Personally, I don't think there are any similarities at all with regards to debt. The victim in this article (Michael Grech) was a loan shark and his alleged killer had a criminal history and a debt owed to the victim. Totally different to KR's financial circumstances (as far as we are aware).
Slightly O/T but it appalls me that Michael Grech was sentenced to only 12 years jail for killing his wife by shooting his wife 4 times in front of their 11 year old daughter.
Now back to Karen and the search to find her. The MSM are quiet. I wonder if the police are onto something. I'm so proud of our boys in blue with all their tireless work to find Karen and to determine what's happened to her. :heartbeat:
The victim in this case is KR. BR had transferred the family home into KR's name only after the 2000 collapse of the business, which is mortgaged to Westpac Bank. There was a caveat over the property, prohibiting it from being sold or transferred.
KR was loaning money from Westpac.
The Ristevski family was plagued with financial burdens and their Bella Bleu clothing boutique in Broadmeadows, in Melbournes north, closed down in February.
- Both KR and BR where partners in formalwear business (Bella Bleu)
- BR - Sole sharholder of Warrant Brands
- KR - Director of Warrant Brands
Can, someone please pick at this scenario.
Just say, BR wanted to sell the house in Oakley Drive or somehow regain control of the house and couldn't because it was in KR's name, and due to the caveat.
Would the debts dissapear if KR had passed away? Would the debts be handed over and leave BR with the responsibility of the mortgage? I understand that it could be different scenario's for everyone due to morgage agreements/wills.
Would the caveat still apply in this scenario (if) BR was handed over the morgage? If the property could not be transferred into BR's name, would the dissapearance of KR help to get the property transferred back into BR's name.