional locations. Over the past five years to June 2011, the combined Rest of State markets, which include all regions outside the capital cities, have seen house values increase by 18.1% compared with a 28.8% gain in capital city home values.

p.4

Equity Overview

Greatest proportion of homes with negative equity % of properties Hold period Statistical Division in neg equity (yrs) Far North, QLD 13.5% 6.2 South Eastern, WA 11.2% 6.6 Gold Coast, QLD 9.9% 6.5 South West, WA 9.8% 5.9 Lower Great Southern, WA 9.8% 6.0 Sunshine Coast, QLD 9.0% 6.7 Upper Great Southern, WA 8.0% 5.7 Mallee, VIC 7.8% 7.6 Murray Lands, SA 7.4% 5.3 Kimberley, WA 7.2% 5.7

Lowest proportion of homes with negative equity % of properties Hold period Statistical Division in neg equity (yrs) Canberra, ACT 1.0% 6.9 Melbourne, VIC 1.4% 9.0 Loddon, VIC 1.6% 7.8 Barwon, VIC 2.2% 7.7 Central Highlands, VIC 2.2% 7.2 Adelaide, SA 2.4% 5.4 Gippsland, VIC 2.4% 7.8 South West, QLD 2.8% 6.6 North West, QLD 2.8% 5.7 Northern, NSW 2.9% 7.3

Note: hold period refers the median difference between the time of the most recent property purchase and June 2011.

Focus on negative equity Across the country just 3.7 percent of home owners are in a position where the original purchase price of their home is lower than the current value of their home, however there are regions around Australian where weak housing markets have created higher rates of negative equity. Focusing on Statistical Divisions (SD) around the country, the analysis shows the regions which typically have the greatest proportion of properties with a negative level of equity are located in Queensland and Western Australia. This should come as no real surprise considering both markets have been particularly weak performers during recent times, most notably within coastal markets which had previously been supported by tourism and the sea change phenomenon. Five of the ten regions with the greatest proportion of negative equity properties are coastal. The Far North region of Queensland which includes areas such as: Cairns, Palm Cove, Port Douglas, Innisfail, Weipa and Atherton has recorded the greatest proportion of properties in a negative equity position at 13.5 percent of all homes. The housing market within the north of Queensland has been noticeably weak and has felt the full brunt of the economic downturn. House values in the region have increased by just 3.2 percent annually over the past six years and unit values have grown by 2.8 percent annually. Although values have risen over the period, if we focus on just the last three years, house values are currently -7.3 percent lower than they were three years ago and unit values are -20.4 percent lower. The vast majority of home owners that have purchased since 2008 are likely to be in a negative equity position. Western Australias South Eastern Statistical Division, which includes the southern councils of Ravensthorpe and Esperance as well as the centrally located Kalgoorlie/Boulder council has shown the second highest proportion of homes in negative equity at 11.2 percent of all dwellings in the region. Median house values across this vast region remain 3.5 percent lower than their peak recorded back in late 2008. Looking at the regions with the lowest levels of negative equity, the top ten regions all have less than 3.0 percent of all properties in a position where the current value is lower than the purchase price.

Canberra has the lowest proportion of properties in a negative equity position with just 1.0 percent of properties or one in every 100 properties in this position. Canberra has recorded consistent growth in property values during recent years and is yet to record any substantial decline which is resulting in a stronger equity position than all other areas across the country.
Outside of Melbourne and Adelaide which are both coastal capital cities, only Barwon with 2.2 percent of all properties in negative equity and Gippsland with 2.4 percent are in coastal regions.

p.5

Equity Overview

Lowest proportion of homes with 100% + equity % of properties Hold period Statistical Division with >100% (yrs) equity Outer Adelaide, SA 29.3% 4.5 South East, SA 30.5% 5.2 Murray Lands, SA 32.7% 5.3 South Eastern, WA 37.5% 5.1 Eyre, SA 36.4% 5.3 Yorke and Lower North, SA 37.1% 4.8 Gold Coast, QLD 35.2% 6.5 Far North, QLD 35.9% 6.2 Mallee, Vic 37.3% 7.6 Sunshine Coast, Qld 38.7% 6.7

Greatest proportion of homes with 100% + equity % of properties Hold period Statistical Division with >100% (yrs) equity Central West, QLD 60.4% 7.4 Midlands, WA 58.7% 6.2 Far West, NSW 56.6% 6.8 South West, QLD 56.2% 6.6 Upper Great Southern, WA 55.5% 5.7 Melbourne, VIC 55.1% 9.0 North West, QLD 52.5% 5.7 Central, WA 52.5% 5.7 Northern, SA 51.3% 5.9 Western District, VIC 51.2% 8.3

Note: hold period refers the median difference between the time of the most recent property purchase and June 2011.

Focus on equity in excess of 100% of purchase price Across the nation, 45.1 percent of residential dwellings have a current value which is more than double the initial purchase price. Looking once again at the Statistical Divisions across the country, those regions which have recorded the lowest proportion of homes where values are at least double the purchase price are mainly located in Queensland and South Australia. Of the ten regions that have the lowest proportion of these high equity properties, only half coincide with regions that were on the list for the greatest proportion of negative equity properties. That would suggest that just because some home owners are in a particularly poor equity position it doesnt necessarily mean that the vast majority of home owners in that region are in a similar position. Many of the regions detailed as having a low proportion of households with equity in excess of 100 percent of the purchase price have a relatively short hold period. Obviously, the longer a property is held, over time it would be expected that the differential between the purchase price and the current value will improve. The Outer Adelaide region of South Australia has the lowest proportion of properties with equity of 100 percent or more at just 29.3 percent. Out of all the Statistical Divisions analysed Outer Adelaide actually has the shortest length of tenure (4.5 years) which largely explains why relatively few properties have a current value more than double the purchase price. Regional locations seem to have the greatest level of equity accumulation with all but one of the Statistical Divisions in the top ten being non-capital cities. The Central West region of Queensland has the greatest proportion of properties which have a current value more than double the purchase price at 60.4 percent. The region is relatively sparsely populated with the major townships in the region being Barcaldine, Blackall and Longreach. The median house price remains quite low and with an average hold period of 7.4 years many home owners are in a very strong position. Across the top ten regions listed, Melbourne is the only capital city market with 55.1 percent of all homes having a value more than double the purchase price. All other areas are quite regional with most in agricultural areas of the country where house prices are much more affordable than they are within capital cities and coastal markets.

p.6

Equity Overview
Equity by state Given the strong growth in property values across the last 10 years, all states have recorded positive growth in median equity. The adjacent table highlights state-by-state equity levels in both percentage terms and dollar value terms as well as the median length of ownership to June 2011. State-wide equity measurement
State New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia Western Australia Tasmania Northern Territory Australian Capital Territory Median change in equity (%) 60.2% 110.4% 54.9% 56.1% 80.7% 85.6% 79.0% 75.2% Median change in equity ($) $168,448 $215,560 $139,419 $119,889 $191,859 $124,653 $200,799 $223,570 Median length of ownership (yrs) 8.7 8.7 6.6 5.3 5.9 7.0 4.8 6.9

Throughout the states, home owners in Victoria have enjoyed the greatest increase in equity at 110.4 percent. It is important to note that Victorian home owners have owned their properties longer (8.7 years) than those in most other states, which is likely to have an affect on equity positions.

At the other end of the spectrum, Queensland properties have typically recorded the lowest level of growth in equity at just 54.9 percent. Capital city equity measurement
State Capital city NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT Sydney Melbourne Brisbane Adelaide Perth Hobart Darwin Canberra Median change in equity (%) 57.2% 119.9% 63.4% 58.5% 81.9% 81.2% 75.0% 75.2% Median change in equity ($) $194,991 $255,928 $169,547 $136,386 $208,612 $141,374 $208,845 $223,570 Median length of ownership (yrs) 8.9 9.0 6.8 5.4 6.0 7.2 4.8 6.9

Capital city equity Most capital city markets have recorded strong growth in property values over the last ten years. As a result, many home owners have built up substantial equity in their homes as these values have risen.

Across the capital cities, Sydney has recorded the lowest increase in equity, with a median change of just 57.2 percent. Given that Sydney property values have recorded the lowest level of capital gains in recent years it is no surprise that equity build-up in that city has been weaker than most others.

On the other hand, equity in Melbourne dwellings has increased by 119.9 percent. This is a function of Melbourne home owners typically owning their homes longer than most other cities together with the strong growth in property values over the last decade.

Greatest equity growth by council areas Across the country, the Local Government Areas (LGA) which have recorded the greatest increase in equity have been dominated by areas of Victoria and notably parts of Melbourne. Melbourne regions are quite prevalent thanks to a longer than average length of tenure as well as the fact that Melbourne home values have seen an above average rate of capital gains over the recent growth phases.

Greatest equity growth by council areas

LGA Tasman Monash Greater Dandenong Whitehorse Gingin Boroondara Manningham Darebin Loddon Glen Eira State TAS VIC VIC VIC WA VIC VIC VIC VIC VIC Median change in equity (%) 196.1% 195.1% 194.6% 187.3% 181.1% 171.8% 167.7% 167.4% 165.7% 161.0% Median change in equity ($) $141,827 $387,004 $240,547 $382,209 $271,327 $550,981 $428,086 $314,093 $86,497 $386,368 Median length of ownership (yrs) 8.2 11.0 10.5 10.7 8.0 10.2 10.9 10.0 10.0 10.3

The Tasman council area in the Southern region of Tasmania has recorded the greatest percentage increase in equity. Values in the region have moved from a very low base and are typically 196.1 percent higher than the original purchase price. This rapid improvement in equity has occurred over just 8.2 years on average.

p.7

New South Wales

State-wide equity measurement
Property type Houses Units Dwellings Median change in equity (%) 81.2% 41.6% 60.2% Median change in equity ($) $198,462 $125,114 $168,448 Median length of ownership (yrs) 9.6 6.9 8.7

New South Wales equity by property type The typical New South Wales property owner has held their property for 8.7 years. The current value of properties is 60.2 percent higher than the initial purchase price. In dollar value terms, the typical home owner has $168,448 worth of equity in their property. In terms of equity build up, houses have outpaced units. Houses are typically owned for much longer (9.6 years) than units (6.9 years). As a result the equity growth for houses (81.2 percent, $198,462), has been significantly greater than it has been for units (60.2 percent, $168,448). Equity levels by major regions
Statistical Division Central West Far West Hunter Illawarra Mid-North Coast Murray Murrumbidgee North Western Northern Richmond-Tweed South Eastern Sydney < 0% 4.4% 6.4% 3.7% 3.4% 4.0% 4.9% 4.6% 4.1% 2.9% 5.0% 4.7% 2.9% 0 - 10% 5.5% 4.4% 5.9% 6.1% 6.8% 8.0% 6.7% 6.6% 4.8% 8.2% 6.2% 4.8% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 16.2% 7.6% 15.7% 17.4% 17.2% 16.7% 15.2% 17.4% 15.5% 14.9% 14.2% 15.5% 16.9% 10.8% 16.6% 17.3% 15.2% 14.9% 17.1% 15.0% 16.8% 14.7% 15.4% 21.7% 13.5% 14.3% 10.6% 10.4% 10.3% 14.0% 15.1% 15.2% 15.1% 10.7% 12.5% 15.4% 43.6% 56.6% 47.5% 45.4% 46.5% 41.4% 41.3% 41.8% 44.9% 46.5% 46.9% 39.6% Median length of ownership (yrs) 8.0 6.8 8.9 9.0 8.7 8.4 7.6 7.5 7.3 8.0 8.1 8.9

Equity by major NSW regions The Far West region of the state has the greatest proportion of properties in a negative equity position (6.4 percent) followed by the Richmond-Tweed region which is a coastal market adjacent to the Queensland and New South Wales border (5.0 percent). Sydney and the Northern region have the fewest properties in a negative equity position at just 2.9 percent each. Across the state, the proportion of properties which have a current value more than double the initial purchase price varies from 39.6 percent in Sydney to 56.6 percent in the Far West (despite the fact that the Far West also has the greatest proportion of negative equity properties). Across all regions more than half of the homes have accumulated equity of 50 percent or more. The Far West has the greatest proportion (70.8 percent), followed by: Northern (60.0 percent) and South Eastern (59.5 percent). If property values across the state fell by 10 percent from their current levels, the following regions would have the greatest instances of negative equity: Richmond-Tweed (13.3 percent), Murray (12.9 percent) and Murrumbidgee (11.3 percent). Properties within the major population centres of Sydney (8.9 years), Hunter (8.9 years) and Illawarra (9.0 years) have tended to be owned for the longest period of time. On the other hand, properties within the Far West (6.8 years) and Northern (7.3 years) regions had typically been owned by the current owners for the shortest period of time.

p.8

Victoria
State-wide equity measurement
Property type Houses Units Dwellings Median change in equity (%) 126.2% 76.6% 110.4% Median change in equity ($) $234,202 $169,006 $215,560 Median length of ownership (yrs) 9.1 7.5 8.7

Victoria equity by property type The typical Victorian property owner has held their property for 8.7 years. The current value of properties is 110.4 percent higher than the initial purchase price. In dollar value terms, the typical home owner has a current value which is $215,560 higher than the initial purchase price.
In terms of equity accumulation, houses have outpaced units. Houses are typically owned for much longer (9.1 years) than units (7.5 years). As a result the typical value improvement for houses (126.2 percent, $234,202), has been significantly greater than it has been for units (76.6 percent, $169,006). Equity levels by major regions
Statistical Division Barwon Central Highlands East Gippsland Gippsland Goulburn Loddon Mallee Melbourne Ovens-Murray Western District Wimmera < 0% 2.2% 2.2% 3.4% 2.4% 4.2% 1.6% 7.8% 1.4% 4.6% 3.2% 4.6% 0 - 10% 3.7% 3.8% 4.8% 4.1% 5.8% 3.0% 8.5% 2.8% 7.3% 4.4% 4.8% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 10.2% 12.0% 13.5% 11.7% 15.2% 10.8% 16.7% 8.2% 18.4% 12.1% 13.7% 17.7% 20.7% 15.8% 18.3% 16.9% 18.1% 15.1% 13.8% 14.2% 16.2% 16.1% 17.9% 16.8% 12.5% 16.7% 15.0% 17.1% 14.7% 18.7% 11.7% 12.9% 16.2% 48.2% 44.5% 50.1% 46.8% 42.9% 49.4% 37.3% 55.1% 43.7% 51.2% 44.6% Median length of ownership (yrs) 7.7 7.2 7.9 7.0 7.7 7.8 7.6 9.0 7.7 8.3 7.5

Equity by major Vic regions The Mallee region of the state has the greatest proportion of properties in which the current value is lower than the purchase price (7.8 percent) followed by Ovens-Murray and Wimmera (both 4.6 percent). Melbourne has the fewest properties in a negative equity position (1.4 percent) followed by Loddon (1.6 percent). Across the state, the proportion of properties which have a current value more than double the initial purchase price varies from 37.3 percent in Mallee to 55.1 percent in Melbourne. Melbourne in particular has a majority of homes with a current value more than double that of the purchase price and this is mainly due to the fact that homes are typically held for a long period of time.

Based on current property values, all regions of Victoria have more than half of their properties worth in excess of 50 percent more than the initial purchase price. Melbourne (73.9 percent), Loddon (66.5 percent) and Barwon (66.1 percent) have the greatest proportion of properties valued at greater than 50 percent more than the purchase price.
If property values across the state fell by 10 percent from their current levels, the following regions would have the greatest instances of negative equity: Mallee (16.2 percent), Ovens-Murray (12.0 percent) and Goulburn (10.0 percent). Properties within Melbourne (9.0 years) and Western District (8.3 years) have tended to be owned for the longest period of time. On the other hand, properties within Gippsland (7.0 years) and the Central Highlands (7.2 years) have typically been owned by the current owners for the shortest period of time.

p.9

Queensland
State-wide equity measurement
Property type Houses Units Dwellings Median change in equity (%) 68.8% 32.7% 54.9% Median change in equity ($) $165,670 $86,454 $139,419 Median length of ownership (yrs) 6.9 5.8 6.6

Queensland equity by property type The typical Queensland property owner has held their property for 6.6 years. The current value of properties is 54.9 percent higher than the initial purchase price. In dollar value terms, the typical home owner has a current value which is $139,419 higher than the initial purchase price. In terms of value growth, houses have outpaced units. Houses are typically owned for much longer (6.9 years) than units (5.8 years). As a result the typical value improvement for houses (68.8 percent, $165,670), has been significantly greater than it has been for units (32.7 percent, $86,454). Equity levels by major regions
Statistical Division Brisbane Central West Darling Downs Far North Fitzroy Gold Coast Mackay North West Northern South West Sunshine Coast West Moreton Wide Bay-Burnett < 0% 4.1% 4.6% 3.0% 13.5% 3.8% 9.9% 6.8% 2.8% 5.9% 2.8% 9.0% 4.1% 6.8% 0 - 10% 9.4% 5.0% 6.0% 12.0% 7.1% 12.7% 8.7% 5.1% 11.5% 4.5% 12.9% 8.7% 11.2% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 15.3% 9.3% 18.7% 15.7% 15.6% 17.0% 18.4% 18.2% 15.7% 12.5% 17.7% 15.8% 18.3% 14.5% 8.8% 18.4% 11.8% 14.1% 14.2% 11.4% 12.8% 11.6% 13.5% 13.3% 14.6% 12.9% 13.7% 12.1% 11.3% 11.3% 10.4% 11.0% 8.9% 8.8% 11.2% 10.6% 8.4% 11.0% 9.3% 42.9% 60.4% 42.6% 35.9% 48.9% 35.2% 45.8% 52.5% 44.1% 56.2% 38.7% 45.8% 41.4% Median length of ownership (yrs) 6.8 7.4 6.4 6.2 6.1 6.5 6.3 5.7 6.2 6.6 6.7 6.2 6.2

Equity by major Qld regions The Far North region has the countrys (and subsequently Queenslands) greatest proportion of total properties with a current property value lower than the purchase price (13.5 percent) followed by the Gold Coast (9.9 percent). A number of Queensland regions have a relatively high instance of negative equity compared to other states however, the North West and South West regions have a relatively low instance of negative equity (both 2.8 percent). The proportion of properties with a current value more than double the purchase price varies across the state from as little as 35.2 percent of properties on the Gold Coast to as high as 60.4 percent in the Central West region. What isnt a surprise is the fact that the Central Wests large number of properties worth double their purchase price coincides with the fact that the region has the longest length of ownership at 7.4 years. The Central West region has the greatest proportion of homes with more than 50 percent equity (72.4 percent) followed by: South West (66.8 percent) and North West (61.2 percent). On the other hand, only 47.1 percent of homes on the Sunshine Coast and within the Far North region have equity in excess of 50 percent of the initial purchase price. If property values across Queensland were to fall a further 10 percent from their June 2011 level, a number of regions would have a substantial number of houses in negative equity including: Far North (25.4 percent), Gold Coast (22.6 percent) and Sunshine Coast (21.9 percent). Property owners in the Central West region have Queenslands longest length of tenure (7.4 years) with Brisbane the second longest at 6.8 years. Most regions have a length of ownership between six and six and a half years however the shortest are: North West (5.7 years) and Fitzroy (6.1 years).

p.10

South Australia
State-wide equity measurement
Property type Houses Units Dwellings Median change in equity (%) 57.5% 51.5% 56.1% Median change in equity ($) $126,739 $100,742 $119,889 Median length of ownership (yrs) 5.4 5.0 5.3

South Australia equity by property type South Australian home owners have typically been in their current property for just 5.3 years. The current value of these homes is 56.1 percent higher than the initial purchase price. In dollar value terms, the typical home owner has a current value which is $119,889 higher than the initial purchase price. In terms of value growth, houses have slightly outperformed units. Houses are typically owned for 5.4 years compared to units which have been held for 5.0 years. As a result, the typical value improvement for houses (57.5 percent, $126,739), has been slightly superior than it has been for units (51.5 percent, $100,742). Equity levels by major regions
Statistical Division Adelaide Eyre Murray Lands Northern Outer Adelaide South East Yorke and Lower North < 0% 2.4% 4.1% 7.4% 5.8% 4.1% 4.6% 5.4% 0 - 10% 6.3% 6.4% 9.4% 6.5% 7.3% 8.0% 8.2% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 16.2% 17.4% 17.9% 12.1% 19.6% 20.3% 17.0% 17.6% 20.4% 17.6% 12.3% 23.1% 21.5% 17.2% 18.4% 15.1% 15.0% 12.0% 16.7% 15.1% 15.1% 39.1% 36.4% 32.7% 51.3% 29.3% 30.5% 37.1% Median length of ownership (yrs) 5.4 5.3 5.3 5.9 4.5 5.2 4.8

Equity by major SA regions In terms of properties in a negative equity position, Murray Lands has the greatest proportion of properties in which the current value is below the purchase price with 7.4 percent of all homes in this position followed by the Northern region (5.8 percent). The rate of negative equity in South Australia is typically higher than the national benchmark however, levels are comparatively low in Adelaide (2.4 percent) and Eyre and South East (both 4.1 percent). The Northern region is the only statistical division across the state which has recorded a majority of homes as having equity levels of more than 100 percent. Outer Adelaide has the nations (and South Australias) lowest proportion of properties in a position where the current value is double the purchase price at just 29.3 percent of properties. Within the Northern region, 63.4 percent of homes have in excess of 50 percent equity. Adelaide (57.4 percent) and Yorke and Lower North (52.2 percent) have comparatively high instances of equity greater than 50 percent. The instances of equity greater than 50 percent are low in: South East (45.7 percent), Outer Adelaide (46.0 percent) and Murray Lands (47.7 percent). If properties across South Australia fell by 10 percent from their current level, negative equity would be greatest within: Murray Lands (16.8 percent), Yorke and Lower North (13.6 percent) and South East (12.6 percent).

Outer Adelaide home owners have held their properties for just 4.5 years which is the shortest length of ownership across all major South Australian regions while the Yorke and Lower North region also has quite a short length (4.8 years). The Northern region has South Australias longest typical length of ownership (5.9 years) however, in comparison to most other states it is a fairly short length of ownership.

p.11

Western Australia
State-wide equity measurement
Property type Houses Units Dwellings Median change in equity (%) 81.9% 74.7% 80.7% Median change in equity ($) $199,507 $159,364 $191,859 Median length of ownership (yrs) 5.8 6.5 5.9

Western Australia equity by property type Western Australian home owners have typically been in possession of their current property for just 5.9 years. The current value of these homes is 80.7 percent higher than the initial purchase price. In dollar value terms, the typical home owner has a current value which is $191,859 higher than the initial purchase price.

In terms of value growth, houses have outperformed units. Houses are typically owned for 5.8 years compared to units which have been held for a longer 6.5 years. Despite the longer hold period for units, the typical value improvement for houses (81.9 percent, $199,507), has been superior than it has been for units (74.7 percent, $159,364).
Equity levels by major regions
Statistical Division Central Kimberley Lower Great Southern Midlands Perth Pilbara South Eastern South West Upper Great Southern < 0% 5.6% 7.2% 9.8% 6.4% 3.9% 5.7% 11.2% 9.8% 8.0% 0 - 10% 5.6% 6.8% 8.0% 4.6% 8.4% 5.7% 8.4% 9.6% 4.1% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 13.5% 15.0% 11.8% 8.7% 17.2% 13.2% 12.8% 15.0% 9.5% 11.5% 9.8% 8.7% 10.0% 11.2% 13.8% 13.2% 10.9% 11.1% 11.3% 14.4% 12.0% 11.6% 12.0% 11.9% 16.8% 12.0% 11.8% 52.5% 46.7% 49.7% 58.7% 47.4% 49.7% 37.5% 42.8% 55.5% Median length of ownership (yrs) 5.7 5.7 6.0 6.2 6.0 5.3 5.1 5.9 5.7

Equity by major WA regions Western Australia has a comparatively high level of negative equity compared to other states due to the property market downturn it has experienced since 2007. The South Eastern region of the state has the greatest instances of negative equity with 11.2 percent of properties worth less than the purchase price. Rates of negative equity are lowest in Perth at 3.9 percent. The Midlands, Upper Great Southern and Central regions of the state all have greater than half their properties in a position where the current value is double the purchase price. Based on the typical equity level, the South Eastern region of the state has the lowest equity position at just 59.2 percent. In each region, more than half of all homes have equity in excess of 50 percent. The greatest proportion of homes with equity of more than 50 percent are found in: Midlands (70.3 percent), Upper Great Southern (67.3 percent) and Central (63.8 percent). The lowest levels of equity in excess of 50 percent more than the purchase price are found in: South Eastern (54.3 percent), South West (54.8 percent) and Perth (59.4 percent). Under a scenario in which property values across Western Australia fell by 10 percent, the following regions would have the greatest instance of negative equity: South Eastern (19.6 percent), South West (19.4 percent) and Lower Great Southern (17.7 percent). Home owners in the South Eastern region have held their properties for just 5.1 years which is the shortest hold period of all regions across the state. Properties in the Pilbara have also been held for a relatively short 5.3 years. The Midlands region not only has the strongest equity position, it also has the longest typical length of ownership at 6.2 years.

p.12

Tasmania
State-wide equity measurement
Property type Houses Units Dwellings Median change in equity (%) 98.2% 45.7% 85.6% Median change in equity ($) $133,032 $81,647 $124,653 Median length of ownership (yrs) 7.3 5.5 7.0

Tasmania equity by property type Home owners across Tasmania have typically owned their properties for 7.0 years. The current value of these homes is 85.6 percent higher than the initial purchase price. In dollar value terms, the typical home owner has a current value which is $124,653 higher than the initial purchase price.
In terms of value growth, houses have outperformed units. Houses are typically owned for 7.3 years compared to units which have been held for a shorter 5.5 years. The typical value improvement for houses (98.2 percent, $133,032), has been far superior than it has been for units (45.7 percent, $81,647).

Equity levels by major regions

Statistical Division Hobart Mersey-Lyell Northern Southern < 0% 3.3% 3.6% 3.3% 5.0% 0 - 10% 6.3% 5.4% 5.0% 6.1% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 14.5% 13.6% 14.0% 12.8% 16.0% 15.4% 16.1% 13.1% 11.4% 12.0% 12.4% 12.1% 48.5% 50.0% 49.2% 51.0% Median length of ownership (yrs) 7.2 6.9 6.9 6.7

Equity by major Tas regions Negative equity levels are close to average across most regions of Tasmania however, they are slightly elevated in the Southern region. Across the Southern region, 5.0 percent of all homes are worth less now than they were when they were purchased. Hobart and the Northern regions have the lowest levels of negative equity (3.3 percent).

Despite the fact that the Southern region had the greatest proportion of homes worth less than when purchased it also has the greatest proportion of properties worth more than double (51.0 percent) the initial purchase price. Mersey-Lyell recorded that half of all homes in the region have a current property value more than double the initial purchase price.
Across the four major regions, each have in excess of 50 percent of properties with a current equity level greater than 50 percent of the purchase price. The Southern region has the greatest proportion of homes with more than 50 percent equity (63.0 percent) while Hobart has the lowest proportion (59.9 percent). If home values throughout all regions in Tasmania were to fall by 10 percent from current levels, the Southern region would have the greatest instances of negative equity (11.1 percent). Under the same circumstances, negative equity would be lowest in the Northern region (8.3 percent). Across the four Tasmanian regions the typical length of ownership of homes does not vary greatly. The Southern region has the shortest length of ownership at just 6.7 years and Hobart home owners have held their properties for the longest typical length (7.2 years).

p.13

Northern Territory
State-wide equity measurement
Property type Houses Units Dwellings Median change in equity (%) 94.2% 60.0% 79.0% Median change in equity ($) $238,327 $152,016 $200,799 Median length of ownership (yrs) 5.1 4.3 4.8

Northern Territory equity by property type Home owners across the Northern Territory have typically owned their current properties for just 4.8 years, the shortest median hold period of any state or territory. The current value of these homes is 79.0 percent higher than the initial purchase price. In dollar value terms, the typical home owner has a current value which is $200,799 higher than the initial purchase price.

In terms of value growth, houses have outperformed units. Houses are typically owned for 5.1 years compared to units which have been held for a shorter 4.3 years. The typical value improvement for houses (94.2 percent, $238,327), has been superior than it has been for units (60.0 percent, $152,016).

Equity levels by major regions

Statistical Division Darwin Northern Territory - Bal < 0% 4.8% 3.1% 0 - 10% 4.6% 2.8% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 12.0% 11.4% 15.3% 11.1% 18.4% 23.1% 45.0% 48.5% Median length of ownership (yrs) 4.8 4.7

Equity by major NT regions Darwin homes have a slightly elevated level of negative equity, whereas those regions outside of Darwin typically enjoy a superior position. Across Darwin, 4.8 percent of homes are currently worth less than the price initially paid whereas in those areas outside of Darwin only 3.1 percent of properties have a current value less than the purchase price. Outside of Darwin, 48.5 percent of homes have a current value which is more than double the initial purchase price. On the other hand, 45.0 percent of home owners in Darwin have a current value which is more than double the price paid for the home. The vast majority of homes across the state have more than 50 percent equity. In Darwin, 63.4 percent of homes have a current value which is more than 50 percent higher than the purchase price and outside of Darwin the figure is 71.6 percent.

If home values fell by 10 percent from their current levels across the Northern Territory, 9.4 percent of Darwin homes would be in a negative equity position compared to 5.9 percent of homes outside of Darwin.
The typical length of home ownership across the Northern Territory is quite low. Home owners in Darwin have typically owned their current properties for just 4.8 years whereas those outside of Darwin have owned their properties for a shorter 4.7 years.

p.14

Australian Capital Territory regions

State-wide equity measurement
Property type Houses Units Dwellings Median change in equity (%) 95.2% 56.3% 75.2% Median change in equity ($) $277,257 $155,738 $223,570 Median length of ownership (yrs) 7.3 5.8 6.9

Australian Capital Territory equity by property type Home owners across the ACT have typically owned their current properties for just 6.9 years. The current value of these homes is 75.2 percent higher than the initial purchase price. In dollar value terms, the typical home owner has a current value which is $223,570 higher than the initial purchase price.

In terms of value growth, houses have outperformed units. Houses are typically owned for 7.3 years compared to units which have been held for a shorter 5.8 years. The typical value improvement for houses (95.2 percent, $277,257), has been superior to units (56.3 percent, $155,738).

Equity levels by major regions

Statistical Sub Division Belconnen Gungahlin-Hall North Canberra South Canberra Tuggeranong Weston Creek-Stromlo Woden Valley Region Canberra Canberra Canberra Canberra Canberra Canberra Canberra < 0% 0.8% 0.6% 2.1% 2.0% 0.4% 0.9% 1.9% 0 - 10% 3.1% 2.2% 3.2% 3.1% 2.2% 3.0% 3.3% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 14.1% 14.7% 12.7% 10.5% 12.2% 11.4% 9.5% 22.4% 22.5% 20.7% 18.9% 18.6% 18.6% 17.3% 15.7% 16.4% 24.1% 21.5% 15.1% 16.9% 17.7% > 100% 43.9% 43.6% 37.2% 43.9% 51.5% 49.2% 50.2%

Median length of ownership (yrs) 6.4 5.2 6.1 7.1 8.1 7.5 7.7

The proportion of homes showing negative equity across the regions of Canberra are relatively low compared to other regions. The region showing the highest proportion of homes currently valued at less than what they were purchased for is North Canberra at just 2.1%. Woden Valley is showing the highest proportion of homes worth at least double what the owners originally paid at 50.2%. If home values across Canberra fell by 10 percent from their current level, the city would still have a comparatively low instance of negative equity, the following levels of negative equity would apply across each region: Tuggeranong (2.5 percent), Gungahlin-Hall (2.8 percent), Belconnen and Weston Creek-Stromlo (both 3.9 percent), South Canberra (5.1 percent), Woden Valley (5.2 percent) and North Canberra (5.3 percent).

p.15

Equity after the GFC

The Global Financial Crisis began affecting housing markets in 2008. Australias capital city house values recorded peak to trough falls of -3.8 percent during 2008 as the world economy slowed. Following the slowdown, interest rates were slashed to their lowest levels in decades and the Federal Government introduced the First Home Owners Grant Boost which encouraged market activity and resulted in growth in home values once more. Since the Reserve Bank began lifting official interest rates back in October 2009 the residential property market has slowed. Across most Australian regions property values have fallen and are now below their peak.

The implications of these conditions are that growth in housing asset values has been much more subdued since the GFC and those which have purchased recently have lower equity levels. The following tables highlight equity positions across each state based on properties which have transacted between June 2001 and June 2011. Pre-GFC is considered to be any of those properties transacted between June 2001 and December 2007 and Post-GFC includes properties purchased after 2007 and before June 2011.
State equity positions pre and post GFC
State NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT National < 0% 5.0% 1.2% 5.1% 1.4% 4.2% 1.9% 2.2% 0.6% 3.7% 0 - 10% 6.3% 1.9% 5.8% 2.1% 5.7% 2.9% 1.0% 1.0% 4.6% Pre-GFC 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 17.7% 32.5% 24.7% 6.0% 19.7% 40.4% 14.7% 23.5% 22.0% 8.2% 25.1% 33.3% 11.2% 12.5% 21.4% 10.2% 21.8% 21.3% 2.8% 10.1% 25.1% 5.2% 26.4% 36.5% 12.5% 24.2% 27.8% > 100% 13.8% 30.8% 28.9% 29.8% 45.0% 41.9% 58.8% 30.3% 27.2% < 0% 4.6% 5.5% 13.3% 6.9% 9.6% 9.5% 8.2% 2.3% 7.7% 0 - 10% 15.1% 13.8% 32.4% 20.7% 22.1% 19.9% 11.3% 10.9% 20.0% Post-GFC 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 44.8% 28.3% 5.7% 35.9% 32.1% 11.1% 40.7% 9.8% 1.7% 50.2% 17.5% 3.1% 43.8% 17.0% 3.9% 41.2% 20.9% 6.2% 36.9% 22.1% 12.1% 46.3% 31.5% 4.3% 42.0% 22.7% 5.7% > 100% 1.6% 1.6% 2.1% 1.5% 3.6% 2.3% 9.5% 4.7% 2.0%

Capital City equity positions pre and post GFC

State Sydney Melbourne Brisbane Adelaide Perth Hobart Darwin Canberra Combined caps < 0% 4.6% 0.6% 2.5% 1.0% 2.9% 1.6% 2.3% 0.6% 2.5% 0 - 10% 5.9% 1.1% 3.3% 1.5% 5.5% 3.0% 1.1% 1.0% 3.6% Pre-GFC 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 17.5% 36.0% 26.9% 4.3% 18.0% 43.4% 12.2% 25.7% 27.2% 6.9% 25.1% 35.6% 11.7% 12.6% 22.0% 10.9% 23.8% 22.0% 2.9% 11.3% 24.7% 5.2% 26.4% 36.5% 11.0% 25.0% 31.5% > 100% 9.1% 32.5% 29.1% 29.8% 45.3% 38.8% 57.7% 30.3% 26.5% < 0% 3.6% 5.2% 10.5% 5.9% 8.0% 9.5% 9.2% 2.3% 6.0% 0 - 10% 13.7% 13.8% 34.8% 21.3% 22.8% 22.9% 12.2% 10.9% 18.9% Post-GFC 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 44.4% 30.8% 6.0% 35.2% 33.3% 11.2% 42.4% 9.1% 1.3% 51.6% 17.1% 2.8% 45.5% 17.1% 3.3% 41.8% 19.6% 4.5% 36.7% 23.0% 10.1% 46.3% 31.5% 4.3% 42.4% 24.9% 5.9% > 100% 1.5% 1.4% 2.0% 1.4% 3.2% 1.6% 8.8% 4.7% 1.9%

The tables above virtually much speak for themselves however, for the most part, those properties purchased following the GFC are more likely to be in a negative equity position and typically have much lower equity overall. Clearly the lower equity positions can be tied back to the comparatively short periods of tenure associated with recent purchases; there has been a vastly shorter amount of time for equity to accumulate. The negative equity positions are much more reflective of weak market conditions in particular regions such as Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania as well as some regional lifestyle markets where conditions have been very soft.

Across the combined states, 8.3 percent of properties purchased over the Pre-GFC period have equity of less than 10 percent compared to 27.7 percent of those properties purchased in the Post-GFC period. It is a similar story across the combined capital cities with 6.1 percent of homes purchased Pre-GFC having equity of less than 10 percent compared to 24.9 percent of those homes purchase in the Post-GFC period.

p.16

Conclusions

Despite soft housing market conditions recently, most home owners are in a strong equity position (assuming they havent leveraged up too much on additional investments). Almost 60 percent of homeowners nationwide have a current home value which is at least 50 percent higher than the price at which they purchased the property. In a scenario where values fell by 10 percent nationally from their current level, almost 10 percent of homes would be in a negative equity position. A fall in home values of this magnitude is highly unlikely at a macro level. Additionally, these results are divergent and homes within Queensland and Western Australia are more likely to be in a weaker equity position than those within other states. The homeowners that are at the greatest risk of home values moving below their purchase price are those that have purchased since 2008. Typically the instance of negative and low equity is much greater amongst those home owners who purchased over this period. In addition, these homeowners will typically have paid down less of their debt so falling asset values would be of greater concern. On the other hand, the lower level of equity for these buyers would indicate that they are less likely to have leveraged up on re-investments so as long as they are diligent in paying back their mortgage (and extra where possible) they should be okay. The results also highlight the long-term nature of home ownership. Short-term movements in market conditions can result in higher rates of negative equity, however, the longer the tenure of ownership the greater the amount of equity accumulation.

p.17

APPENDIX 1 Statistical Subdivision Tables for each state

p.18

NSW Regions
Statistical Sub Division Albury Bathurst Blacktown Canterbury-Bankstown Central Macquarie (excl. Dubbo) Central Murray Central Murrumbidgee (excl. Wagga Wagga) Central Northern Sydney Central Tablelands (excl. Bathurst) Central Western Sydney Clarence (excl. Coffs Harbour) Coffs Harbour Dubbo Eastern Suburbs Fairfield-Liverpool Far West Gosford-Wyong Hastings (excl. Port Macquarie) Hunter SD Bal Illawarra SD Bal Inner Sydney Inner Western Sydney Lachlan Lismore Lower Murrumbidgee Lower Northern Sydney Lower South Coast Macquarie-Barwon Murray-Darling Newcastle North Central Plain Northern Beaches Northern Slopes (excl. Tamworth) Northern Tablelands Nowra-Bomaderry Orange Outer South Western Sydney Outer Western Sydney Port Macquarie Queanbeyan Richmond-Tweed SD Bal Snowy Southern Tablelands (excl. Queanbeyan) St George-Sutherland Tamworth Tweed Heads & Tweed Coast Upper Darling Upper Murray (excl. Albury) Wagga Wagga Wollongong Region Murray Central West Sydney Sydney North Western Murray Murrumbidgee Sydney Central West Sydney Mid-North Coast Mid-North Coast North Western Sydney Sydney Far West Sydney Mid-North Coast Hunter Illawarra Sydney Sydney Central West Richmond-Tweed Murrumbidgee Sydney South Eastern North Western Murray Hunter Northern Sydney Northern Northern Illawarra Central West Sydney Sydney Mid-North Coast South Eastern Richmond-Tweed South Eastern South Eastern Sydney Northern Richmond-Tweed North Western Murray Murrumbidgee Illawarra < 0% 5.1% 2.6% 2.2% 2.1% 3.7% 4.9% 4.9% 2.0% 3.7% 3.1% 2.9% 3.3% 4.4% 3.4% 2.6% 6.4% 7.4% 4.7% 5.7% 4.5% 3.0% 1.9% 9.1% 2.0% 12.0% 2.2% 6.0% 3.5% 4.1% 3.4% 3.1% 3.1% 2.2% 3.3% 3.9% 2.6% 3.0% 3.3% 4.8% 1.3% 3.8% 6.3% 4.8% 1.9% 2.6% 7.4% 4.0% 4.5% 1.6% 2.9% 0 - 10% 9.1% 4.5% 4.5% 3.6% 5.1% 6.6% 6.1% 4.3% 5.0% 5.1% 5.5% 7.0% 8.3% 4.8% 2.8% 4.4% 10.3% 6.9% 7.5% 7.0% 3.7% 3.9% 7.0% 5.0% 12.0% 3.6% 7.7% 3.7% 8.0% 5.7% 4.5% 4.9% 2.9% 4.9% 8.7% 5.3% 7.7% 6.0% 8.2% 3.4% 6.4% 6.0% 5.9% 3.6% 5.6% 11.4% 5.3% 5.9% 4.8% 5.5% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 17.0% 17.5% 17.4% 13.3% 16.2% 17.0% 12.9% 15.7% 14.9% 17.7% 14.9% 17.3% 19.9% 12.5% 12.1% 7.6% 21.5% 16.7% 15.1% 17.0% 13.1% 13.2% 13.3% 15.6% 15.3% 13.3% 15.5% 10.7% 19.6% 15.8% 11.5% 16.2% 12.3% 13.8% 22.1% 18.3% 21.5% 17.9% 20.7% 12.1% 15.0% 12.1% 14.5% 13.7% 19.8% 14.5% 14.3% 14.7% 16.2% 17.1% 13.4% 23.2% 22.4% 23.3% 14.4% 17.6% 14.4% 23.1% 14.8% 24.5% 16.3% 15.6% 15.7% 20.0% 20.0% 10.8% 15.1% 13.5% 14.0% 16.2% 24.6% 22.1% 13.8% 18.0% 15.6% 23.0% 12.6% 13.9% 21.2% 16.9% 16.7% 21.8% 16.7% 16.6% 17.3% 15.8% 16.0% 18.0% 16.0% 17.6% 15.8% 15.2% 19.3% 24.9% 17.1% 12.3% 14.3% 15.4% 18.9% 17.8% 12.0% 13.7% 11.0% 17.4% 15.2% 18.6% 16.7% 14.8% 14.1% 14.1% 11.1% 9.1% 14.8% 16.4% 13.6% 14.3% 12.9% 10.6% 12.4% 10.5% 22.5% 18.9% 16.4% 12.9% 17.1% 19.0% 9.2% 18.0% 15.8% 10.3% 20.4% 13.4% 15.7% 15.4% 11.6% 10.7% 10.0% 10.9% 10.3% 14.7% 11.7% 14.5% 16.5% 17.3% 12.8% 8.9% 14.1% 15.2% 13.6% 10.3% 43.5% 38.5% 42.5% 40.3% 45.4% 35.3% 45.0% 40.2% 47.5% 35.5% 49.4% 47.7% 36.8% 42.9% 48.9% 56.6% 32.8% 47.7% 45.3% 44.8% 33.0% 40.0% 40.4% 46.5% 28.0% 38.9% 49.0% 50.2% 31.3% 47.8% 43.9% 40.5% 50.1% 45.9% 36.4% 47.4% 41.7% 43.9% 40.0% 51.0% 47.4% 45.9% 39.0% 38.6% 42.2% 45.6% 48.0% 44.3% 44.9% 46.5% Median length of ownership (yrs) 9.4 7.5 10.0 8.7 7.6 7.1 7.7 8.8 8.4 8.2 8.5 8.9 7.7 9.5 10.1 6.8 8.2 8.9 8.6 8.7 7.7 8.5 7.8 7.4 7.4 8.6 9.1 6.9 6.3 9.0 7.4 8.6 6.7 7.0 7.5 8.4 9.1 9.9 8.3 7.7 8.0 8.0 6.7 9.3 7.9 8.2 6.8 7.7 7.7 9.3

p.19

Victorian Regions
Statistical Sub Division Ballarat City Boroondara City East Barwon East Central Highlands East Gippsland Shire East Mallee East Ovens-Murray Eastern Middle Melbourne Eastern Outer Melbourne Frankston City Glenelg Greater Bendigo City Part A Greater Dandenong City Greater Geelong City Part A Greater Shepparton City Part A Hopkins Hume City Inner Melbourne La Trobe Valley Melton-Wyndham Mildura Rural City Part A Moreland City Mornington Peninsula Shire North Goulburn North Loddon North Wimmera Northern Middle Melbourne Northern Outer Melbourne South Eastern Outer Melbourne South Gippsland South Goulburn South Loddon South West Goulburn South Wimmera Southern Melbourne Warrnambool City Wellington Shire West Barwon West Central Highlands West Gippsland West Mallee West Ovens-Murray Western Melbourne Wodonga Yarra Ranges Shire Part A Region Central Highlands Melbourne Barwon Central Highlands East Gippsland Mallee Ovens-Murray Melbourne Melbourne Melbourne Western District Loddon Melbourne Barwon Goulburn Western District Melbourne Melbourne Gippsland Melbourne Mallee Melbourne Melbourne Goulburn Loddon Wimmera Melbourne Melbourne Melbourne Gippsland Goulburn Loddon Goulburn Wimmera Melbourne Western District East Gippsland Barwon Central Highlands Gippsland Mallee Ovens-Murray Melbourne Ovens-Murray Melbourne < 0% 2.1% 0.9% 2.7% 2.2% 3.5% 6.0% 6.7% 1.5% 1.4% 1.1% 3.9% 1.9% 1.2% 1.7% 4.6% 2.3% 1.2% 2.5% 1.8% 1.3% 9.0% 1.3% 1.2% 4.7% 1.7% 3.0% 1.3% 1.5% 0.9% 2.7% 3.3% 0.9% 3.6% 5.1% 1.6% 3.1% 3.3% 4.7% 3.6% 3.3% 3.2% 4.2% 1.2% 4.3% 1.5% 0 - 10% 4.0% 1.9% 4.0% 3.0% 4.6% 7.0% 5.7% 2.3% 2.7% 3.0% 4.7% 3.6% 2.1% 3.4% 7.5% 2.8% 3.0% 4.4% 3.5% 3.5% 9.8% 2.9% 2.6% 5.7% 2.7% 2.9% 2.0% 2.9% 3.1% 4.0% 5.1% 1.8% 4.3% 5.5% 2.6% 4.9% 4.9% 5.3% 4.2% 6.1% 2.4% 7.0% 2.6% 8.0% 2.8% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 12.9% 5.7% 10.0% 9.2% 13.8% 12.6% 11.3% 6.2% 6.8% 9.4% 10.6% 12.6% 5.8% 10.1% 19.2% 10.2% 9.5% 11.4% 12.3% 13.2% 19.4% 6.7% 7.9% 14.6% 8.9% 9.4% 6.8% 9.2% 10.6% 10.4% 12.7% 7.3% 12.8% 15.2% 7.2% 14.6% 13.3% 11.6% 11.4% 14.0% 9.7% 16.8% 8.1% 21.4% 7.9% 21.7% 11.1% 16.3% 19.3% 16.2% 12.8% 11.0% 10.2% 12.5% 16.8% 15.3% 20.6% 10.2% 18.8% 16.5% 13.2% 18.1% 16.2% 18.7% 22.4% 16.6% 10.8% 14.2% 15.9% 13.8% 14.7% 11.2% 15.5% 19.5% 16.9% 15.9% 15.0% 20.0% 16.5% 12.0% 18.7% 15.3% 14.6% 15.0% 21.5% 11.0% 14.4% 13.2% 15.0% 13.5% 16.1% 15.8% 18.0% 19.6% 11.8% 15.1% 12.6% 15.3% 18.7% 20.3% 12.8% 15.5% 16.8% 18.5% 13.5% 14.8% 22.8% 20.1% 15.7% 23.7% 14.2% 16.7% 20.4% 15.6% 17.0% 17.3% 17.7% 18.5% 22.9% 18.3% 14.3% 22.1% 16.5% 15.9% 16.3% 12.0% 13.2% 12.6% 15.6% 14.9% 16.8% 12.3% 19.9% 11.2% 18.6% 43.2% 64.6% 49.0% 46.8% 50.1% 46.5% 52.8% 64.6% 58.0% 49.5% 52.6% 45.8% 63.9% 47.5% 38.8% 56.7% 45.3% 45.3% 47.9% 35.8% 31.0% 61.6% 53.7% 43.5% 55.9% 52.7% 61.0% 52.3% 42.9% 47.8% 48.7% 52.9% 42.9% 41.8% 60.3% 46.7% 50.0% 51.1% 50.3% 40.1% 56.8% 45.3% 55.0% 40.1% 55.7% Median length of ownership (yrs) 7.1 10.2 7.6 7.2 8.0 8.6 8.7 10.9 9.8 8.0 8.2 7.8 10.5 7.6 8.0 8.8 7.6 8.5 7.3 5.6 7.1 10.1 8.1 7.9 8.2 8.4 10.0 9.2 6.8 7.2 8.1 7.3 6.9 7.3 10.0 8.2 7.7 8.7 7.6 5.9 8.8 7.7 8.6 7.3 9.3

p.20

Queensland Regions
Statistical Sub Division Beaudesert Shire Part A Bundaberg Caboolture Shire Cairns City Part A Central West Darling Downs SD Bal Far North SD Bal Fitzroy SD Bal Gladstone Gold Coast East Gold Coast North Gold Coast SD Bal Gold Coast West Hervey Bay City Part A Inner Brisbane Ipswich City Logan City Lower West Moreton Mackay City Part A Mackay SD Bal North West Northern SD Bal Northwest Inner Brisbane Northwest Outer Brisbane Pine Rivers Shire Redcliffe City Redland Shire Rockhampton South West Southeast Inner Brisbane Southeast Outer Brisbane Sunshine Coast Sunshine Coast SD Bal Thuringowa City Part A Toowoomba Townsville City Part A Upper West Moreton Wide Bay-Burnett SD Bal Region Brisbane Wide Bay-Burnett Brisbane Far North Central West Darling Downs Far North Fitzroy Fitzroy Gold Coast Gold Coast Gold Coast Gold Coast Wide Bay-Burnett Brisbane Brisbane Brisbane West Moreton Mackay Mackay North West Northern Brisbane Brisbane Brisbane Brisbane Brisbane Fitzroy South West Brisbane Brisbane Sunshine Coast Sunshine Coast Northern Darling Downs Northern West Moreton Wide Bay-Burnett < 0% 2.9% 5.8% 6.4% 15.2% 4.6% 3.6% 9.1% 4.9% 1.3% 13.0% 7.8% 6.0% 6.7% 10.0% 6.2% 5.8% 3.9% 3.7% 3.8% 11.3% 2.8% 5.2% 4.6% 2.3% 5.3% 6.2% 4.2% 4.4% 2.8% 3.5% 2.4% 9.4% 6.6% 5.1% 2.7% 6.5% 5.2% 5.9% 0 - 10% 9.6% 12.2% 14.1% 13.7% 5.0% 6.7% 7.7% 8.7% 1.7% 12.1% 13.2% 10.8% 13.4% 14.2% 8.7% 12.6% 9.8% 8.6% 8.8% 8.5% 5.1% 5.3% 6.8% 7.6% 14.1% 12.4% 10.9% 9.4% 4.5% 7.2% 7.4% 13.2% 11.0% 14.8% 5.6% 11.4% 8.7% 9.1% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% > 100% 14.7% 18.8% 18.8% 16.8% 9.3% 14.6% 12.8% 18.9% 10.7% 15.9% 15.2% 15.4% 18.8% 21.6% 16.7% 15.6% 15.1% 16.3% 21.8% 13.4% 18.2% 9.7% 12.9% 14.2% 16.8% 18.6% 16.3% 15.7% 12.5% 14.2% 15.1% 18.0% 15.9% 17.9% 20.8% 16.3% 14.3% 16.4% 15.4% 12.6% 16.7% 12.0% 8.8% 15.3% 11.2% 13.7% 20.6% 12.7% 14.1% 14.6% 16.0% 11.7% 16.2% 14.1% 12.2% 14.9% 11.3% 11.6% 12.8% 10.6% 13.3% 14.3% 17.4% 15.2% 15.3% 9.8% 13.5% 13.6% 14.2% 13.2% 14.1% 11.2% 20.1% 12.2% 13.7% 13.7% 12.0% 9.4% 9.6% 11.5% 12.1% 11.8% 10.8% 9.2% 13.7% 10.5% 11.2% 11.3% 11.6% 6.8% 18.7% 10.6% 13.1% 11.2% 7.4% 11.1% 8.8% 12.4% 15.8% 13.9% 12.2% 11.6% 11.1% 9.3% 10.6% 15.1% 14.7% 8.2% 9.2% 11.0% 11.1% 10.9% 10.5% 10.5% 45.4% 41.3% 34.4% 30.8% 60.4% 48.0% 48.4% 44.6% 52.0% 35.8% 38.5% 41.9% 33.5% 35.6% 33.5% 41.3% 46.0% 45.2% 47.0% 44.1% 52.5% 56.7% 46.7% 47.6% 34.2% 36.0% 42.2% 51.4% 56.2% 46.4% 46.2% 38.0% 43.1% 40.1% 39.7% 42.7% 47.5% 44.5% Median length of ownership (yrs) 6.8 6.2 5.5 5.9 7.4 6.5 6.9 5.8 5.8 7.1 5.9 6.6 6.1 6.0 6.4 6.0 7.1 6.1 6.4 6.1 5.7 6.9 7.7 7.5 5.4 5.8 7.0 6.7 6.6 7.5 7.4 6.7 6.6 5.7 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.3

p.21

South Australian Regions

SSD Barossa Eastern Adelaide Far North Fleurieu Flinders Ranges Kangaroo Island Lincoln Lower North Lower South East Mt Lofty Ranges Murray Mallee Northern Adelaide Pirie Riverland Southern Adelaide Upper South East West Coast Western Adelaide Whyalla Yorke Region Outer Adelaide Adelaide Northern Outer Adelaide Northern Outer Adelaide Eyre Yorke and Lower North South East Outer Adelaide Murray Lands Adelaide Northern Murray Lands Adelaide South East Eyre Adelaide Northern Yorke and Lower North < 0% 3.9% 2.3% 3.4% 5.6% 4.1% 3.8% 4.2% 5.0% 4.5% 2.0% 8.9% 2.3% 10.4% 5.8% 2.6% 5.0% 3.9% 2.5% 3.4% 5.6% 0 - 10% 6.6% 4.6% 7.8% 7.8% 5.1% 8.0% 6.5% 8.0% 7.7% 7.0% 11.0% 7.1% 7.3% 7.7% 7.0% 8.8% 5.9% 5.6% 6.1% 8.3% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 18.3% 13.9% 18.7% 20.2% 10.5% 24.9% 18.0% 19.9% 20.8% 19.2% 16.5% 17.7% 11.9% 19.3% 16.7% 18.6% 13.7% 15.4% 10.8% 15.6% 23.3% 18.0% 14.2% 22.9% 12.7% 24.7% 21.3% 16.2% 22.1% 23.0% 16.2% 18.4% 13.0% 19.1% 17.2% 19.6% 15.4% 16.7% 10.6% 17.7% 16.2% 19.9% 11.1% 16.1% 11.0% 14.4% 14.9% 14.8% 15.2% 18.0% 13.2% 17.4% 14.9% 17.0% 18.2% 15.0% 16.5% 18.5% 10.3% 15.3% > 100% 31.8% 41.4% 44.7% 27.4% 56.6% 24.2% 35.0% 36.1% 29.7% 30.6% 34.2% 37.0% 42.6% 31.1% 38.2% 33.1% 44.7% 41.4% 58.7% 37.5% Median length of ownership (yrs) 4.6 5.5 4.9 4.3 6.6 4.0 5.3 4.8 5.3 4.6 5.2 5.2 5.7 5.5 5.4 4.9 5.4 5.5 6.4 4.9

Western Australian Regions

Statistical Sub Division Avon Blackwood Bunbury Campion Carnegie Central Metropolitan De Grey East Metropolitan Fitzroy Fortescue Gascoyne Geraldton Greenough River Hotham Johnston Kalgoorlie/Boulder City Part A King Lakes Lefroy Mandurah Moore North Metropolitan Ord Pallinup Preston South East Metropolitan South West Metropolitan Vasse Region Midlands South West South West Midlands Central Perth Pilbara Perth Kimberley Pilbara Central Central Central Upper Great Southern South Eastern South Eastern Lower Great Southern Upper Great Southern South Eastern South West Midlands Perth Kimberley Lower Great Southern South West Perth Perth South West < 0% 7.0% 8.0% 8.2% 6.2% 10.0% 4.3% 7.4% 4.5% 7.6% 4.0% 5.6% 4.7% 8.2% 8.3% 9.1% 11.7% 10.0% 6.6% 13.3% 11.6% 5.6% 3.2% 5.5% 8.9% 8.7% 3.8% 4.3% 9.6% 0 - 10% 5.3% 5.2% 10.5% 3.9% 3.6% 7.1% 5.1% 9.2% 6.9% 6.3% 3.9% 6.5% 4.1% 4.5% 6.7% 9.4% 8.7% 2.6% 6.3% 9.8% 3.7% 8.4% 6.4% 4.2% 6.9% 7.9% 8.9% 10.4% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 9.8% 10.1% 17.8% 5.9% 7.2% 14.2% 10.1% 16.7% 14.4% 16.4% 10.5% 15.7% 9.1% 10.5% 10.2% 14.5% 12.4% 4.9% 8.6% 14.9% 8.6% 18.0% 17.3% 9.0% 11.6% 17.3% 17.6% 13.9% 10.8% 10.6% 11.2% 7.7% 8.8% 11.3% 13.7% 9.8% 9.6% 13.8% 9.8% 12.3% 10.4% 11.6% 8.9% 15.4% 8.6% 8.7% 9.8% 10.6% 9.9% 11.1% 10.7% 9.0% 9.4% 11.9% 11.5% 11.8% 12.1% 12.3% 10.5% 14.3% 19.7% 12.5% 14.6% 11.3% 15.2% 9.2% 13.5% 10.3% 11.9% 11.6% 12.0% 18.1% 11.6% 12.8% 20.3% 13.6% 9.6% 12.4% 11.6% 14.0% 10.2% 11.5% 12.0% 12.0% > 100% 55.1% 53.8% 41.8% 62.0% 50.6% 50.6% 49.0% 48.5% 46.3% 50.4% 56.8% 50.4% 56.3% 53.5% 53.2% 30.9% 48.7% 64.5% 41.8% 39.5% 62.6% 46.9% 48.5% 54.9% 53.2% 47.7% 45.7% 42.3% Median length of ownership (yrs) 5.8 6.1 5.7 5.7 4.9 6.4 5.2 5.9 5.7 5.3 5.8 5.6 6.4 5.6 6.4 4.9 6.1 6.4 4.7 6.0 7.2 6.0 5.3 5.7 6.0 5.9 6.0 5.8

p.22

Tasmanian regions
Statistical Sub Division Burnie-Devonport Central North Greater Hobart Greater Launceston Lyell North Eastern North Western Rural Southern Region Mersey-Lyell Northern Hobart Northern Mersey-Lyell Northern Mersey-Lyell Southern < 0% 3.3% 4.3% 3.3% 3.1% 5.6% 4.1% 4.7% 5.0% 0 - 10% 5.4% 5.4% 6.3% 5.0% 5.5% 4.6% 5.3% 6.1% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 14.4% 12.1% 14.5% 14.6% 9.1% 11.6% 11.4% 12.8% 16.0% 13.7% 16.0% 16.9% 12.9% 12.4% 13.3% 13.1% 12.0% 12.9% 11.4% 12.3% 11.1% 12.9% 12.4% 12.1% > 100% 49.0% 51.6% 48.5% 48.1% 55.8% 54.5% 52.9% 51.0% Median length of ownership (yrs) 6.9 6.3 7.2 7.0 7.0 7.2 6.8 6.7

Northern Territory regions

Statistical Sub Division Barkly Central NT Darwin City East Arnhem Litchfield Shire Lower Top End NT Palmerston-East Arm Region Northern Territory - Bal Northern Territory - Bal Darwin Northern Territory - Bal Darwin Northern Territory - Bal Darwin < 0% 3.7% 2.7% 5.7% 5.8% 4.5% 3.4% 2.8% 0 - 10% 0.6% 2.7% 4.3% 3.3% 3.3% 3.3% 5.6% 10 - 25% 25 - 50% 50 - 100% 4.8% 12.1% 11.7% 8.5% 9.7% 12.3% 13.0% 5.6% 10.8% 15.5% 10.7% 8.6% 15.1% 16.3% 12.4% 25.7% 19.7% 12.7% 13.4% 21.0% 16.3% > 100% 72.9% 46.0% 43.1% 59.0% 60.4% 44.9% 46.0% Median length of ownership (yrs) 4.1 4.7 4.9 4.8 5.2 4.8 4.5

p.23

About RP Data
Established in 1991, RP Data is the leading supplier of commercial and residential property information services throughout Australia and New Zealand. Subscription clients to RP Datas property information service include over 10,000 real estate agents, valuers, property developers, financial institutions and government departments. RP Data is also the largest supplier of electronic valuations and consumer property reports in Australia generating over 30 million electronic valuations every month. Our recent acquisitions of the Valex Group (made up of Valuation Exchange and Megaw & Hogg National Valuers) and Sandstones VMS division has allowed us to expand this role further. By combining our leading databases and analytics with existing property valuation management processes, platforms and a leading valuation firm, were able to develop more efficient valuation solutions while reducing the risks associated with mortgage lending. The name RP Data is synonymous with the property and commercial markets. We have forged a strong reputation as leaders in the provision of comprehensive real-time data that has proven to cut costs, increase productivity and deliver a real and rapid return on investment. Used by thousands of corporations and consumers seeking property information, RP Data is proud to boast the Reserve Bank of Australia as one of our key customers along with many multi-national corporations, financial institutions, real estate professionals, developers, investors and more recently, the broader consumer market through our user-friendly consumer brand myrpdata.com Through our five-star property information services, we are able to ensure that the quality of our data and extended information services give our customers the confidence to make sound and well researched decisions about property. As the pioneers of online property information, we are at the forefront of innovation through continual investment in emerging state-of-the-art technologies which are user-friendly and costeffective for customers at all levels. Our key value to our clients lies in the delivery of vast and accurate property information and analytics. Whether our clients need to increase listings to sell more, manage their risk portfolio effectively, market to current and future clients who are transacting in property, or simply streamline the way they do business, RP Data has the solution. It's not just data, it's RP Data.

p.24

Disclaimers
Disclaimers
2011 Copyright RP Data Ltd, Local, State, and Commonwealth Governments. All rights reserved. No reproduction, distribution or transmission of the copyrighted materials in this publication is permitted whether in whole or in part. The information provided in this publication is current as at the publication date only. This publication is supplied on the basis that while rpdata.com believes all the information in it is deemed reliable at the publication date, it does not warrant its accuracy or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or damage sustained by yourself, or by any other person or body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or any part of the information in this publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any liability it may have to the amount paid to rpdata.com for the supply of such information. This publication provides general information only it is not intended as advice and should not be relied upon as such. The material has not been prepared by taking into account your investment objectives, financial situation or personal needs. You should make your own inquiries and if necessary take independent financial advice tailored to your specific circumstances before making any investment decisions. Queensland Data In compiling this publication, RP Data has relied upon information supplied by a number of external sources. The publication is supplied on the basis that while the RP Data believes all the information in it is deemed reliable at the time of publication, it does not warrant its accuracy or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or damage sustained by subscribers, or by any other person or body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or any part of the information in this publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any liability it may have to the amount paid to RP Data for the supply of such information. The State of Queensland (Department of Natural Resources and Mines) 2011. Based on data provided with the permission of the Department of Natural Resources and Mines: [QVAS - (May/2011)]. The Department of Natural Resources and Mines makes no representations or warranties about accuracy, reliability, completeness or suitability of the data for any particular purpose and disclaims all responsibility and all liability (including without limitation, liability in negligence) for all expenses, losses and damages (including indirect or consequential damage) and costs which might be incurred as a result of the data being inaccurate or incomplete in any way and for any reason. South Australian Data In compiling this publication, RP Data has relied upon information supplied by a number of external sources. The publication is supplied on the basis that while the RP Data believes all the information in it is deemed reliable at the time of publication, it does not warrant its accuracy or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or damage sustained by subscribers, or by any other person or body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or any part of the information in this publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any liability it may have to the amount paid to RP Data for the supply of such information. 2011 Copyright in this information belongs to the South Australian Government and the South Australian Government does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information. New South Wales Data In compiling this publication, RP Data has relied upon information supplied by a number of external sources. The publication is supplied on the basis that while the RP Data believes all the information in it is deemed reliable at the time of publication, it does not warrant its accuracy or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or damage sustained by subscribers, or by any other person or body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or any part of the information in this publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any liability it may have to the amount paid to RP Data for the supply of such information. Contains property sales information provided under licence from the Department of Lands NSW. Victorian Data In compiling this publication, RP Data has relied upon information supplied by a number of external sources. The publication is supplied on the basis that while the RP Data believes all the information in it is deemed reliable at the time of publication, it does not warrant its accuracy or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or damage sustained by subscribers, or by any other person or body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or any part of the information in this publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any liability it may have to the amount paid to RP Data for the supply of such information. The State of Victoria owns the copyright in the Property Sales Data and reproduction of the data in any way without the consent of the State of Victoria will constitute a breach of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth). The State of Victoria does not warrant the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this report and any person using or relying upon such information does so on the basis that the State of Victoria accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults, defects or omissions in the information supplied.

p.25

Disclaimers
Disclaimers
Western Australian Data In compiling this publication, RP Data has relied upon information supplied by a number of external sources. The publication is supplied on the basis that while the RP Data believes all the information in it is deemed reliable at the time of publication, it does not warrant its accuracy or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or damage sustained by subscribers, or by any other person or body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or any part of the information in this publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any liability it may have to the amount paid to RP Data for the supply of such information. Based on information provided by and with the permission of the Western Australian Land Information Authority (2011) trading as Landgate. Australian Capital Territory Data In compiling this publication, RP Data has relied upon information supplied by a number of external sources. The publication is supplied on the basis that while the RP Data believes all the information in it is deemed reliable at the time of publication, it does not warrant its accuracy or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or damage sustained by subscribers, or by any other person or body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or any part of the information in this publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any liability it may have to the amount paid to RP Data for the supply of such information. The Territory Data is the property of the Australian Capital Territory. No part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be directed to: Director, Customer Services ACT Planning and Land Authority GPO Box 1908 Canberra ACT 2601. Tasmanian Data In compiling this publication, RP Data has relied upon information supplied by a number of external sources. The publication is supplied on the basis that while the RP Data believes all the information in it is deemed reliable at the time of publication, it does not warrant its accuracy or completeness and to the full extent allowed by law excludes liability in contract, tort or otherwise, for any loss or damage sustained by subscribers, or by any other person or body corporate arising from or in connection with the supply or use of the whole or any part of the information in this publication through any cause whatsoever and limits any liability it may have to the amount paid to RP Data for the supply of such information. This product incorporates data that is copyright owned by the Crown in Right of Tasmania. The data has been used in the product with the permission of the Crown in Right of Tasmania. The Crown in Right of Tasmania and its employees and agents: a) give no warranty regarding the data's accuracy, completeness, currency or suitability for any particular purpose; and b) do not accept liability howsoever arising, including but not limited to negligence for any loss resulting from the use of or reliance upon the data. Base data from the LIST State of Tasmania http://www.thelist.tas.gov.au

p.26