Queensland homebuyers lose out on $25k grant due to satellite images & More Trending News

In September 2020, she lastly did it, signing on the dotted line for an off-the-plan unit within the Redlands, 25km south-east of Brisbane.

The 28-year-old stated her choice to purchase the unit had been based mostly partly on the promise of the federal authorities’s $25,000 HomeBuilder grant, which was introduced only a few months earlier.

“Everything lined up so perfectly. I’d been working so hard, doing long shifts and saving,” Bloomfield stated. 

“I spent a year staying with friends and family so I had no bills – and then the $25,000 grant came up.

“My unit was offered to me – by the true property agent, the developer – it was all offered to me with the 25 grand just about promised.”

Bloomfield had no idea all of her carefully laid plans were about to be scuppered by a single satellite image.

The first and only indication Bloomfield had that something was wrong came when her application for the grant was suddenly rejected in a letter sent by the Queensland Revenue Office.

While the grant is a federal government initiative, the states and territories are responsible for administering it.

Bloomfield said she was stunned.

“When I first learn the letter I used to be considering ‘certainly not’. I could not consider it,” she said.

“I had completely no thought. I used to be very, very stunned as a result of I used to be simply ready for the grant to come by. I assumed there was no approach it will be rejected.”

The department said a satellite image showed construction was started on the site of the apartment block before the grant came into effect on June 4, 2020, making the property ineligible.

The satellite image in question showed a dirty patch of land, where a house previously on the property had been demolished.

Confused, Bloomfield said she went to the developer and builders, who both provided letters – seen by 9News.com.au – stating construction work had not started on the development until at least August 2020.

Another letter from Redland City Council shows the development application to change the use of the property was not approved until June 4, 2020, the same day the government stipulated work could not begin before.

“You simply assume to your self, nicely, how may they’ve began constructing earlier than then if it wasn’t even permitted by council,” Bloomfield said.

Bloomfield said she was still waiting to hear back from the Queensland Revenue Office after lodging an objection to their decision.

While she still had some hope it would be overturned, Bloomfield said it felt like the government had broken its promise.

And losing the grant would be very tough financially, she said.

“I’m already working a ridiculous quantity of hours. I lastly thought I might have somewhat little bit of a break as soon as I moved in, that I may lastly decelerate for somewhat bit, however no,” she said.

Bloomfield is not the only homebuyer claiming to have had their grant unfairly refused on the basis of satellite images used by the Queensland Revenue Office.

A Facebook group dedicated to the issue has been formed and has 84 members.

One of those members is Erica Newman, who bought a newly built home with her partner Josh in Ipswich, in March 2021.

The couple, who have a one-year-old son, said they were told by developer Stockland the house was eligible for the grant because construction for it began during the applicable time period.

“All the paperwork stated November 2020 – that was when the positioning preparations and the slab was laid and the prep work was completed,” Newman said. 

However, like Bloomfield, the young couple were shocked when they got a letter in February this year informing them that their application had been rejected as work had started before June 2020.

A satellite image showed vegetation had been cleared off the property earlier the same year.

“Some fundamental clearing was completed on our lot earlier in 2020 lengthy earlier than the constructing plans – clearly to make the road protected and presentable, however that is what the division is utilizing to deny our utility,” Newman said.

A letter provided by Stockland, seen by 9News.com.au, backs up the couple’s claims.

“Prior to November 2020, there have been no website works carried out that associated to the development of the house,” the letter reads, noting building approval had not yet been granted for the development at the time.

“Any satellite images from June 2020 present the lot in its vacant state, prior to the graduation of any works.”

A Queensland Treasury spokesman said the Queensland Revenue Office (QRO) used the best information available to assess grant applications.

“As new data turns into out there, QRO will use this to affirm an applicant’s eligibility,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

“Where an utility is discovered to have incomplete or inaccurate data, QRO will take steps to guarantee the method is honest for all candidates.”

In its letter to Bloomfield, the QRO noted its definition of excavation and site preparation included land clearing, rehabilitation works, excavation and site cut and fill.

However, Stockland argued the QRO had failed to properly distinguish between civil works conducted by the developer and excavation site or preparation works undertaken for individual home sites.

Newman said she and her partner had been left feeling cheated and misled by the grant.

“It simply appears actually unfair and like they’ve kind of made this up to get out of paying the grant to as many individuals as they’ll,” she said.

“It’s some huge cash for a younger household like ours not to have whenever you’re anticipating to get it – and when you already know that you’re entitled to it.”

Contact reporter Emily McPherson at [email protected]