Close Menu
Invest Insider News
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Tuesday, July 8
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest Vimeo
    Invest Insider News
    • Home
    • Bitcoin
    • Commodities
    • Finance
    • Investing
    • Property
    • Stock Market
    • Utilities
    Invest Insider News
    Home»Property»Property owners have not lost their homes in secret government heist
    Property

    Property owners have not lost their homes in secret government heist

    March 31, 20254 Mins Read


    WHAT WAS CLAIMED

    The Australian government has stolen everyone’s homes through changes to title records.

    OUR VERDICT

    False. The changes have made no difference to property ownership.

    AAP FACTCHECK – The Australian government hasn’t stolen everyone’s private property through surreptitious changes to land title records, despite a viral claim online.

    Experts in property law say the cited changes to how titles are managed in Australia have had no bearing on the legal status of the titles or people’s ownership of their homes.

    The claims are made in a video conversation, between former UK Brexit Party candidate Jim Ferguson and former Neighbours actress Nicola Charles, being shared on Facebook.

    “The top two parties … have actually stolen everyone’s homes and properties in Australia,” Ms Charles says of the Australian federal government in the clip.

    Facebook claims government stolen Australians' homes: Nicola Charles
    Nicola Charles and Jim Ferguson whipped up fear about the imaginary theft of Australians’ homes. (Facebook/AAP)

    She says this was done “in a couple of very sneaky and … deceptive ways” before outlining what she claims was a threefold strategy to strip homeowners of their properties.

    First, she claims the government rendered all parchment paper title deeds null and void with a “big stamp” that says “Destroyed, no longer legal”. 

    She claims the Albanese government then sold an entity she describes as the “title deeds and lands office” to an Australian super fund.

    Finally, she says that “in the biggest heist” the government changed the language on the digitised titles from “in fee simple”, or “freehold”, to “fee simple”, which Ms Charles falsely claims means “leasehold”.

    A for lease sign on a real estate property in Melbourne.
    The claim falsely states freehold titles have been downgraded to leasehold. (James Ross/AAP PHOTOS)

    “In fee simple” and “fee simple” both mean the same thing, which is freehold – the opposite of leasehold.

    However, Ms Charles incorrectly says the result is that Australian freeholders now own their property only by leasehold.

     “You own it with the government,” she says. “It’s so they can mandate things like smart meters … so they can do things like put native title liens on the properties.

    “So, on paper, Australians have had their homes and land stolen from them.”

    John Page, a property law scholar at the University of NSW Sydney, told AAP FactCheck the claims are incorrect.

    He said Australia’s Torrens title systems are now digitalised, with paper documents phased out.

    “But there is no substantive change to the law across the states and territories,” Professor Page said. 

    “Owners of fee simple estates have not been ‘dispossessed’ by government action.”

    He added that some title registries have been privatised but this is an operational matter and the law remains the same.

    He confirmed the term “fee simple” does not mean leasehold as claimed.

    A sold sign in front of a house in Melbourne.
    Australian land law is regulated by the states and territories. (James Ross/AAP PHOTOS)

    Kate Galloway, an expert on property law and land rights at Griffith University, said it made no difference whether or not the preposition “in” remains on digital titles.

    “Fee simple is the opposite of leasehold,” Dr Galloway said. “Fee simple can never be less than freehold.

    “How anyone could rationally suggest that removal of a preposition, while leaving the same term, could fundamentally change the nature of what has been granted, is beyond me.”

    Fee simple, as explained by Land Services South Australia, is the most common freehold estate and “equivalent to absolute ownership”.

    Nicole Graham, a property law expert at the University of Sydney, also said the claims were false, noting that private property is regulated by the states, not the federal government.

    “The federal government isn’t the correct government in question,” she told AAP FactCheck. “Private property is state-based and regulated by state-based legislation.”

    Professor Graham said the transition from paper-based titles to digital titles in NSW had not affected landholders’ ownership of title.

    “The titles that landholders of freehold title have are unchanged, they are subject to the same limitations recorded on the register, such as mortgage interests, leasehold interests, easements and so on.”

    She said in NSW the transition from paper-based titles to digital titles helped digitise the registration process, noting that “hot waxed seals” have also become a thing of the past.

    AAP FactCheck is an accredited member of the International Fact-Checking Network. To keep up with our latest fact checks, follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, BlueSky, TikTok and YouTube.





    Source link

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Previous ArticleUn nouveau marché haussier de la diversification a-t-il officiellement commencé ?
    Next Article Bitcoin (BTC) ‘Death Cross’ apparaît sur un indicateur rare: que se passe-t-il ensuite?

    Related Posts

    Property

    UK house prices stall in June as stamp duty change and weak economy hit confidence

    July 7, 2025
    Property

    Supreme Clean Property Services Announces the Expansion of Student Housing Turnovers in All 50 US States

    July 7, 2025
    Property

    White Mountains takes majority stake in US insurance group – The Royal Gazette

    July 7, 2025
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Top Posts

    How is the UK Commercial Property Market Performing?

    December 31, 2000

    How much are they in different states across the US?

    December 31, 2000

    A Guide To Becoming A Property Developer

    December 31, 2000
    Stay In Touch
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • TikTok
    • WhatsApp
    • Twitter
    • Instagram
    Latest Reviews
    Property

    What makes this China share rally really unique

    March 10, 2025
    Utilities

    BlackRock Utilities, Infrastructure & Power Opportunities Trust (NYSE:BUI) Plans Monthly Dividend of $0.12

    July 14, 2024
    Commodities

    Terra Metals and Metalex Commodities Launch Joint Venture to Develop Mwinilunga Copper Mine

    June 20, 2025
    What's Hot

    Boil Advisory Lifted For Greeneville Water And Greene County Utilities – WGRV.com

    October 15, 2024

    Bitcoin Skeptic Peter Schiff Accidentally Makes a Pro-Bitcoin Argument

    August 6, 2024

    Oil Prices Plunge After Israel’s Strike on Iran Avoids Energy Facilities

    October 28, 2024
    Most Popular

    Standard Chartered beats Q2 profit estimates, announces $1.5 bln buyback By Investing.com

    July 30, 2024

    Liberty Utilities responds to ACC questions after asking customers to conserve

    August 16, 2024

    Ghana’s Regina House in the UK Has Not Been Seized – Papa Owusu-Ankomah Clarifies | General News

    August 22, 2024
    Editor's Picks

    China’s economic recovery dragged down by property slump and weak consumption in July

    August 19, 2024

    European Stock Markets also Rise after Trump’s Decision to reduce Tariffs on Beijing

    April 23, 2025

    Values-Based Investing and the Post-Christian Marketplace

    October 29, 2024
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest Vimeo
    • Get In Touch
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions
    © 2025 Invest Insider News

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.