Highton buyers switched onto the value of their own back yard have pounced on a renovated family home that sparked a flurry of pre-auction interest.

The vendors of 33 Brassey Ave, Highton, scored a $20,000 bonus after accepting an early $980,000 offer for their four-bedroom house.

The 812sq m property had been scheduled to go under the hammer this weekend but Barry Plant, South Barwon agent Kingston Wade said a chance to break into one of the suburb’s most sought-after pockets spurred people to act.

RELATED: Home reno jobs you should be doing yourself

Huge home price surge predicted before Christmas

Plans step close for vacant Geelong West site

“We probably had five or six interested parties and we ended up getting a couple of offers early and that sparked a bit of competition,” he said.

“We got to the point where a few people had dropped out and the best thing to do at that point was to sell it to the highest bidder.”

The buyers had their ducks in a row having recently sold their own home in Highton with a view to upsizing.

Mr Wade said the property ticked a lot of boxes, with a separate insulated and airconditioned home office or rumpus room attached to the double garage, a large outdoor entertainment area and kid-friendly garden.

The home’s living zones include a lounge, dining room and a modern kitchen/meals area featuring stone benchtops and premium appliances.

“It had been renovated throughout and had exposed timber flooring, which is really popular,” he said.

“The roof has already been replaced because it’s a ’60s home and that is usually one of the first things to go and cause problems.

“So it was move in ready and obviously the location is the amazing. Everything that comes up for sale there seems to go really well.”

He said there was a sense of optimism heading into spring with more buyers on the ground.

“The market is definitely heading up, everyone is the office is saying things are selling quicker,” he said.

The post Renovated Highton home sells before auction in spring confidence boost appeared first on realestate.com.au.

CrossCountry Mortgage has asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit alleging the lender engaged in an illegal kickback arrangement with a Raleigh real estate firm.

Homebuyer Jeremiah VonBlohn, who filed suit at the end of July, claims his agent at Raleigh Realty directed him to CrossCountry in 2022 under a co-marketing agreement that gave the lender prominent placement on the firm’s website.

Several other borrowers also filed suits in June and July, accusing the national lender of paying Raleigh Realty $15,000 per month in 2021 and 2022 in exchange for exclusive client referrals.

All of the plaintiffs, including VonBlohn, are seeking unspecified damages under RESPA and North Carolina’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, arguing they could have obtained lower mortgage rates and fees if not for the alleged steering.

In a motion filed on Sept. 29, CrossCountry said that VonBlohn’s claims should be thrown out because the case was filed more than a year after VonBlohn closed on his mortgage, which exceeds RESPA’s statute of limitations.

CrossCountry also argued that VonBlohn’s complaint does not show that he was overcharged or otherwise injured, a requirement for standing under both federal and state law.

The company also maintained that its co-marketing deal with Raleigh Realty was lawful, saying it paid $15,000 a month for actual website marketing services, which falls under RESPA’s safe harbor for “services actually performed.”

The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. At the time of publication, Raleigh Realty did not return HousingWire’s request for comment. A CrossCountry spokesperson said that the company does not comment on pending legal matters. 

Raleigh Realty did not file a dismissal motion on Sept. 29, but instead asked the court for a time extension, moving its deadline to respond to the complaint from Sept. 29 to Oct. 16, 2025.

Where do the other suits stand?

CrossCountry has not filed a motion to dismiss on the other suits, but they remain active. Each separate suit’s plaintiffs, along with the defendants, filed joint motions seeking to extend deadlines at the end of September.

Under the proposed schedule for the suit between CrossCountry and plaintiffs John and Carolyn Kessler, and a separate suit between CrossCountry and plaintiffs Cassandra Anderson and Patrick Anderson, defendants would have until Oct. 9 to file motions to dismiss, the plaintiffs would have until Nov. 6 to respond, and defendants would have until Dec. 4 to reply. This is according to the suit’s documents available on PACER.

Other joint motions seeking to extend deadlines give a different set of deadlines for CrossCountry and Raleigh Realty. Motions filed by plaintiffs Claudia Salazar, Rodney Little and Deborah Little and Angela Sims give the defendants a deadline to file motions to dismiss the amended complaint by Oct. 16. The plaintiffs’ responses are due by Nov. 13 and the defendants’ reply briefs are due by Dec. 11.

Despite rumors earlier this year that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) was investigating Zillow and Redfin over their $100 million rental syndication deal, the announcement that the FTC was suing the two companies still carried an element of surprise.

“This shows that the Federal government is still looking hard at the realty space,” Chuck Cain, an attorney and the president of Alliance Solutions, wrote in an email. “Those who thought the current administration would back off on scrutiny and enforcement compared to previous ones are sadly mistaken.” 

FTC taking hard look at technology companies

While it is surprising to see the Trump administration taking a strong stance on antitrust enforcement, Marx Sterbcow, the managing attorney of Sterbcow Law Group, noted that the current FTC is taking a hard look at potential antitrust cases involving technology companies.

“It is not unexpected that the FTC is taking action. The folks that are leading it right now have strong backgrounds in technology antitrust actions and this is a technology issue that they felt strongly enough about,” Sterbcow said. “Their focus right now is on the monopolization of technology. They think it stifles competition, which it can.” 

In addition to the FTC’s lawsuit, the attorneys general in Virginia, Washington, New York, Connecticut and Arizona filed an identical lawsuit on Wednesday. Sterbcow noted that the political makeup of these attorneys general, which includes Jason Miyares, a republican from Virginia, indicates that this is a bipartisan issue. 

Zillow and Redfin allegedly conspired to eliminate competition

In the lawsuits, the state and federal regulators claim that Zillow and Redfin conspired to eliminate competition in the rental listing space and that their syndication agreement violates antitrust laws and Section 5 of the FTC Act. 

“The practical outcome of the agreement is obvious: Redfin has terminated its existing multifamily advertising business operations and, for the duration of the agreement, has stopped competing to provide [Internet Listing Services] advertising for multifamily properties,” the FTC’s filing states. “The wholesale elimination of critical competition in this highly concentrated space will harm rental advertisers and the Americans who rely on ILSs to find their next home.”

Allegations may have sticking power

Harrison McAvoy, a partner at Shinder Cantor Lerner LLP who specializes in antitrust law, believes that the allegations have sticking power.

“Generally these types of agreements receive intense scrutiny, so the defendants will have to identify some pro-competitive justification for the deal, otherwise it could be fairly smooth sailing for the government,” McAvoy said. 

McAvoy noted that the FTC also brought claims under the Clayton Act, in which it claims that the agreement constitutes an acquisition, as Zillow has acquired assets “including Redfin’s customer relationships, key employees, business information, and a commitment by Redfin to terminate a class of customer contracts by a date certain.”

“It accomplishes the transfer of a sufficient part of the bundle of rights and privileges from Redfin to Zillow such that the transfer has economic significance and an anticompetitive effect,” the FTC’s filing states. 

“Even if the court sees some justification for the deal, resulting in less scrutiny on the Sherman Act Section 1 claim, the court will also evaluate it under the standards for mergers,” McAvoy said.

When it comes to the government’s FTC Act claims, McAvoy said that since this statute is a bit broader than antitrust laws, it could provide the FTC with a little more flexibility for proving its case. 

FTC involvement is ‘quite the statement’

However, no matter how the case shakes out, Sterbcow feels that the FTC getting involved is quite the statement. 

“Anytime the Federal Trade Commission gets involved, especially in this day and age, that’s a big deal,” Sterbcow said. “And the FTC might be correct because many times when you consolidate it leads to higher costs and this deal could lead to reduced options for consumers to look for apartments and higher costs for landlords advertising properties.” 

Although the lawsuits may prove to be costly for Zillow and Redfin, which was acquired by Rocket in March of this year, in terms of legal fees, McAvoy notes that neither suit is requesting monetary damages, just injunctive relief, which could potentially mean just the unwinding of the deal.

“This may be to some degree about drawing a line in the sand or signaling to the rental listing market that these kinds of deals are not going to be acceptable in the future,” he said.

Rita Ora has left neighbours furious after winning a battle over a gym at her £7.5 million ($A15.2 million) mansion.

The singer, 34, has won planning permission for a controversial gym despite protests from her neighbours, The Sun reports.

A number of residents and local groups were up in arms about plans for the fitness facility at the bottom of her garden in a strict conservation area.

They branded the gym an “eyesore” and “entirely out of keeping” with the Grade II-listed property, which she bought for £7.5 million ($A15.2 million) in North London four years ago.

Her whole road and two neighbouring streets wrote a joint complaint to the local council expressing their anger at her plans.

Their objection states the singer has publicly spoken out about her love of the outdoors and her plans will lead to the destruction of the delicate natural habitat.

MORE: ‘Lived apart’: Kidman, Keith’s $70m property empire

Second ex-wife: Harrison Ford’s $23m payout

Robert’s wealth after sad fortune Steve Irwin left

Their objection states: “Ironically, the current owner has gone on record to say they wanted to preserve and honour the heritage of this sunken garden which they say is a sanctuary for butterflies and is also a sanctuary for many birds, including robins, herons and even peacocks have been sighted there over the years.

“To destroy the natural ecology [in] this area in order to build a modern gym is entirely out of keeping with the heritage and calm of this particular listed property itself.”

The letter links to a YouTube video made at Ora’s home for Architectural Digest and her starring and narrating in it, giving viewers a glimpse of its unique features.

She says of the garden: “Welcome to what I like to call my little piece of heaven.

“What I love most about the garden is that it’s full of flowers. I love flowers.

“My gardener’s amazing. He and I have sat here for hours deciding what we want, how we want it. I’m just so proud of us. Look how far we’ve come.”

The Fifty Shades of Grey star shows off a historic fireplace, a real sundial, a pond, and a passageway which leads out into a grassy area with flowers, which she describes as “my green piece of secret heaven”.

Despite the protests, Ora was given the green light for her ambitious project as long as she produces tree protection and biodiversity plans.

The singer’s architects are proposing a garden room, which will be used as a gym, and sits 30m from the house.

A source close to Ora says: “Rita has no intention of disturbing the peace in her neighbourhood and has gone about everything in the proper manner.

“She wouldn’t have got permission from the council if she was violating any planning rules.”

But her plans have been strongly criticised by disgruntled neighbours.

Some are concerned about the music and light being generated from the building late at night and early morning.

A block of flats nearby jointly complained, saying: “Residents who chose this area for its tranquillity should not be forced to live with artificial lighting, amplified sound or loss of privacy.

“Although acoustic insulation is mentioned, the inclusion of bi-fold doors suggests that music and voice projection could occur at any hour.

“The neighbouring property has a strict rule prohibiting large gatherings or parties, adopted precisely to preserve peace and respect among neighbours.

“This proposal undermines that shared understanding and carries the potential to generate conflict, complaints and even legal disputes.”

They go on to claim that Ora will be ruining the lives of neighbours, but not her own.

“This proposal has been drafted (deliberately or not) with minimum impact to the owner but with apparent disregard for the multiple adverse effects on surrounding neighbours,” reads the objection.

Parts of this story first appeared in The Sun and was republished with permission.

MORE: ‘Ruin’: Insane way Cage lost $207m fortune

Amy Winehouse’s sad fortune revealed

Secret details of Selena Gomez cash blow out

The post Rita Ora leaves neighbours furious as she wins battle over gym at $15.2m mansion appeared first on realestate.com.au.