One of Australia’s oldest properties, Bonnyrigg House, is to be sold off by the State Government at auction on October 25.

The heritage-listed homestead at 19-21 Cartwright St in Bonnyrigg Heights was built in 1826 – just shy of two centuries ago.

Designed by Francis Greenway and constructed by A. Kinghorne and Thomas Moore, the landmark residence was once an orphanage for boys and a schoolmaster’s quarters.

Originally the residence sat on a much larger land parcel and operated as a farm to teach the resident boys farming skills.

According to a survey conducted in 1863, paddocks and a working vineyard surrounded the school. Wine produced from the estate’s grapes were exported from the colony as early as 1831 – some of the first Australian wine to reach Europe. By the late 1870s and early 1880s, the church behind the orphanage decided to subdivide the land.

Bonnyrigg House also changed over the years. The most significant renovations appear to be a single storey front addition that was added around 1914, as well as a timber veranda and a two-storey extension to the rear of the building.

Today, Bonnyrigg House sits on a 2500sqm parcel surrounded by Homestead Park, with a 50m street frontage. The property is in need of a major makeover and the Department on Planning and Environment is seeking its next custodians.

Gary Attard and Jorge Vasquez of Andrew Partners Real Estate are taking the estate to auction on October 25 at 11.30am. Given the home’s rare heritage and government ownership, the site must sell under the hammer, however there are few comparable sales to indicate price.

Over the past 12 months, Bonnyrigg Heights has seen a median house price increase of 5.3%, according to PropTrack data. A typical house in the suburb is now $1.284 million.

Grand homes in the neighbourhood, however, have hit much greater a heights.

A five-bedroom house on the same street at 30 Cartwright St sold under the hammer in June for $2.5 million through Matteo Pecora and Aleksandar Stanojevic of Ray White Wetherill Park/Cecil Hills. The hot auction had attracted 18 registered bidders and reportedly fetched more than $600,000 over the set reserve, setting a suburb record. 

In July, a brand new seven-bedroom, six-bathroom house on 841sqm at 245 North Liverpool Rd in Bonnyrigg achieved $3.1 at auction with Tony Fahma and Johnny Khoury from Blaze Real Estate.

Attard said during more than two decades in the industry, he had never listed such an historic property. 

“It’s got character, charm and a whole lot of history. Blocks of this size are rarely seen in the area set in a most convenient and popular location among quality homes, this one is sure to attract plenty of attention,” he said.

As is, two-storey Bonnyrigg House has three to four bedrooms, one bathroom, multiple living areas, storage options and several original period features. There is a full-width veranda at the rear of the house’s footprint, plus a sunroom, lounge room and separate dining room.

In recent years, Bonnyrigg and Bonnyrigg Heights have been undergoing a revival. The leafy region, approximately 50kms from Sydney’s CBD, has been home to the State Government’s $855 million Bonnyrigg Estate renewal housing plan. In this plan, a total of 2,998 dwellings, including 900 social housing homes, are in the pipeline.

This evolving project has already introduced a new community hub, close to 300 social and private homes, as well as public green spaces, including more links for pedestrians and cyclists.

Bonnyrigg Dhanawi Hub was opened to the community in 2024 and features a large hall for social and cultural activities, meeting rooms, play areas, and a shared a community garden.

The post Government to sell historic Bonnyrigg House at auction appeared first on realestate.com.au.

Once home to a now-shuttered military uniform manufacturer, a prime site in Melbourne’s inner north could transform into a masterplanned community just 10km from the CBD. 

The 2.56-hectare site at 14–22 Gaffney Street is being offered for sale as a development opportunity that could be home to the city’s next masterplanned community. 

The land, which is being called “Coburg Lakes,” in the listing due to its proximity to Coburg Lake Reserve, offers mixed-use zoning that could pave the way for a diverse range of new housing, from apartments and build-to-rent projects to spacious townhouses or retirement living. 

Previously home to the Australian government’s Australian Defence Apparel facility, where military uniforms were made, the property was purchased in 2022 by Ryman Healthcare with plans for a $350 million retirement village.  

At the time, the New Zealand-based company said the project would include a café, bar, gym, cinema, indoor pool, specialist dementia care and new commercial space.  

Those plans did not proceed and the site is now back on the market via expressions of interest. 

If redeveloped, the Coburg Lakes site could incorporate landscaped public areas, pedestrian-friendly streets and local services alongside a mix of housing.  

A rare opportunity in the inner north 

Large residential land parcels close to Melbourne’s CBD are few and far between.  

Coburg Lakes sits directly opposite Batman Station, which offers train services reaching the city in under 20 minutes. Tram stops and bus routes are also nearby and cycling and walking paths link the site to local parks and shops.  

Lifestyle amenities are equally accessible. Sydney Road’s eclectic mix of cafés, restaurants and boutiques is just minutes away, while Pentridge Shopping Centre provides a range of entertainment amenities, including Palace Cinemas.   

The site is close to Coburg Lake Reserve, which features walking trails, picnic areas, playgrounds and hosts community activities. Merri Creek’s well-used cycling routes are also accessible from the surrounding streets. 

Also located nearby is the earmarked Coburg Health and Community Services precinct on Bell Street, which is already underway.  

This is expected to house healthcare facilities and could support over 1000 new construction and healthcare jobs, according to Merri-Bek City Council.  

According to PropTrack data, Coburg North’s median house price sits at $990,000, up 1.3% over the past 12 months, while units have a median price of $690,500. 

Its location near Brunswick, several major universities and Melbourne’s biomedical precinct provides commuting options for workers and students. 

Walkable streets, public transport connections and nearby amenities make it practical for residents who want city access without living in the CBD. 

Expressions of interest for the site close Thursday 30 October 2025. 

For the latest in buying and building new, check out our New Homes section. 

The post Abandoned inner-north Melbourne factory set for next life as housing  appeared first on realestate.com.au.

Finally, after weeks and weeks of foreshadowing, the moment has arrived. It’s landscape week and things quickly get rocky.

Predictably, Han was in tears. Not only was she overwhelmed by the huge task ahead but she was down in the dumps after a cast screening of the first episode.

Believing she had come across as a “spoiled brat,” Han was flattened.

“I feel gross,” she moped. “I feel gross about myself. I feel gross about the situation.”

For Can, on the other hand, the screening drove home how much of her time was being spent dealing with Han’s moods.

“It’s just a TV show. It’s not life or death,” she cautioned to a tearful Han.

Her words fell on deaf ears though, because Han had already found a new drama to agonise over.

RELATED: When is The Block finale? Auctioneer drops big hint

How much Block contestants really make

Block couple’s stunning $435K profit

This time she was in a strop over Britt and Taz’s speakeasy. Having been told her own plans for the outdoor shed were not compliant (leaving them to present an unfinished and confused room), Han was annoyed that Britt and Taz had received the greenlight to turn their shed into a backyard wine bar.

“I ask all those questions and get told it’s not ok. So, it’s unfair. How is it ok for one and not another?” Han moaned.

She rightly saw this as an unfair double standard. But Can was eager to just move on and enjoy the time that was left.

Can joked that The Block had taken a toll on them as a couple: “We used to be friends and now we are enemies. If I had my time again, I would come here with Robby.”

Unbeknownst to Han, Britt and Taz’ wine bar hadn’t actually been held to different standard. The West Australian cops simply hadn’t made their vision for the space clear in the submitted plans.

Now that the room had been revealed, site supervisor Aiden told the couple that it wasn’t compliant and would need to undergo a major make-over to go under the hammer.

Unimpressed, Britt said “We have sacrificed three months of our lives to sell a house and set our young family up. So, for him to say, well you can’t sell your house [is devastating].”

Like Han, Taz and Britt felt they were being subjected to double standards, pointing to the fact that Robbie and Mat had an almost identical set up in their underground cellar.

“I don’t think you are getting double standards. Most of that room is dominated by being a wine cellar,” Aiden countered.

“I am not here to tell you what to do. But to me, this is more of a bar than a wine cellar. If you made it more of a cellar…”

So essentially, they need to whine less about failing to get approvals and add more wine to get approval.

Taz said it had dampened what should have been one of the more exciting weeks on The Block.

At least they had made some headway on their landscaping unlike most of the other contestants who were staring at a dwindling bank balance and an empty yard to fill by Sunday.

All season host Scott Cam has been banging on about how herculean the task would be, urging the teams to tuck money away each week in anticipation.

Emma and Ben had a whopping $130,000 in their kitty for works, Britt and Taz had $100,000 available, Sonny and Alicia were spending $90,000, Robby and Mat were spending $70,000 (on top of the $50,000 fireplace and $50,000 pickle ball court they won earlier) while Han and Can have just $50,000.

Everybody was getting a 3D printed cabana. And $10,000 worth of furniture.

With the most cash to splash (and holders of the secret gnome) Emma and Ben were well placed for a win.

But their budget also needed to fund their copycat cellar.

After touring Robby and Mat’s winning cellar (and snapping a few “inspiration” shots), Emma wasn’t feeling optimistic about getting their room done on top of landscaping all that garden and producing a pool cabana.

The expectant parents were eager to use their main point of difference –their house elevation – to house a cellar. Only, beyond laying a concrete slab they hadn’t yet done anything towards making their dream a reality.

Matt and Robby, on the other hand, had been toiling away on their space since week one.

“The boys delivered such an incredible cellar and, at the moment, I am looking around at ours and it looks like a mess,” Emma said. “It just feels a bit unobtainable at the moment. I don’t know how we are going to pull it off.”

Emma was also worried that her yard was going to look more like a skate park than a garden because so much of the space would be paved.

Her solution was to add a large circle of grass in the middle of the concrete. Emma and Ben also used the old “finders keepers” law to give their garden a boost.

Last week, their neighbours Han and Can had asked to store some large boulders on Emma and Ben’s property. Several days later, and with fence lines now built, some of the avalanche of rocks still hadn’t been removed.

And so, they made their way into Emma and Ben’s design.

The expectant parents argued it was just a case of mistaken identity. Given all rocks essentially look the same, Han and Can’s rocks had simply been mixed up with their own.

“It wasn’t like we said ‘let’s steal these rocks!’ it was more a case of, ‘well, the rocks are there…’” Emma justified.

Han and Can’s normally zen landscaper wasn’t having a bar of it, declaring the move “devilish!”

MISSED AN EPISODE? HERE’S ALL OUR RECAPS SO FAR

Episode 1: Why no NSW applicants were good enough for The Block

Episode 2: The worst day on The Block

Episode 3/4: ‘Tear them off’: teams forced to rip tiles from walls

Episode 5: Judges feedback leaves one contestant vomiting

Episode 6: Dan and Dani’s heartbreak

Episode 7: The big problem with the Block house designs

Episode 8: Robby and Mat’s drunken blunder

Episode 9: ‘An up-market nursing home’

Episode 10: Can faces the wrath of Han

Episode 11: Han micromanaging from her sick bed

Episode 12: Sonny cops a spray from Alicia

Episode 13: Brutal feedback leaves Block team confused

Episode 14: Han and Can are in trouble with Dan, and other contestants

Episode 15: Han explodes at Dan in shocking tirade

Episode 16: Defiant Han gets epic dressing down from Scott Cam

Episode 17: Two teams are smashed by hyperbolic judges

Episode 18: Two teams start the week devastated by judges’ feedback

Episode 19: Copying scandal erupts as Alicia and Sonny point the finger

Episode 20: Ben and Emma drop good news into tense Block week

Episode 21: Ben and Emma and Sonny and Alicia cop the wrath of the judges

Episode 22: As Sonny and Alicia despair, Mat summons his inner Mean Boy

Episode 23: Han and Can all but quit the spa room challenge

Episode 24: Ben and Emma finally crack after yet another loss

Episode 25: Britt and Taz make a major blunder

Episode 26: The girls fire their builder

Episode 27: Ben and Emma hatch a sneaky plan

Episode 28: Britt’s decision to freeze out her former bestie has Alicia on the warpath

Episode 29: ‘Basic’, ‘no heart’, ‘not elegant’ – judges pan some teams’ kitchens

Episode 30: Block stars ugly showdown

Episode 31: Greed and cheating accusations at body corp meeting

Episode 32: Team unleashes on ‘dog act’

Episode 33: Three teams fail to finish in bruising week

Episode 34: Han fires up at sacked builder over ‘w***er’ texts

Episode 35: Sonny refuses to back down on his decision to block extended hours

Episode 36: Sonny dobs in Britt and Taz and Han loses her cool

Episode 37: Going all out for a win one team comes unstuck

Episode 38: Mild-mannered Ben calls for an arson attack on Britt and Taz

Episode 39: Alicia denies making snide comments then refers to Britt’s ‘b***h face’

Episode 40: A controversial Block win stirs new trouble

Epidode 41: A pig-headed decision could cost one team big at auction

The post The Block 2025 Episode 42 recap: Han worries she’s been portrayed as a spoilt brat while Britt and Taz cop it for their illegal bar appeared first on realestate.com.au.

This summer, New York City renters filed hundreds of reports against agents and landlords for violating a new law that requires landlords to pay commissions for the brokers they hire. But what happened after the city collected those complaints? The answer is not much—yet.

Since June 11th, the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) has received 1,125 complaints and questions about the Fairness in Apartment Rental Expenses (FARE) Act, DCWP spokesperson Stephany Vasquez Sanchez told Brick Underground. The FARE Act mandates landlords to pay their own brokers, rather than asking renters to cough up their fees.

Of those complaints, the department has settled three disputes and won another three at a city court, Vasquez Sanchez told Brick. 

Those numbers represent the start of DCWP’s enforcement of the new law, which went into effect in June despite massive opposition from brokers (and a still-ongoing lawsuit). Under the FARE Act, a renter can complain to DCWP if they’re being pressured to pay a landlord broker’s fee, often up to 15 percent of a year’s rent. 

The DCWP’s special broker fee team investigates agents and landlords and issue fines up to $2,000 under the new law.

“We have a dedicated team who are actively investigating these complaints and also assessing which are actionable to bring administrative charges,” Vasquez Sanchez said. “We urge any New Yorker who believes they’ve encountered a violation of this law to reach out to us as soon as possible by calling 311 or visiting nyc.gov/consumers.”

But proving a FARE Act violation requires a lot of details that renters often leave out, Vasquez Sanchez said. (And some renters Brick Underground spoke with were hesitant to make a complaint in the first place.)

“Many of the complaints we have received so far have not included the actionable evidence we need to issue a summons,” Vasquez Sanchez said. “Many of the consumers we have reached out to have also so far not responded to our requests for additional information.”

Read on for everything you need to know before you make a FARE Act complaint, and what to expect after.

What to include in a FARE Act report

The rental market moves fast. Listings can appear and disappear in a matter of days, along with the evidence of a possible FARE Act violation. That’s why it’s crucial to collect as much information as possible when you make a report.

You can report brokers or landlords for demanding that you cover the fee of an agent you didn’t hire, or if a broker requires you to pay their fee to rent an apartment by calling 311 or filling out DCWP’s online form. 

Make sure to include screenshots or photos of the listing in question—including the date the photo was taken and the full URL of the listing—the name of any websites where the apartment was listed, records of any conversations with an agent such as texts or emails, and your and the agent’s contact information, if you have it.

All of that information helps DCWP build the strongest case they can against an agent or landlord, and complaining also means the city can recognize patterns among those who break the law, and how they do it. 

Scams to watch out for

According to DCWP, renters are complaining about two things: agents illegally charging a broker fee, or bait-and-switch schemes involving a broker who won’t show an apartment to a would-be-renter unless that renter agrees to pay their fee. (And most of those complaints are for Brooklyn apartments, according to DCWP complaint data from June 11th through Oct. 1st.) 

Both of those scams happened to James, a renter raised in Borough Park who was looking for an apartment in Brooklyn for his parents who have a modest budget of up to $2,500 a month. (James asked to use a pseudonym to speak candidly about his experience.)

James said that one listing agent told him that he would have to hire the agent before being shown any apartments. But more commonly, James said he’d inquire about an apartment on StreetEasy, only to have a broker claim that it was no longer available—sometimes just hours after it was put up online—and then offer “off-market listings” James could only access if he agreed to pay for that broker’s services. (This tactic, known as a bait-and-switch, exploits part of the FARE Act, which allows agents to ask renters to pay a commission if the renter hires the agent.)

James shared screenshots of emails from a brokerage that made the FARE Act part of their sales pitch, arguing that “more and more renters” are hiring agents because “many listings have been pulled” off listing platforms since the FARE Act went into effect. 

Luckily, James’s parents were able to negotiate with a landlord to keep their current place. And James did report at least one suspicious listing to StreetEasy, but said he didn’t make a report to the city because he said he didn’t have the time. 

Another renter, Adrianna, also experienced what she called a bait-and-switch, but said she too lacked the time to make a formal report to DCWP. Adrianna, who asked to use a pseudonym because she still hasn’t found a new apartment, wants to move back to NYC from Virginia, where she moved in 2024 when the Bushwick apartment she had rented for more than a decade became unaffordable.

When Adrianna inquired about a one bedroom in Flatbush she found on StreetEasy, she said she got a call a few days later from a woman from the “real estate office” who said the unit was no longer available, but offered a nearby apartment for a similar price. The woman asked Adrianna if she was willing to pay a broker fee, and abruptly hung up after Adrianna said she wasn’t interested in paying any fees, Adrianna said.

Why (and where) you should report

Both Adrianna and James pointed out one major obstacle to reporting bad brokers: a lack of time. Because apartment hunting is so time consuming (and stressful), both said they couldn’t make a report to the city and that it was easier to flag listings on StreetEasy.

But renters should always report potential violations of the FARE Act to DCWP first, said Amanda Shur, a spokesperson for StreetEasy. Shur encouraged renters to report listings on the platform as well, but noted that DCWP is the agency with the power to enforce the law.

“We always recommend that renters report violations to DCWP because they are the enforcing agency of the FARE Act.” Shur said. “They’re the ones that are responsible for issuing those violations and fines. So it’s really important that renters report there first.”

StreetEasy also launched a new tab on its website that breaks down the costs and fees associated with an apartment. (FYI: Under the FARE Act, a brokerage that publishes a listing is presumed to be working for the landlord, and cannot collect their fee from the renter.)

What happens after you report: Investigation and enforcement

After a renter complains, a DCWP attorney reviews their case, collects more evidence, and determines whether DCWP should summon a landlord or broker to the Office of Administrative Trials and Hearings (OATH), a court that holds hearings for city agencies, to explain themselves. 

DCWP has issued “about 25” summonses to brokers, landlords, or property managers for FARE Act violations, Vasquez Sanchez said. Once at OATH, DCWP can issue fines and seek restitution—such as a refunded broker fee.

But don’t expect your money back quickly, if at all. If you’re willing to pay a broker a fee that they’re illegally demanding to secure an apartment, and plan to get it back after making a complaint, know that DCWP’s investigation will take time. And there’s a chance you won’t get that money back at all if they’re unable to prove your claims.

“You really have to assess whether you’re OK eating that broker fee for a long period of time, and are you comfortable with potentially never getting it back?” said Allia Mohamed, the CEO and co-founder of openigloo, an apartment listing and review website. 

But, she warned, “if your first interaction with a building is the agent breaking the law, that is an extremely bad indication of what your space is going to be like in that building.”

Digital mortgage platform Beeline Holdings announced Monday that it has paid off more than $7 million in debt and is positioning itself to become cash flow positive by the first quarter of 2026.

The company’s announcement also explained that all secured credit facilities, including senior debentures, were fully repaid as of Sept. 3, 2025.

Only short-term warehouse credit lines remain in place, per the company’s release.

“Achieving this milestone earlier than planned strengthens our financial foundation and allows us to focus fully on growth and innovation. It’s a testament to our team’s discipline and execution,” said Nick Liuzza, Beeline’s CEO and co-founder.

“We are well-positioned for explosive growth in 2026 and look forward to sharing our story and going deeper on our unique model,” he added. “Our story is compelling, but what excites us most is how consistently we’ve executed against our vision. We look forward to sharing this with investors — and we think they’ll love what they hear.”

Beeline reported improved financial results in Q2 2025, with revenue rising 27% from the prior quarter to $1.7 million and operating costs falling 40% to $5.6 million, according to company filings. The firm’s net loss narrowed to $4.1 million, down 68% from Q1, while adjusted EBITDA improved to -$2.8 million, an improvement from -$3.5 million in Q1.

The company also funded $52 million in mortgages during Q2 2025, a 31% increase from the first quarter, and it said that July revenues were its highest in three years. Beeline attributed the gains in part to a 20% quarter-over-quarter reduction in marketing expenses.

The lender has also rolled out new products, including BeelineEQUITY, which lets homeowners sell up to 49% of their equity to investors instead of taking on additional debt. The company completed its first transaction in June and expects to close 10 more by late October ahead of a full rollout.

The company has also rolled out BlinkQC, an AI audit tool, and “Bob,” an AI chatbot that converted inquiries to leads at six times the rate of human agents in testing.