Ray White Broadbeach agent Troy Fitzgerald outside 20 Riviera Rd, Miami. Picture: Jerad WilliamsA GOLD Coast beachside shack, on the market after 46 years with one owner, is expected to fetch a seven-digit dollar figure at auction next month.The home is likely to attract plenty of buyer interest and a high sale price – given that it’s now almost impossible to find a house east of the Gold Coast Highway for less than a $1 million.Ray White Broadbeach marketing agent Troy Fitzgerald, who is taking the Miami property to auction on April 1, said the suburb was “a little bit understated”.“That pocket has got a lot of growth still,” he said. “It is the first of that type of property to be on the market in years, and it’s going to set a bit of a benchmark on other properties in the area.”The two-bedroom Miami shack hasn’t changed much. This was taken around 1971 when Gweneth and George Dean bought the property. Her children in the photo are now 50 and 52.Brisbane-based vendors Gweneth and George Dean bought the Miami property in 1971 for just $6500.“We had always holidayed in Burleigh Heads and we had another holiday house there,” 80-year-old Mrs Dean said.“During the 1971 Christmas break I happened to see a property in Riviera Rd, Miami, advertised for $6500 which I felt was worth investigating.” 20 Riviera Rd, Miami.More from news02:37Purchasers snap up every residence in the $40 million Siarn Palm Beach North10 hours ago02:37International architect Desmond Brooks selling luxury beach villa1 day agoMrs Dean said the family used to visit Burleigh Heads fortnightly and were initially attracted to the vibe of the area.“Burleigh was always a very family orientated area,” she said.“It got to a stage where we looked upon ourselves as being half local. You knew every second person you’d meet along the street.”But she said the demographic had now changed with new developments and a younger crowd moving in.“It’s now probably more tourist orientated and there’s very few of the older residents left.” she said.20 Riviera Rd, Miami in the 1970s.Since they bought 20 Riviera Rd, the Deans have only painted the property.“The last (and current) tenancy contract was signed in 2000 and although there were occasional changes of individuals the present tenant has been there since 2004,” Ms Dean said.“We have never lost a week’s rent in that time.”Mrs Dean acknowledged the property might be snapped up by developers due to its medium-density zoning and proximity to the beach.“We assumed that might happen and that’s one of the reasons we didn’t do a lot of work on it,” she said.What else you could buy in 1971?23 inch TV, $20Vegemite 4oz, 22c (113 grams)Fridge, $39Lip stick, 69cAjax washing power 20oz, 39c (566g)1964 Holden Station Wagon, $1045 20 Riviera Rd, Miami.The 536sq m block, just 200m from the beach, included an old two-bedroom weatherboard house which was built in the 1930s.“We bought it purely as an investment as we used the Burleigh house whenever we were down,” Mrs Dean said.“The area was very quiet. The house was called ‘Tween Hills’ as it was directly ‘between the hills’ of North Burleigh and Miami/ Nobby.”Highly sought-after Riviera Rd is a mix of unit blocks and luxury homes including the highest-seller – a four-bedroom home at No. 13. Riviera connects the Gold Coast Highway with popular Marine Pde.
The UK High Court has ruled in favour of The Pensions Regulator (TPR) in the first judicial review of the latter’s approach in relation to automatic enrolment.The case concerned the position the TPR took in relation to peripatetic workers, such as seafarers and airline pilots.It was brought by Fleet Maritime Services (Bermuda) (FMSB), a company that employs seafarers who work on ships owned by Carnival, such as P&O Cruises and Cunard.In July 2014, TPR effectively ordered FMSB to auto-enrol qualifying employees, setting out its approach and guidance in a compliance notice to the company. FMSB challenged this with TPR, but, in September 2014, the regulator affirmed its decision, prompting the employer to seek a judicial review of the decision.FMSB argued that many of its UK staff were not covered by the Pensions Act 2008, as they worked in international waters and could not be said to “ordinarily work in the UK”. TPR argued that the location of the workers’ base was the primary consideration and not their contracts.Shortly before Christmas, the UK High Court ruled that the regulator’s approach on peripatetic workers was correct and concluded that the “base test” and not the “contract test” was the most appropriate test to apply when establishing where such a worker “ordinarily works”.TPR chief executive Lesley Titcomb welcomed the judgment, also noting that the judge made clear that “decisions of the regulator based on the assessment of particular facts are not ordinarily suitable for judicial review”.The High Court ruled in favour of the company in relation to those workers who regularly begin and end tours of duty in non-UK ports.