February: It depends on where you look
The leap year saved the market from year over year sales declines, with 29 sales reported on the 29th bringing us to 470 total for February, just 10 over the year ago figures. So zero change to sales activity, but just the normal seasonal increase is enough to put us into a sellers market as I mentioned last month. However how active it feels really depends on where you’re looking. As mentioned here before, there’s still a big gap in activity for properties that are listed under a million VS over, indicating that buyers are generally still able to get financing, but are having a hard time coming up with the minimum $200k down payment required (+~$22k in closing costs). Despite only 10% of properties going for over ask in the entire market, a whopping 40% of houses in the core asking between $900k and $1M have gone over ask so far this year (of course some of them end up selling over the million mark). So if you’re bidding in that market, it’s going to feel competitive and stressful, while if you’re in a higher price range there’s a lot less urgency.
The gradient of activity also exists on dimensions other than price. We’ve talked for months about how the westshore market was hit harder by rising rates, and that remains true. Not only is months of inventory higher out there, but it’s also evident in other metrics, like a lower average days on market and higher sales to list price ratio in the core. The gap in months of inventory is larger now (+2) than it was a year ago (+1.5).
Between condos and houses, there’s less difference than you might expect. Months of inventory in the detached market is essentially the same as the condo market. Stagnant short term rental inventory aside, the condo market is actually doing OK.
Overall sales were mixed again in February, declining slightly on a seasonally adjusted basis overall but within the margin for noise.
Looking at sales relative to the historical range, we can see that really nothing much has changed here in the last year, with sales pretty stagnant in the low end of the range.
The VREB press release commented on the fact that townhouse sales were up 50% from a year ago. Is that notable or just noise in a low-volume sub-market? Well sales are definitely up (though off a low year over year level) and months of inventory at 2.9 is actually the lowest for all property types. I suspect it’s a reflection of the high demand we’re seeing in the sub-$1M detached market, given they’re essentially serving the same need (families).
New listings remained healthy in February, but don’t be fooled by the 34% increase into thinking that we’re seeing an unprecedented surge in listings for this time of year. Last February we simply had a very low number of new listings and most of the increase is just due to that base effect. That said, we’re at a higher level than we’ve seen for most of the last decade which is great news for buyers.
Those new listings also reversed the decline in seasonally adjusted inventory levels we were starting to see again this year. That’s unlike last year when the drop continued all the way through the spring as sales picked up in the middle of a new listings drought. Again good news for buyers. However while we’ve struggled our way back to roughly average inventory levels, we were at much higher levels a decade ago, and a durable buyers market requires substantially more inventory than we have right now.
The measures of market balance were mixed, with the sales to new list ratio (SNLR) cooling off, while seasonally adjusted months of inventory was roughly unchanged from January.
At 4 months of residential inventory, we are into a sellers market overall, and this will very likely heat up a bit further into the spring. It’s unlikely we’ll get to the same activity levels as last spring given our higher inventory, but certainly don’t expect any price declines in the short term. These months of inventory levels have been associated with rising prices in the past.
The wavering between cool balanced, to balanced, to sellers markets in recent months means prices have been noisy but also essentially unchanged from 4-6 months ago. Generally prices are a little stronger than they were at the end of last year, most prominently in the detached market.
That’s also evident in sales to assessed values, which show that detached values have recovered from their fall weakness, while condos are stable and townhouses are leading the pack for the time being (with the usual caution about low sales numbers making their median less reliable).
Overall, a mostly status-quo month, and I don’t expect much will change with sales numbers until we see movement in interest rates. The big wildcard is new listings, which are also the least predictable part of the market. Sometimes we simply have inexplicable new listings droughts, while other times they are healthy with little or no relation to what is going on in the rest of the market. Right now we’re at strong levels which bodes well for increasing choice for buyers into the spring.
I should have been more specific. It was Japan. Other Asian tourist focussed countries like Thailand and Bali were easy to get around via lonely plane 30 years ago. Japan was not, but is fine now with Airbnb.
I first went to Asia (solo) over 30 years ago and never used an agent. Just had a Lonely Planet guide.
New post: https://househuntvictoria.ca/2024/03/11/book-review-our-crumbling-foundation/
I do know some people who went to resorts which had individual cabins like at Yellow Point or Craig Bay. These existed in resort areas and had limited capacity and you generally had to book the year before to get in – sometimes longer.
I wasn’t aware that whole home vacation rentals were a big thing in non-resort areas before 2008ish though. Certainly were not talked about among the people I know like they were after the internet of things brought them to everyone’s attention. And the greater availability of well-priced and set up whole homes with independent reviews that you can book direct has, in my opinion, increased demand from people like me.
There is most certainly a huge shift for international travelers. When I went to Asia for the first time you needed to have an agent to book you into a hotel due to the language barrier and lack of alternate options. I think it is almost 20 years since I’ve used a booking agent for any trip.
There also used to be something called a BC Tourist Accommodation Guide which you could find on the ferries and at the tourist info centres. Used it a lot back in the day.
Airbnb started with a couple of dudes In San Francisco renting an air mattress In the loft.
https://www.igms.com/airbnb-history/
It Is a traditional bnb…It had a bed and It had breakfast. They took the bull by the horns…Look at them now. Good for them!
Vacation rentals have been a big thing since long before I was born. This may sound fictional but back in the day people would phone (with an actual rotary dial telephone) to the tourist board in the area they were going and ask for a list of vacation rentals or rental cottages, or chalets. The tourist board would mail (in an envelope with a stamp) you the info and then you would phone around to find a place. Ski chalets in the Alps were a thing even before WW2.
VRBO – founded 1995
AirBnB – 2007
So a buyer could lose out on a potential house because their agent wanted a bigger cut, so how does the conversation go with the buyer and the agent when that happens? “you had the best offer but because I wanted a bigger commission, you didn’t get the house. Sorry better luck next time”
But most realtors will offer cash back to the buyer anyways so there are two variables at play.
never mind
My experience with traditional B&Bs is far different than STVRs through Airbnb and VRBO. Traditional B&Bs get you a room in someone’s home and breakfast in their dining room. Totally different than your own separate full home for you and your extended family with a private kitchen, yard and living area.
The whole unit style of accommodation has only really been a thing since circa 2008.
B&B accommodations have been around since the horse and buggy. AirBnB is a booking site not a physical property. I have been staying in B&Bs with family since before the internet existed. I also owned and operated a B&B for 13 years and didn’t use Airbnb for bookings. People just google searched for them before AirBnb arrived and ruined it for everyone
As for the fractional interest in a hotel style condominium, it seems since the change in the STRs these type of investments have appreciated. If you don’t live in Victoria but want to spend a month here each year then these might be a solution. I suppose people are betting that their occupancy rate increases with fewer STRs.
Anyway review the last three years of their income and expense statements.
This involves a super long answer but keep in mind if a lower commission business model is advertising such a model on the basis of a lower cooperating commission (buyer’s commission) that is rarely how much the seller actually pays. My friend worked for such a brokerage and over 90% of offers received on their listings had a signed fee agreement (buyer’s agent asking for a larger commission) and he said 90% of sellers accepted it.
Therefore, if a company is advertising 1.4% gross commission, for example, with 0.7% to listing agent and 0.7% to buyer’s agent most often the seller will pay more than 1.4% as the vast majority of offers will be asking for more than 0.7%.
My practice has been to offer a bit, but not too much off the commonly seeing cooperating commission in the marketplace. For example, if the market rate is 5% (I am making this number up) and you offer 1% most offers will come in asking for 5%, but if you offer 4.5%, for example, most buyer’s agent will not want to go to their buyers to sign the fee agreement to ask for the extra 0.5 to bring it up to 5%.
In my opinion, the focus needs to be on getting the best possible fees on the listing portion (no one knows how much you are paying the listing agent) of the listing and the coop in general you want to keep at a healthy amount (all agents in Victoria can see the coop). You can’t override human nature.
Here’s a listing for a “missing middle” lot for sale in a comparable area to the one MJ was posting about in Fairfield. This has plans for a side by side duplex each with a suite and the old home has been demolished.
https://youtu.be/jnnjgSwMYkU?si=ygu618IRj_QYnVGE
The lot was previously bought with an old home that was demolished for $990,000 which is in line with the price of the property MJ mentioned given that prices are now slightly higher.
Or one could just build a single family house with a suite as a lot at 2000 Romney is offered at $1,125,000
My opinion is if you want to build a multi-plex with more than four self contained suites you are going to need both a larger lot and it needs to be a corner lot. Such as the development at 395 St. Charles with a 9,500 square feet lot with an old home was bought for $1,395,000.
If the lot is too small then the multiplex units will be small too. And that’s an untested market to find out if a prospective purchaser will pay a premium price for a small unit even if it is in Fairfield. It’s a lot safer for a contractor to build a single family house or a side by side duplex. The contractor knows that there is a market for these.
Perhaps after several of these multiplexes are developed and sold, then contractors will have more confidence but at this time I suspect most don’t want to take the risk.
“The seeing of the eyes is better than the wandering of the desire,”
You can up the buyer’s commission at your discretion if you like. Realtors can try to talk clients out of a property but this is less effective in condos where there are multiple units for sale in the building by various realtors. The Realtor would have to convince the buyer there is a problem with the actual unit which is much harder IMO.
Marko, have you actually talked clients out of buying a property due to low co-op commission (or heard of such practice being common)? I don’t think this is common as most realtors just wants to close a deal and move on if it’s just a typical property. For high-end stuff, a custom commission structure is typically negotiated anyways and the buying realtor is at the mercy of that.
Hmmm, that isn’t a bad setup. Takes the risk off the table of the agent being fired and incurring costs.
Re. See Parkside, Oswego and Regent in Vic.
Ya, I think those are different animals. We looked into those once as well. They are often 1/4 shares, you are tied into their management, and if you are not careful you may not even have the proceeds distributed equally, i.e. in some places,
distribution of ‘rent’ is based on each unit’s occupancy, not the percentage share of the building. i.e. if other suites are rented more often than yours, you will pay all the maintenance and management but not get as much of the distribution. May be good for some people in some situations but you have to really do your homework. Also take longer to sell, I think.
Am I wrong about this? I thought that while those places indeed operate like sort of condo-hotels, you’re tied into the front desk management co if you want to rent, belaboured by high fees, and you can’t just airbnb it yourself and keep the profits? Many years ago, we looked into buying a unit at the Regent & that was my impression at that time, ie. lacklustre economics (certainly compared to the cashflow airnbs have been providing in the past for some or even many owners).
Another teardown missing middle sale in Fairfield this morning and another Vancouver buyer’s agent.
The realtor (part time) that I worked with only charge $5k for selling sfh on her side of commission, but ask $2k in front to cover photos, documents and etc fees; and the rest $3k paid after the house being sold. I believe she only kept $3k for the last sfh I bought after first day on the market with a clean offer. I wouldn’t recommend 1% Realty because some sneaky realtors may give many reasons to their clients not to buy the property.
I don’t think I am. But I guess we will find out.
Maybe some towns that previously did not have a licensing regime for primary residences/suites in primary residences will bring this in and there will be more supply for STRs as a result. Not sure.
The availability of comfortable affordable homes for family groups created this pattern for us and I expect lots of others. It is a good time for good value.
My older relatives just did not do this unless they had a family cabin and even then it was not 3x a year. They were much more likely to save their funds to travel outside of Canada and not as a family group.
International travelers coming to Canada are very used to STRs so I suspect this will also impact these numbers significantly.
Well then don’t complain about fees. If fees are the problem maybe a better approach would be to ask family and friends if they know of agents that have offered them lower fees and then hit up google/reddit/etc., and do some research. Instead of paying the fees (where there are lower cost options) and then complaining after the fact.
The #1 issue I see is that people ask their friends and family which realtors they have used and go from there.
So how did people manage this prior to the founding of Airbnb?
I meant consumer action.
1% realty does
The thing is during the Janion pre-sales in January 2014 I don’t remember one person bringing up the word AirBnb or short term rental. Neither the developer nor the buyers nor anyone in the line-up waiting to buy a unit (photo of line-up below).
Even in 2017 the first re-sales weren’t even mentioning short term rentals in their description so while it resulted being a popular Airbnb building, I don’t think it was actually the intent otherwise the developer wouldn’t have sold them starting at $110,000 (later to be resold at peak for 400k).
2017 description
“DOWNTOWN WATERFRONT. This spectacular new Concrete construction condo is overlooking Victorias Upper Harbour. Private balcony to enjoy water views and beautiful sunsets! Beautiful contemporary kitchen with solid surface countertops, Bloomberg cooktop and wall oven, Fisher & Paykel fridge/freezer and Bloomberg washer/dryer. High end finishing with wide plank oak flooring and a modern bathroom with large walk-in shower. Lots of amenities including full gym, kayak storage at waters edge, storage locker and rooftop deck with barbecue area. Superb location in Old Town to enjoy harbour walks and great restaurants and shops. This unit has a sought after UNDERGROUND PARKING spot included. Move right in and enjoy as the stylish furniture is included”
There were 16,000 entire home units being used as Airbnbs in BC, not 600. Of these, only a small percent will be able to continue.
We vacation in BC in a family group of three adult children, four adults, and a dog three times a year. On Airbnb we typically could book homes with four-five bedrooms. Now rerun the numbers for price or vacancy for hotel rooms this July.
Numbers aside, the experience is not the same and not something I would do.
Is what it is and we have found a solution that works for us, but it is not hotels and it is not in BC. This means that the approx. 18k a year spent on this (between two families) will not be put into the economy here. However someone will be paying long-term rent for these units so the overall economic loss is probably more like 15k to the economy plus people are homed.
Why would anyone be insulted? I’ve personally never been insulted, it is a business.
Last year a seller emailed me and I think it was a copy and paste email to a bunch of agents. It was only a couple of sentences long but he disclosed the unit #/building address (so agents can look it up), the fact a tenant just moved out and it was vacant and the property management company had the keys at their offer if I wanted to look at it. Then he asked if would I be willing to list it for a commission that was LESS than the cooperating commission I typically offer (which is already a bit lower than what is commonly seen in the marketplace). Was I insulted?
Nope. I explained that what he was suggested was lower than the cooperating commission, let alone my listing end and based on the fact that the condo was vacant, in a complex I was familiar with, and a 5 minute walk from my personal condo, I gave him a counter offer on what I would be willing to offer.
A few days later he contacted me that he was going to list with me and that was that.
Often I am not willing to lower my fees, for example, tenanted properties suck up a ton of my time as the listing agent. Tenants have been extremely difficult to work with the last few years especially if they have below market rent so vacant vs owner occupied vs tenanted is a decision factor on the discount, amongst many other factors.
That being said if you contact enough agents someone will budge.
+1, like the other HHVer posted that is concerned about offending his agent friend by asking for cash back 🙂
This is a really frustrating topic for me as I elluded to recently. Everyone complains about the high fees, but no one cares to take any action to secure lower fees.
It’s been around for quite a while and it’s called a “condo hotel”. I believe that Victoria has one or more in fact.
Why not just see if anyone is willing to go below what 1% realty offers?
https://victoriaonepercentrealty.ca/about-1-realty.html
I think you are overstating the case a bit. I also enjoy staying at AirBnBs, but it’s not like travel was awful before AirBnB existed.
See Parkside, Oswego and Regent in Vic.
Whistler has plenty of places like that. Front desk and services like a hotel, but units are individually owned and can be rented out by whatever platform the owner chooses.
I don’t think these 600 units of Airbnb will move the needle much on aggregate terms. I just looked on booking.com for July 11-14 weekend, for most hotels the downtown nightly rate (including all fees) are around ~250 (strath) to ~400 (grand pacific) ,not much different than previous years. Sure there are some $600+ a night hotels (fairmont, magnolia, oak bay beach) but those have been there previous years also..
Similar pricing for middle of august weekend also.
That attitude is far too Canadian. There’s circa 1600 real estate agents in Greater Victoria. If I were you I wouldn’t lose too much sleep about offending one or two.
Marko has suggested an approach before via email. That way the “offended” ones don’t have to bother replying to your query.
Maybe what is actually needed is a new category of strata AirB&B units where the whole building is exclusively built and used for AirB&B. Essentially motels with multiply ownership of the units. Seperate AirB&B from residential buildings. The Janion was mostly designed as a motel and intended as AirB&B (with the exception of a handful of units.
I doubt they modeled much of anything, and if they did, I’d be suspicious of their ability to do so competently. Seems more like a knee-jerk reaction to placating public sentiment to me.
“When you bought the condo, did the listing realtor have any impact on whether or not you wanted to make an offer or how much you wanted to offer?”
I did meet the listing realtor at an open house but got no information of any real value. I do wish my own agent at the time had been more knowledgeable about the condo market however (BTA this was not an STR condo). I would be interested hearing what amount of a discount from standard commission rates might be negotiated without insulting prospective realtors too much. Thanks.
Over 16,650 tourism businesses operate in British Columbia. In 2021 (pre Covid) the tourism industry generated $13.5 billion in revenue. It is a significant part of the economy.
I think Airbnb bans are going stop a lot of visitors/BC residents from picking BC – me included. I have zero interest in staying in hotels and good luck getting a room if you do.
Airbnb needed more controls for sure but I hope the province modelled the cost benefit correctly.
The point is that it’s a nuisance use. Granted not usually as much of a nuisance as a safe injection site, but still one that many people don’t want in their neighbourhood. And yes restrictions on other commercial uses of residential property are also warranted.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/gilmour-street-airbnb-shooting-guilty-1.6482019
As for the praises of tourism, people worldwide are starting to wake up to the negative externalities. To those not familiar with the term, it means some of the costs are offloaded to the general public.
The existing STR system is fine, and they should keep it. Just tweak the licensing/regulations. There are many economic benefits from a STR, outweighing the small one-time benefit from adding a single shoebox unit to the residential housing stock. Since Victoria depends on tourism, this STR ban is an example of burning-the-furniture for heat.
BC gov’t should let cities opt out of these STR changes for any reason, not just > 3% vacancy.
It is amazing how well the politicans are playing the angry public…..can’t wait to see how this unfolds in 10 years when affordability is way worse then what it is today.
Yes, use common sense…..or don’t use common sense and attempt to tax demand to death while on the flip side bring in a record amount of immigrants because immigrants don’t contribute to demand.
Nailed that false analogy fallacy right there….. An AirBnB in a garden suite, basement or room in a house is no more of safe injection site than it is a hazardous waste dump, chemical plant or auto shop, but I guess if you book rooms at the safe injection site through AirBnB you might be able to twist that into working…lol.. I guess if we are going down that amount of pedantic reasoning, I guess you will be looking to have home offices, nanny services and hosting a book club at home in the commercial realm as well.
If property tax rates differ for residential and commercial use, I certainly think it’s justified to restrict commercial use of residentially zoned properties. To which I may add, if AirBnB is ok, why not, say, a safe injection site?
When it comes to building more than four units on a single family lot, it seems OSFI and the Appraisal Institute are sticking to the four and under regulations. Five units and more will still be considered a commercial loan. That means higher costs to home owners intending to build more than four units on their property.
Changes to Provincial Legislation that
may have a bearing on CRA Scope of Designation
The AIC is aware of the current trend of governments to allow more units on a residential site. With respect to a CRA Member, appraisal assignments remain limited to a maximum of four residential units in accordance with CUSPAP Ethics Standard Comment 5.4.6.
Going forward, the subject and comparable sales will have to be carefully considered but it is unlikely that every subject and comparable sale of a single-family residential property will have been purchased for redevelopment and a different Highest and Best Use. As discussed in AIC and UBC materials, a point to consider is often the purchaser and the intended use – if it is John Doe for a first mortgage on a 10-year-old home vs. Jane Doe’s Demo & Build Co. for a construction mortgage on an 80-year-old teardown.
The determining factor as to whether a property is within the scope of a CRA designated Member is the actual highest and best use (HBU) or the HBU assumed for the purposes of the assignment. If the HBU, actual or assumed, is residential (an individual, undeveloped site for not more than four self-contained housing units) then it is within scope for a CRA to value. A CRA Member is equipped to review zoning and related documents and should be able to determine when the HBU falls outside of their designation.
The AIC encourages all Members to:
thoroughly check the zoning of the property;
understand what uses can be made of the property; and
thoroughly establish the property’s HBU at the point in time.
Once this is done, the CRA-designated Member can determine if they are able to continue with an assignment by themselves or would need to enlist the services of an AACI designated co-signer for those 4+ redevelopment sites.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/home-show-garden-suites-toronto-1.7138448
Lol. Making failure right across the country. Let’s just admit that all housing initiatives are just false lip service designed to pacify an angry public and those that control policy either don’t know how to get things to work or just don’t actually want it work. It doesn’t matter how good a policy sounds, is that government at all levels put in mechanisms that stop work from getting done in any reasonable manner. Building homes is not about community benefits, building below market, tax revenue generation, the types of homes built, social causes, or dictating what the home can be used for (AirBnB or not). It should be just to build homes on scale and the other things just sort themselves out.
At the time, as an investment, was it allowed to be an AirBnB?
This could be interesting
My go to line with sellers, lol. Sellers (typically higher-end) also ask if I will advertise in print and I ask them…..so you bought this house after you saw it in a magazine in the waiting room at the dentist? It’s truly sad how many people can’t use some common sense.
As someone who has sold over a 1,000 properties in Victoria I would like to think I have some experience. Assuming the agents you are considering all meet the minimum level of competency which isn’t difficult you need to go with the one that will offer you the lowest fees as the condo will sell at what the market will bear.
I have proof of this through mere postings over the years. The mere posting condos I’ve listed in buildings have sold on average in-line with the full service comparables; however, the mere postings have netted more as they’ve saved 40 to 45% of the market rate commission.
As VicRe points out buyer could care less if Bob, Suzy or seller via mere posting has the property listed.
Not saying people should do mere postings (not for everyone, you have to deal with strata documents orders which can be upwards of $400, etc.) but my point is list with the agent offering the lowest fees.
Conclusion, the most important factor is fees and then it is a massive drop off from there. Obviously it helps if you agent has been a strata president in buildings, owns condos, knows law (differences between LCP and CP and part of strata lot parking, etc.), and some other factors but on a scale they are very small factors compared to fees as factors beyond fees simply don’t influence the outcome much. I wish they did influence outcomes as people might hire very knowledgeable agents, but if I am being honest they don’t. On the buying end probably more advantageous to have a knowledgeable agent.
When you bought the condo, did the listing realtor have any impact on whether or not you wanted to make an offer or how much you wanted to offer?
A general question. I plan on selling an investment condo this year and have a few choices for realtors to list with. Does it really matter much in terms of the end sales result which realtor is chosen to list with? If so, what factors are important? Thanks for any insights.
I would like to read this. Probably at the request of tourism related businesses in Victoria because this as an about-face from her letters requesting/supporting short term legislation. Now the other shoe drops. Open up all the Airbnbs for long-term and there are so many revenue-producing activities that get impacted and ultimately this will lead to job loss – in some cases for the same people who can’t find an affordable place to live.
I think some tourist-dependent places will be put into a tailspin this year. Like the Okanagan which has already been hit hard by fires and crop losses. Tourists are just going to choose other places with good accommodation availability and ex. conferences are going to book where there is enough accommodation.
Try getting a mortgage on a commercial property. Banks require an environmental study ( several years ago the cost was 5k, probably 4x that now). They want to know the history of previous businesses or business use to determine whether any chemical contamination occurred. For example- previous site of a gas station, one time dry cleaning business, or hardware store that sold paint. Unless you have cash, it’s unavoidable. Can create a problem when you want to sell. Commercial appraisals are also very expensive.
More owner-builder emails too
This goes in line with my concerns of it is becoming very difficult to obtain a builder’s license which means many communities won’t have a licensed builder(s) available, but at the same time BC Housing is forcing the unnecessary owner builder exam down on people.
Many people over the years have spent winters in trailers on their property because of this 100% unnecessary exam.
In 30 years someone will write a report on how that exam has been administered for 40 years for no reason and everyone will be shocked 🙂
Not to mention how much soil is the city trucking out if replacing the sewer line to an existing property? They have to back-fill the work and they might use a bit more sand/crush rock around the new pipes but it still has to be back-filled so there should be more than one truck of soil/material being trucked out?
If that was the only waste. The problem is there are like a bunch of wasteful things and it really adds up.
Anyone know how much a 9 x 7 Insulated steel garage door spring replacement cost’s?
From what? Heating oil from leaking underground tanks? Asphalt?
Neither of those are a particular hazard in this situation.
Random testing for contamination would be a ridiculous waste of time and money.
Major Alto just put out a letter asking the province to delay Bill 35 (short term rental ban) to after peak tourist season…..interesting.
At least we don’t have to clear land mines and remove undetonated artillery/bombs.
Just like commercial fishing licenses. Jim Pattison bought the bulk of them up back In the day.
https://actions.eko.org/a/kpmg-tax-dodge
The training is a joke as you can take credits that you need every year for professional development that double up as the step code training, so you actually aren’t having to do an additional number of hours whatsoever to cover off the step code.
A lot of older builders I know just do their yearly “training” on various cruises – https://buildingitright.com/cruise-options.html
The younger builders just take some courses online a lot of which are pretty useless.
Thing is BC Housing is really putting the clamps down on getting a licence. I don’t think I want to build going forward (would just contract out) but will keep the renewing the licence as you never know, could be a hot commodity in 10-20 years.
Further to CuriousCat’s post,
Fourteen more lawsuits filed against owners accused of abusing condo program
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/fourteen-more-lawsuits-filed-against-owners-accused-of-abusing-condo-program-8420645
https://www.cheknews.ca/22-open-lawsuits-filed-by-bc-housing-against-vivid-at-the-yates-homeowners-1194216/
Days after it was brought to light that homeowners of units in Victoria’s Vivid at the Yates building purchased the homes against rules set in the covenant, the total number of lawsuits filed by BC Housing against allegedly ineligible homeowners has risen to 22.
It’ll just be put on the cladders and Insulators. They will be the ones taking the step code training just to get the job. Being step 3 compliant they offer will some form of documentation to the builder to pass along to the municipality.
A bit more nuanced, I think. Buildings tend to stick around for a long time, and there is only one good time to ensure it has been built properly (envelope-wise). The use of blower doors will find the spots that need to be sealed up prior to being covered over, at a cost of ~2k.
Way better use of $ (imho) than an automatic 35k water main upcharge. A half inch line can easily support new dwellings, especially if you plumb via a manifold.
As for step code training – I think it’s fair that builders should require some training. Not like other professions don’t evolve over time…
What about the asphalt pavement?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11791850/
Chemical contamination.
Do you know what specifically they are testing for?
Ya laughable , affordable housing is a croc . Zoning or no zoning the cost to build will just continue to go up . I guess it’s good for job creation thou
The builder must prove it with vacuums and fans.
BC Energy Step Code Training.
Back to school for you.
It just keeps getting more and more affordable by the day.
https://www.bchousing.org/licensing-consumer-services/builder-licensing/general-contractors-and-bc-energy-step-code
They even want to go to step 5…
All that by 2032…You can even get an energy coach.
https://www.betterhomesbc.ca/connect/
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/industry/construction-industry/building-codes-standards/bc-codes/2024-bc-codes
currently development only needs to upgrade utilities to add the capacity required for that development and municipality may choose to jump in on the action and pay the difference to upgrade for future capacity. I can totally see that changing to a latecomer cost recovery model. Where another developer comes along and has to pay the first developer a portion of the upgrade previously bore entirely by that first developer. I am seeing this being suggested already but it’s not popular as future development is not guaranteed making that cost recovery extremely risky.
I have seen something way worse than that just a few weeks ago. Also every new build or addition of an ADU triggers a $35,000 water meter install charge (my town not COV). It’s happening everywhere. Oh yea affordable housing is headed in the opposite direction of reality.
Would that apply to having a natural gas line run to your house? Had mine done several years ago, the charge was $25.
My understanding is so far only the COV is making the property owner pay for testing on city property. I understand if it might be province wide regulations, fair enough, but the payment part is a little crazy. What’s next, the sixplex project will be responsible for upgrading the sewer for three blocks at a cost of a a few million even if the current sewer supports that individual sixplex.
Another thing the province could easily fix if they wanted to. Don’t tell me we can’t find a place to dump some soil on an island the size of many countries.
Also As I understand it there is nowhere on the Island that can take the contaminated soil so it gets trucked over to Delta. Marko is probably spot on as to the reason for the new rule in COV it could be really costly to the city. Lots of downloading of responsibility going on. Its like a silent tax that can get levied without calling it a tax
There have been a few changes from the province regarding contaminated soils. Including changes to how Certificates of Compliance are handled and also the threshold was lowered for levels of contaminants triggering special handling of excavated soils meaning you cant just take it to the landfills anymore. My guess is this new rule is to make sure soils are properly disposed of. The kicker is there are naturally occurring contaminants in soil that can trigger the special handling. This is Province wide.
Re soil testing
Interesting development. While I don’t hear many people talking about it, I suspect that an awful lot of properties in the core are over current day limits for things like lead, copper, arsenic etc. Given how low the current standards are and how many years the area has been subject to backyard burning, lead paint removal, industrial smoke, old school pressure treated landscaping, ashes from the coal or even wood stove, etc. etc. it would be surprising if anywhere was pristine. If the city starts finding toxic samples everywhere is it likely to affect land values? How many people buying in the core care or want to know if the soil their kids are playing in is contaminated? Am I worrying about nothing?
https://realestatemagazine.ca/albertas-housing-dilemma-influx-of-out-of-province-buyers-sparks-market-concerns/
If on private property they won’t deal with it, they will ask for it to be dealt with and end of conversation.
If on city property I imagine they will just send a property owner a notice saying “hey the soil samples you paid for on city property are positive for xyz, bringing new services to your lot line will now be $100,000 in addition as we have to deal with the soil cleanup. Let us know if you want to proceed?)
how would COV deal with a positive soil sample due to neighbor’s oil tank leaking 40 years ago; and that neighbor’s land be assembled 30 years ago and now is an apartment building?
I don’t remember the COV ever doing soil sample testing prior to installing new services to lot line so it was never done before (unless industrial site/area type situation).
Someone came up with the idea recently, the city probably got their first bill post testing and was like this is expensive….let’s keep the policy but will make the property owner pay for it.
As far as I can tell the policy hasn’t spread to other municipalities yet but you can bet it will.
Leo posted my comment on Twitter and then a developer texted me and he says if you are dumping more than 10 trucks loads from a residential excavation (like a SFH teardown site) that now also requires soil sample testing at approx. $3,500.
As I’ve been saying for the last 15 years on HHV more and more non-sense gets added to the cost of construction every single year but they are really reaching deep into their bag of tricks at this point.
Are soil samples usually done in these situations and up to now who has been paying for them (if anybody)?
Meanwhile, in Calgary…
“Not one councillor campaigned on a mandate for upzoning the entire city,” McLean said Thursday.
“Something this consequential, I think, should go to the people for a vote of the electors.”
Councillors aim to take citywide rezoning proposal to a plebiscite
https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/councillors-citywide-rezoning-proposal-plebiscite
Oh right! On the price adjustment you were talking about were you referring to them including the GST in the price?
Learned of a brand new policy from the COV today. For new construction they are now forcing the property owner to carry out soil sample testing, get this, on city property where the excavation will take place for the new city services (sewer/storm/water). As this is on city property and most often the service are below the road you need to get a road permit/traffic control, etc. for boring the holes. I haven’t priced this out yet but I can’t see it being less than $10k. Then you provide the report to the engineering department.
Despite bringing in the MMI in terms of zoning via bureaucracy it will simply be suffocated from making economic sense.
No, the exemption AND threshold was increased from 750k to $1.1 million for new builds (purchased directly from developer/builder). So two weeks ago if you bought a $1 million dollar unit from Bosa you would have had to pay $18,000 in PTT. If you buy now (with completion after April 1st) you pay $0 (assuming principal residence, etc.) https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/property-taxes/property-transfer-tax/exemptions/newly-built-home-exemption
(Not to be confused with the PTT exemption for first time buyers where the exemption was NOT increased and remains at 500k, but the threshold was increased to 835k).
So every other unit is less than 835k?
Well a re-sale sold today so not sure about undercutting re-sales completely but I was there with buyers yesterday and its busy all of a sudden at Dockside with quite a few offers. They adjusted their prices a bit plus the new PTT announcement helps them out. Other than a penthouse all of their units left now qualify for the PTT exemption. That’s an 18k savings on the bigger units that wasn’t there two weeks ago.
Out of towners start shopping in Vic West this time of year, I think they clear out remaining inventory within 60 days.
No word on next two towers. Most likely tough to make a profit when the sales are at $950/foot +/-. My guess is they need sales to be north of $1000/foot at these construction/carrying costs.
@Marko,Just saw an ad on my social media from Dockside Green, looks like they are now cutting prices to sell the remaining units and are undercutting the current resales now.
So we are left with do buyers not qualify (most have assets worth over 50k) or are the available units facing a highway and potential buyers that do qualify don’t view them as a deal.
Finally someone did some research!
https://www.vicnews.com/local-news/more-lawsuits-filed-against-buyers-in-victorias-vivid-building-total-at-22-7327014
“The current incarnation of the affordable housing program used for the purchases does not allow buyers to own other property, but at the time of the purchases in question — most purchases were in early 2018 — this was not a rule.
At the time, the buyers were required only to have an income of less than $150,000 per year, be a Canadian citizen or permanent resident for at least 12 months, only purchase one unit, and live in it as a primary residence for the first two years, according to a BC Housing spokesperson.”
“Poly B™ pipes, also known as polybutylene pipes, are not designed to take water pressure or withstand excessive heat. When exposed to excessively high temperatures, these pipes can become brittle, leading to cracks. As these cracks propagate, the risk of water leaks and even catastrophic pipe failure increases”.
https://urbanpiping.com/blog/poly-b-plumbing-issues/
When was polybutylene plumbing banned in Canada?
“In 1998 the Polybutylene resin stopped being produced because of complaints that some installations were failing, and ultimately the Canadian plumbing code removed Poly-B as a viable material for use in 2005”.
https://www.albertarealtor.ca/post/blog-what-should-i-know-about-poly-b-piping-in-homes
Just don’t use any hot water and keep a steady stream flowing at all times so there Is no pressure In the water lines.
We had some poly b and were told it might be a problem for insurance… So we asked our insurer (TD) about it specifically several times and the person on the phone seemed confused that we were even asking and said it wasn’t a problem.
As I think has been mentioned by others before, based on their blasé attitude I am rather nervous about whether TD is ACTUALLY reliable when you need to make a claim….
The only reason there Is a slowdown Is because Investment Is waiting for this current mayor and council to GTFO.
The fact that they loosened the eligibility criteria last summer indicates they weren’t exactly overrun with demand.
“Updates broaden eligibility requirements around income and residency status to make the Program accessible to more home buyers. Previously, applicants were required to be a Langford resident for two-years to qualify. Now, applicants who have resided or been employed in Langford for the past six-months are eligible”
The problem in reference to Langford’s program is I have no information regarding uptake, what the eligible units actually are, is there any units actually available? are they 20 or 50′ away from the highway, etc.
Therefore, overanalyzing the qualification criteria doesn’t help me draw any conclusions.
If had some sort of info like all the units were spoken for in one day, or there has been no uptake then maybe some conclusions can be drawn from qualifying criteira.
On your end doesn’t seem like you are a huge fan of living right on the highway anyway
Those old 2x4s are a ticking time bomb.
You’re probably right, I probably am too obsessed with the numbers.
But without numbers, how do you assess whether policy is good or bad?
Anyway, I found some numbers from the 2021 census data:
15425 households had income between $125k and $150k in 2020
This represents the bottom ~9% of the top 30% of households.
No information on household net worth, so no way to link incomes and net worth, as far as I can tell.
I blew most of my net worth on a rickety 1912 house with “issues” that is going to rot/collapse by 1972 latest according to Just Jack/whatever.
You seem to be a little obsessed with the numbers including the VREB reporting. Some of the numbers you’ve asked for we actually have but I am not sure what conclusions you’ll be able to draw from the numbers that will actually help you in any way.
Lately both my buyers and sellers have been obsessing over BC Assessment and I don’t quite understand what conclusion you draw from such on an individual property. I’ve personally offered on two teardowns unconditionally in the last month (didn’t get either) and I didn’t check, nor did I know the assessment at time of offer. With my buyers on the other hand before I get out of my car I check the assessment as I know every single time its the same question “why do you think this is listed above/below assessment.”
Here are some of the numbers you were looking for the other week.
What was the primary motive of the buyer(s)? 2023 Annual Summary
To enter the housing market (first time buyer) 633 21.5%
Wanted a larger home 366 12.4%
Wanted a smaller home 240 8.2%
Wanted to move to a different neighbourhood 320 10.9%
Wanted to be closer to family 127 4.3%
Due to a family reconfiguration 181 6.2%
It was a work-related move 107 3.6%
Buying a second home for use by family member(s) 123 4.2%
Buying a second home for future retirement 57 1.9%
Buying a second home for vacation use 52 1.8%
Buying a revenue property as an investment (rental) 157 5.3%
Relocation 438 14.9%
Other 142 4.8%
Total Responses 2,943 100.0%
Not really interested in “you would think”. I’d like to see the actual numbers.
I blew my entire net worth on a 500 sq.ft. poorly laid out (no window in the bedroom) condo with no parking. Had to start somewhere.
You would think with student loans lots of people in such a scenario?
Those criteria don’t make much sense to me.
How many households in Victoria earn >$135k and <$150k, but have a net worth <$50k?
And why are we encouraging these people to blow that entire net worth on a shoe-box, next to the highway, way out on the city limits?
I wouldn’t be surprised if Langford had to do double digit increased going forward as well with development slowing down. Doubt council is as well equipped as Stew….he pulled some good maneuvers, imo, during his time. For example, during the 2009 meltdown he did this
https://canada.constructconnect.com/dcn/news/government/2009/02/langford-reduces-taxes-and-waives-permit-fees-to-attract-developers-dcn032740w
Stew’s concession speech when he lost really turned me off him, but the guy does have real life experience. When we came to Canada in the 1990s my father did the masonry work on a townhome project Stew was building back then. It helps when a politician has been out in the real world in my opinion.
Note, BC Housing @ Vivd no criteria for networth and properties owned.
Stew’s program criteria…real life common sense criteria imo.
Currently live or work in Langford and have lived here for the past 6 months, or are a member of the RCMP posted in the West Shore, or are a member of the Canadian Armed Forces posted in Greater Victoria.
Do not currently own any real estate.
Current value of all assets held by your family does not exceed $50,000.
in related news Max’s blood pressure also spikes 15.6% higher
After the increase in Langford how do the taxes compare with places like Esquimalt or Oak Bay.
So with higher density and population growth comes higher tax’s when the slowdown comes I guess
Langford property-tax hike rises to 15.6%, with amenity funds no longer offsetting increases
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/langford-property-tax-hike-rises-to-156-with-amenity-funds-no-longer-offsetting-increases-8408249
Depends on what generation of Poly B piping it is….if it has copper fitting and elbows easier to insure than the older generation. Thunderbird Insurance has always been pretty good when dealing with Poly B with my clients.
Might want to consider other things beyond getting insurance. If a rancher on a crawl space dealing with the poly b is manageable, if a three story home, fully finished/drywalled on slab…..yikes.
Hi folks,
Does anyone have any experience buying a home with Poly B piping? Did you encounter any issues getting insurance?
Stew did have a bit more common sense than BC Housing.
The program
Market unit at Trailside not facing the lake (away from highway) – https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/26541986/107-1361-goldstream-ave-langford-langford-lake (plus it says on the back-end of my system that they have promotional prices for certain units).
I would have to see where exactly these program units are. If they are the ones closest to highway not really a “deal.”
Found Janet Wu’s undercover account.
Orders of magnitude different payoff. Buying a discounted home has a big net worth windfall (to be paid by the taxpayers!) . Getting a decent public housing rental doesn’t.
Solution is to cancel the lottery that gives instant home equity to a few lucky people, and use the funds to improve public housing, to make it less of a lottery.
You know, help the poor, not the middle class.
and look, their eligibility includes not owning a home and a net worth limit
What are the eligibility requirements?
Gross annual household income of:
$125,000 or less for 1-bedroom or 1-bedroom and den
$130,000 or less for 2-bedroom
$140,000 or less for 3-bedroom
$150,000 or less for 2-bedroom and den or 3-bedroom
Currently live or work in Langford and have lived here for the past 6 months, or are a member of the RCMP posted in the West Shore, or are a member of the Canadian Armed Forces posted in Greater Victoria.
Do not currently own any real estate.
Current value of all assets held by your family does not exceed $50,000.
Have qualified for a pre-mortgage approval of at least $399,000 (unit size dependent).
Do not have access to down payment assistance from family, friends, or other.
Yeah I think we disagreed on that point. The prices were well below market to start and then market jumped. Even with the mediocre units I think it was a good deal.
Looks like it’s still going https://langford.ca/langfords-innovative-attainable-housing-program-broadens-eligibility/
We are pleased that Trailside at the Lake is our first project under this new Program, and we’re excited to offer these brand-new homes at a significantly reduced price of $100,000 or more under market value. At Trailside, families will be able to work, play and achieve the dream of new homeowners in our amazing community.”
I believe I chewed out the program because the building involved was like 20 feet off the highway and the units they were likely going to throw into the program would be the ones facing the highway (the extremely difficult ones to sell at market prices anyway so they weren’t really going to be a “deal”). I saw it as somewhat beneficial to the developer. I can’t remember exactly and I haven’t heard of anyone taking advantage of the program so I’ve forgot the details.
On the whole I was surprised Stew was getting involved with such antics. It seemed like a political play and I viewed him more as a common sense type person.
As I recall in that interview I was relatively positive about it other than questioning why affordable housing programs were refocusing from targeting lower income to higher income folks. Same reason I’m skeptical of the current housing for the middle class business
Seemed like a good deal for the people that could have qualified though.
Public housing is also a lottery
Bitcoin.
https://www.nicehash.com/countdown/btc-halving-2024-05-10-12-00
I think the point is the government should be designing the programs to minimize fraud in the first place
I’m a first time home buyer. I bought In 1998, a lot of others like me…we’re not going down.
These schemes where government allows a few lucky people to buy homes below market are inherently flawed, but it is solvable.
The lower (“below market”) price of the unit should only apply to the first owner. For example, if it was estimated that the government subsidy has resulted in the home being $80k below market, then the government could have a $80k lien on the home (lasting 10 years) that would be repaid on resale of the home from proceeds of sale. So if the new home is for sale for $300k to a qualified low-income buyer and market value is $380k, when it is purchased the government gets a (no-interest) lien added to the mortgage for $80k that is only payable on resale, payable after other mortgages are paid, and expires after 10 years with nothing payable. So the government subsidy is treated like a no interest loan, forgivable after 10 years, but repayable in full if sold prior to 10 years.
This scheme would remove the motivation for “flippers” to buy these homes,. And the only people buying them would be people intending to live in them long term, knowing that if they live in them 10+ years, there’s a $80k gift from the government waiting for them when that lien is cancelled.
So, uh, any other investment opportunities coming up like the Vivid one? Asking for a friend.
It’s a 20-story concrete building downtown built by a very reputable developer. Not exactly a wood-frame on the highway in Langford.
It isn’t super far fetched that someone retired from the mainland with an income of <$150,000 and a $3 million dollar older home in Vancouver would buy a two-bedroom unit on the 20th floor and move here for two years into a condo to be closer to grandkids, or similar (this individual would have done nothing wrong as per poorly put together BC Housing criteria/covenant). After two years you sell at market value and buy something else, or after two years rent it out and keep as investment.
Real estate agents are licensed by the BC Financial Services Authority. Realtor is a trademark, not a license. In theory an agent can lose their right to use the trademark but BC’s real estate boards have been rather forgiving of indiscretions.
BC Housing probably didn’t think anyone with high net worth/ multiple properties would want to live in this building anyway. That’s my best guess!
Reading this story this morning reminded me of something else I’ve been seeing lately, and of my own experience as a first-time home buyer. We’re told that investors are vital if developers are to raise enough money to start construction. But when I was trying to buy my first condo, I found over and over again that the affordable pre-sale units had been snapped up by realtors and their investor clients who had the opportunity to buy before the general public. Sure, I could buy a penthouse or a 2-bed 2-bath unit, but the 1-bed 1-baths on the lower floors were always pre-pre-sold.
If anyone is curious I just posted the actual covenant on VV ->
Agreed. It is mind boggling that the government could setup a housing program where a rich person could qualify. A simple declaration question and net worth limitation would have solved it.
Moreover, the government has $6 billion deficits projected for the next few years. Which means to pay for these programs they borrow money for future generations to pay back. These will be higher if the economy turns down. The government should be cancelling these expensive housing programs, as they only benefit a tiny number of people anyway.
For example, there is the inane “workforce housing” program, that’s supposed to subsidize housing purchase for people with incomes in the $80-$180k range. Axe that program!
Any program where someone ends up buying a home below market due to a government subsidy is akin to a lottery. Meaning that only a few people benefit. Government should stick to public housing programs where they help those most in need and subsidize their housing via rentals, but it is the government that owns the housing.
Exactly, it is something. I doubt when first time buyers exercise their PPT exemption in BC that anyone is doing an audit as to whether they own or have ever been on a title to a property in Poland or India or elsewhere. We don’t seem to be worried about people lying under all of these other programs; therefore, I think a first-time buyer or do not own any property should have been a MUST criteria to purchase in Vivid.
One of the buyers I represented into Vivid was my tenant. First-time buyer, rented my place across the street for 10 years, moderate income, etc. If BC Housing had a no other unit owned criteria more people like my tenant could have purchased.
@Marko I hate agreeing with you but I think that for the Vivid thing you’re right. It’s not the realtors clients fault that they qualified for the purchase of the property. It is the fault of the agreement that was in place. They should have specifically agreed to no other units owned by the buyer or any non-arms length corporation/individual in order to qualify. It does highlight the property gluttony that we have here though.
Its hard but could just do what Leo said and say ‘can’t own another home’ – easy enough to check the homeownership registry in BC at least. Wont’ capture everything obviously but at least its SOMETHING.
“any chance that Janet gets her realtors licence take away by VREB”
She’ll be fine. She has the “does not speak English as her first or principal language, and has limitations with respect to her understanding of English” get out of jail free pass.
Not sure how government could determine someone’s net wealth? Maybe possible but would require effort and coordination between departments. So I’d give that zero percent chance.
any chance that Janet gets her realtors licence take away by VREB (or whoever is responsible for that) – or does that basically never happen?
Overseeing a septic inspection for buyers with nothing better to do 🙂
Actually, there should be a net worth declaration and a net worth limitation. But I would have thought that obvious.
No, I can’t. So did you skip breakfast today?
That’s my exact point. If BC Housing had a qualifying criteria where you had to own zero or one property maximum, for example, doubt buyers with 6 properties would be walking into an lawyer’s office to sign a declaration that they one zero or one. Sure one could lie, but not recommended and easily audited.
A bit of background information, my clients that purchased at Vivid had to pay out of pocket and go to a lawyer to sign a declaration provided by BC Housing that they met the qualifying criteria.
Can someone give me one argument for not adding to the criteria/declaration a maximun number of properties owned condition?
I would not recommend doing this. There will be audits.
I am sure people lie on the spec tax decleration as well, all the time. I’ve never been asked for a rental agreement?
I do think this would have eliminated 90% of the problem buyers and would have cost nothing to implement.
The big picture is being missed in the story. This has been known to the public for more than a year and according to Ravi to the government since 2021. What is setting people off is not that buyers broke the covenant (that is wrong obviously) but the networth of those buyers. Reporters could have ran this story last year and no one would have cared. What made the story blow up, in my opinion, is the networth of some of the buyers that has been now made available.
It sets this narrative up of rich investors being the root cause of our housing problems, a month ago it was the greedy airbnb investors taking away housing stock, etc.
First time buyer buys at Vivid with a networth of 25,000 (the downpayment) and meets all of the BC Housing purchasing qualifications but in the two years the building is being built ends up finding a partner and rents out the unit to a friend. Ends up being busted and has to face the conesequences. Non-news story.
Rich person buys at Vivid with a networth of $25 million and meets all of the BC Housing purchasing qualifications but rents out the unit. Ends up being busted and has to face the consequences. Same degree of fault as the person above (you could argue the person above had intent to live in the unit) but it is a massive story due to their networth, even thought networth wasn’t a qualifying criteria.
LMAO, would not want to be Janet Wu today….
Yes, they’re pitting people who aren’t committing fraud against people who are committing fraud. How dare they?
You think people don’t lie under oath? Happens all the time.
B.C.’s securities watchdog is struggling to claim $430M in fines
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-securities-commission-fines-unpaid-1.7133944
B of C holds steady on interest rates. Not a surprise.
Why in the hell isn’t the government reading Marko’s posts on VibrantVictoria???
More horrible reporting, now front page of TC
https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/discount-price-condos-were-to-be-sold-only-to-first-time-buyers-13-sued-for-buying-when-they-didnt-qualify-8402830
first paragraph
“One of the purchasers of a unit in a downtown building subsidized for first-time homebuyers already owned six single-family homes in the Victoria area worth more than $7 million, says a civil suit filed by B.C. Housing.”
later in the story
“Housing Minister Ravi Kahlon said in an interview Tuesday that it was the responsibility of the developer to vet buyers for units in Vivid at the Yates. The province first became aware of concerns that some owners were not living in the units in 2021 through an audit by B.C. Housing, he said.”
WTF has happened to journalism? A reporter can’t do 5 minutes of research? Anyone with any common sense would have asked the housing minister “Can we please get an explanation as to why BC Housing did not have a restriction on networth or number of properties owned as qualifying criteria.”
Then hundreds of comments online along the lines of
“Government is going way too easy on these scum bags.”
I cannot believe how well the government has been playing the public lately. They are completing diverting housing issues from the government and pitting people against each other instead.
If the government used 5 minutes of common sense back in 2018 when I made the comment about the oversight on this program all of this could have been averted. There is NO WAY someone that owns 6 properties goes in-front of a lawyer to sign a declaration that they own 0 properties.
Even the article titles are horrible…..these buyers QUALIFIED to buy, but they didn’t follow the covenant when the building was finished (that is where they were in the wrong and this has been known for more than a year to the public and apparently known to government since 2021).
Just for clarity, I do not support anyone that broke the program rules and that should have consequences. I just take issue with the way this is being presented by the media.
Ohh yea the one the reporter quoted me on chewing out the program, lol. I don’t think Stew was happy with me if he read that. Leo, I believe you were in the article as well?
I don’t know what happened, haven’t heard of anyone that participated in the program.
Anyone know what happened to that Langford program to give below market condos? Seemed like a good deal at the time but I don’t know of anyone that bought in
Does anyone know if the application process for the low price units was regulated? Or is it possible Chard sales office could have given preference to friends and family that are now being sued for ineligibility? Greed is a powerful drug.
Used to be tons of goldbugs on the precursor to this blog in 2007. Most jumped to crypto I guess.
I remember reading about Dalios all weather or permanent portfolio which I believe is 25% gold
ok, but mostly the reason they tell older folks not to be 100% invested in stocks is because they think one should be MORE conservative as one gets older. GICs or bonds or other fixed income can fill that safety role in your 70/30 scenario in a way gold, crypto or hedge funds can’t. It’s about return OF capital more so than return ON capital for that 30% (or whatever percentage dedicated to safety). Investing X% in fixed income, albeit basically dead money, provides an important sleep-at-night factor, ability to work through a few years of equity markets going down without having to sell equities at an inopportune time, overall cushion, and funds to redeploy into equities at better times. Gold, crypto or hedge fund performance in my view is too volatile to provide any functional equivalence to that.
I am sure that Chard is happy to take its oversized profits and they really dont care what happens to the units. Why would they.
Old ceo had many issues….. direct award contracts to a none profit where his wife was ceo and that none profit had a for profit subsidiary. IMO, further investigation is warranted.
Must be a special project. I had few water main upgrades in the past 3 years on typical sfh in the core, the highest cost was around $12k that including a $6k new meter to accommodate 1 1/4 pipeline.
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7134822
So they can only go after those who didn’t make their condo their primary residence. I wonder how many additional buyers technically followed the rules and lived in their unit for the required 2 years but own other properties.
and found my comment on VV -> https://vibrantvictoria.ca/forum/index.php?/topic/6200-downtown-victoria-vivid-at-the-yates-attainable-condos-market-commercial-20-storeys-built-completed-in-2021/page-8
MarkoJ
“Posted 15 February 2018 – 03:18 PM
The interesting thing is someone with $10 million net worth can qualify to buy in Vivid if their T4A shows below $150,000 per year. I find that to be a bit of an oversight.”
Remind me again what the land transfer costs are in Alberta?
Have to love the reactions on Reddit
“This is utterly disgusting. Being sued isn’t enough – they should become court-ordered sales. The agents and notaries involved in these sales should lose their license/be investigated. I hope that the courts/province make a painful example out of these %#* fraudsters.”
Not one person is asking the question why was networth/number of properties owned not a criteria put on by BC Housing.
The fact that some owners never lived in these condos has been well known for more than a year, see comment January 5th, 2023 -> https://vibrantvictoria.ca/forum/index.php?/topic/6200-downtown-victoria-vivid-at-the-yates-attainable-condos-market-commercial-20-storeys-built-completed-in-2021/page-30
What’s making this a news story more than a year later is the media pushing a narrative (networth of purchasers/properties owned) that wasn’t even a BC Housing criteria in the first place. Story really should how did BC Housing come up with such stupid criteria? What’s BC Housings explanation behind allowing someone with six properties to legally buy into a tax payer subsidized project. Just curious.
This isn’t the only issue with BC Housing on this project. Plenty of other ones including when I went to sell a unit at Vivid for a client after the two year covenant no one at BC Housing had a clue as to the process of discharging the covenant from title, etc. My client had to hire a lawyer to deal with BC Housing to discharge the covenant. Like how is that efficient? When the covenant was drafted they should have simply added a clause that the covenant automatically expires two years after occupancy, or similar.
Other issues I have at Vivid with BC Housing I won’t get in to.
but moral of the story is it is funny that people think government will somehow solve housing problems…..good luck with that. They couldn’t do Vivid right, they couldn’t do Haven right, really curious as to the stupidity they come up with on Douglas. I bet everyone at Chard just roles their eyes every time BC Housing comes up these programs, but they need the below market loans from BC Housing.
Yup, news is misinterpreting this. couple reporters asked me about this but I don’t have anything useful to say about it I should have sent them your way.
And you shouldn’t see any real deals in court ordered sales when your clients insist on bidding on properties that others find appealing too. I’ve seen some great deals for acreage on Salt Spring Island and homes that were trashed by the previous owners. But the majority of foreclosures will sell within a reasonable range of 2 to 5 percent of market value under normal marketing conditions.
There are exception such as in the first quarter of 2016 at the time of the wild fires in Fort McMurray. The court room was packed with Albertans bidding on trash housing.
Around that time I had a client that was an electrician and a property foreclosure came up that needed to be completely rewired. The wiring was completely Mickey Mouse. Basically you would turn on the porch light and the car would start.
She got a good deal because few people wanted to take a chance on the cost of electrical repairs.
Over the years I have been involved with several investor groups that want to buy housing but they all want to buy the same housing that everyone else wants to buy. To do some cosmetic lipstick work and then resell at a profit. I hate to be a pessimist – but that’s just not going to happen these days.
Watch the video @ 35 seconds -> https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/2314522691814
Point one is not true 🙂
I was in court with clients probably 5x per year back then and I haven’t been to court in years now.
I never saw any deals to be had in Victoria. I would always show up with my clients to court then they would see the other realtors/buyers and the price would end up getting bid up to market or sometimes beyond. Clearly remember a house in Central Saanich I thought was worth $515,000 back in 2012 ended up hitting $541,000 in court. My clients lost out but then found a better non-court ordered sale house for less.
I’ve never understood this public notion that there are deals to be had on court foreclosures, at least in Victoria. Inventory would have to hit 6,000-7,000 active listings for court deals.
During 2012 up until 2016, I was busy working with law firms that were obtaining court orders for sale. I’ve been to court where there is only one bidder to when the small court room seating is filled and people are lined up in the hallway wanting to make bids.
When the delinquency rate is near a half percent the courts are busy but the rate is still low enough not to be a concern to the market. A one percent delinquency rate would likely have an effect on the market place as there would be enough properties under duress circumstances to effect market prices. But unless we have a prolonged recession, I don’t think this is likely.
A boring, but technically correct, reason to invest in gold.
And now the real reason to invest in gold:
Full disclosure – my gold holdings are not yet large enough to support diving as a recommended activity.
Arrears rates, back to pre-pandemic level and trend is definitely steep but I’m not going to get too concerned about it until we exceed the levels we were at a decade ago (did anyone think arrears were high in 2012?)
Like I said, if you get to pick the stock market (in this case, the USA S&P 500), and the time period, you can get that result.
As I showed in my post below, for 20 years the results are different, where gold price growth exceeds all the stock markets except the USA , which is slightly higher, but probably equal when factoring in taxes paid on dividends.
In any event, nobody older (over age 50) is supposed to be invested 100% in stocks, so if you are invested 70% stocks, the question becomes what do with the other 30%. Most of my investments are stocks, but for the non-stock ones, there are other good options besides bonds or GICs, namely gold, crypto and hedge funds. If you run a long term chart of a Canadian bond fund (after tax) vs gold, you’ll see what I mean.
Gold is inversely correlated with stocks, so an ideal hedge to diversify your portfolio.
Gold vs Stocks with Dividends Reinvested.
Big in Toronto and Vancouver, never a thing to any extent in Victoria.
Gold vs Stocks over 50 years. Compounding makes a big difference over 50 years.
So, it would kind of kill off assignment sales?
Haven was totally different for my buyers, but equally as bad in terms of poor bureaucracy. Now there is a 10% mortgage you need to repay if you sell/rent, etc.
and I haven’t seen any details as to what Chard is doing with BC Housing on Douglas but you know Chard isn’t stupid.
I was just talking to another realtor a few minutes ago and I brought up an example of $600k and he said wouldn’t you only pay $1k on $600k and I am like no $2k on $600k….reason he thought $1k was on the first 200k you pay 1% but that is from $0 to $200,000, not $500,000 to $600,000.
lol…..why did they have to screw this up so bad.
I am losing my mind or do I not see a button/option for first time buyer?
I have a friend in City of Victoria who is fighting with city hall trying to get a STVR licence, he has a basement with 2 bedrooms but no kitchen it also has a fullsize fridge and laundry, no door on basement stairs to the rest of the home, there is a basement door. When he built it about 3 years ago the occupancy permit says that is was approved but it is not classified as a suite. He has received a licence the last 3 years but it has been a fight each year. it seems that the CoV is clamping down on issuing licences for accomodations that may be possible suites?
Also on the flipping tax, I heard from a solid source that it will apply from the date that the presale contract is signed. So someone who buys a presale, then 3 years later it completes and they sell it immediately should not have to pay the tax.
As mentioned, a source I trust and they heard it from the government, but it’s second hand info so I would verify this yourself if you are buying presales.
Good question. I think they are still doing these partnerships, is it a rule in any new ones?
Dad, here is a quote for asbestos removal and plumbing issues on an older 2,400 square feet home I looked at last month. The structure is solid. There is much needed to make the house safe and in good working order, though. The current condition affects getting home-owner’s insurance and financing.
-Remove asbestos wrapped pipes using wrap and cut techniques, leave ends accessible for tie-in of new
pipes. Approximately 200 lineal ft – moderate risk
-Remove approximately 5, 2×8 channels of plaster/lath to expose wrapped pipes leading to second
floor, and remove. Approx 75 lineal ft – high risk
-Remove presumed ACM plaster ceiling from the main floor (excluding sunroom), excluding cove
ceiling areas, to allow for wiring upgrade. Approximately 1350 sq ft – high risk
-Allow approximately 10, 12 inch square areas of plaster removal on the top floor to allow for fishing of
wire -glove bag techniques
Kitchen –
-Remove presumed ACM 12×16 & 8×6 areas in kitchen, nook, and stairway plus adhered subfloor layer
– high risk
Upper bathroom –
-Remove 6×8 presumed ACM sheet vinyl flooring plus adhered subfloor – modified-moderate risk
Seal all material in two layers of 6 mil poly and label as per WorkSafeBC regulations. HEPA filter
vacuum and wet wipe work zone with approved cleaning methods and spray with a water based
encapsulate which will glue down any remaining microscopic fibres and prevent any fibres from being
released.
Transport and dispose of the hazardous material according to Ministry of Environment regulations,
using a licensed TDG transporter.
Quote from HAZPRO was $44,000.
And a quote for plumbing upgrades
-Use Excavator to dig trench (up to 24″ in depth) for water line replacement
-Bed trench with sand to protect new waterline
-Core 1″ hole through concrete and patch with hydraulic cement
-Install new 1″ PEX pipe water line from city meter to home
-Install new pressure reducing valve, main shut off valve and expansion tank (as per
plumbing code)
-Backfill trench with native soil
Does not include:
-Landscaping
-Seeding
-Irrigation repair
-Jackhammering or concrete repairs
-New water line within home (anything under slab)
– Electrical locate (if required)
*1 year warranty on all FULL water service replacements unless otherwise stated.
Quote was $25,980 from Clear Choice Plumbing and Heating
The response from the gov’t on the PTT thing:
Hello Leo,
Thank you for your email. The new First Time Home Buyers’ Program qualifications apply to any transfer registered with the Land Title Office on or after April 1, 2024.
The new qualifications will provide a maximum exemption amount of $8,000. For example, if the fair market value is $835,000, you would pay an estimated property transfer tax of $6,700 ($14,700 total tax owing on transfer less $8,000 exemption amount). You can use the following link to calculate the total tax owing and calculate your estimated payable for your unique circumstance: https://forms2.gov.bc.ca/forms/content?id=EEE44ACAC0DB4212BB616D7BD233F2A6
Confirmed, any first time buyers with unconditional contracts completing in March if you can amend the completion date into April you would be saving the $8k (assuming you qualify and buying between 500-525k and 835-860k). Those buying under 500k doesn’t matter, you qualified under the previous setup as well.
Sorry, I quickly eyeballed the gold chart and meant to say the 40 and 10 year rate of return on gold is around 4% vs about 12% for S&P500.
Gold is just really a hedge against inflation.
Patrick, I raelly hope your not not on vacation doing research on this in the middle of the night?
Marko, when was the last simple explanation that you got from government?? There is less spin in a laundromat.
I know it isn’t a “big deal” but that vast majority of realtors/mortgage brokers/lawyers I chatted with after I figured out what was really going on were also fooled. Right now I have two first time buyers waiting on law firms to call them back re clarification as I suggested we try to negotiate with the seller to move the completion dates from end of March to beginning of April.
I love how when they brought in the foreign buyer tax and other non-sense they made it effective immediately on unconditional contracts, but they make this change to PTT and set it for April 1st so now all the buyers that went unconditional prior to the announcement and completing before April 1st are not saving $8,000 but those completing after April 1st are saving $8,000. It should have been made effective immediately and make a clear memo available for notaries/lawyers.
You would think if PTT exemption has been done a certain way for 30 years and you change the way it is structured you maybe mention that in the annoucement? I thought I was getting old and losing my mind but given you were fooled and the majority of people I’ve talked to it wasn’t explained properly.
I don’t understand how 1,000s of people can work at a ministry and roll something out without a simple explaination. It can be explained in less than a paragraph.
Problem is they didn’t even bother to make up that rule. Do you really think if they had a rule that you can’t own another property and made buyers sign a declaration at a lawyer’s office that they don’t own another property that these 13 people would have done so? It would have been down to 2 or so people at most. Why there was no such rule is a complete mystery. Not to mention in theory someone with 10 properties could have legally bought a place at Vivid under market value (assuming they lived in it), the optics of that are not good.
I’ve had more clients (legit buyers that qualify) buy at Haven (down the street, another Chard/BC Housing project) and just more BC Housing non-sense. They can’t do anything right imo.
I had someone approach me about a shady purchase (I knew their actual intent was to rent) at Vivd and certainly glad I turned that down….would not to want to be named in that article.
It could have been a great program thought. I had a tenant for 10 years in one of my units that I convinced to buy at Vivid as he qualified. He carried his stuff from my unit at 834 Johnson across the street to the Vivid. He did well on the purchase price, has been paying down his principal instead of paying me rent and I was able to increase the rent $500/month on my unit he vacated. It was a good win-win situation.
Well let’s test that… Canadian TSX/TSE composite stocks for 20 years? Gold is up +444% CAD over last 20 years as I posted in the chart below. That’s 8.84%/year for gold. Did the TSX “absolutely smoke” that ? Apparently not, since the TRI of TSX composite including dividends over 20 years was less than gold, at 7.8% / year. https://www.taxtips.ca/stocksandbonds/historical-investment-returns-stocks-bonds-tbills.htm And Japanese (6.3%), euro (6.0%) or emerg stocks (6.6%) were worse than that. S&P 500 (USA) slightly better at 9.4% (though factoring in tax payable on the US S&P dividends makes returns about the same as gold). And bonds way worse.
—-===
So for your “stocks smoked gold” statement to be true, it appears you would need to first choose the country for stocks and the time period.
Sure, but its trivial to include the question and state the requirement question “Is your net worth less then XXXXX. If not, you are not eligible”.
At that point, rich people would need to lie, which would stop a lot of people. For example, the rich people that got the subsidized condos were legally applying, and they may well have stopped the application by that single question.
It was the same nonsense with CERB, the government could have put a single requirement that you have to declare that you need the CERB money. That would have stopped a lot of people who just took CERB because someone told them the government was giving away the money and wanted people to take it.
Just add a question like this, and they would have saved billions, because lots of people are honest and wouldn’t have said yes to this…
X I declare that I need these CERB funds to pay my day-to-day bills, because of a loss of income from COVID-19
Short of holding actual cash in the mattress gold has been one of the poorest performing asset classes over a range of holding periods. Stocks have absolutely smoked gold over 10, 30, 50 year periods. Maybe it makes sense to hold a bit of gold for diversification purposes (I do) or because you like shiny things (also yes). But don’t delude yourself that it is a great long term investment.
Also 7.78 over that period = about 3.7% real return. Not bad, but that is also one of the kindest periods in history to gold prices.
I agree, though it is very tough to verify net worth. Seems like with our fancy beneficial ownership registry it should be trivial to make a rule that you can’t own another house, and then check it though.
The government needs to improve the “means test” they include with their giveaway programs.
Because Rich people can still legally qualify for:
—- electric car rebates (through their company, or via a family member)
—— affordable housing (as the example article from today showed)’
the solution is simple, add a net worth threshold that would disqualify people from these subsidies.
Because it’s news and that’s of public interest even if it’s not the basis of the lawsuits.
Not great but also don’t think it’s a big deal. Definitely fooled me on the exemption amount, I went back to correct the info to reflect the fact that the amount you actually don’t pay tax on and the PTT threshold are now diff. As you know you qualify for the exemption amount with a house under $835-$860k but you only save the PTT on the first $500k and pay it on the remainder.
The 50 year return on gold is 7.78%. Other periods are shown in my chart, I have no idea what your 2-4% refers to. It is way off.
If it is gold mining stocks, who cares – I’m talking about gold.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1061434/gold-other-assets-average-annual-returns-global/#:~:text=Between%20January%201971%20and%20December,in%202022%20was%200.4%20percent.
“ Between January 1971 and December 2022, gold had average annual returns of 7.78 percent,”
Patrick, try reading my message again. You love to cherry pick data.
https://goldprice.org/spot-gold.html
What period of time are you referring to? Looks good to me.
https://goldprice.org/
Patrick, I didnt realize you were also a gold bug. Gold and especially gold stocks have most likely been the worst performing asset class over the last 10 to 50 years and further back, with return of less then 2% and 4% over that time period. The smartest long term investor in the world, Warren Buffett refuses to buy gold.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/021615/does-warren-buffett-invest-gold-why-or-why-not.asp
Yes, but North America markets are open. Gold price at a record and moving higher.
LMAO, isn’t it 4:08am in Queensland? Go to sleep…
No, because being in negative amortization doesn’t mean the customer cannot meet their interest payment. It is a feature of the mortgage (a fixed payment), that lasts only to renewal, with a higher payment going forward. The customers aren’t missing any payments and are fulfilling all mortgage terms so their credit rating is unaffected.
The three banks that allow this (BMO, CIBC, TD) reported falls (improvements) of 20-25% in numbers of customers in this state.
Mortgage rates have been high for more than one year (since October 2022). That’s about 25% of mortgages already renewing at higher rates, and there haven’t been problems reported.
What are the types of issues that inspectors turn up on older homes? In both properties I’ve owned, there were issues not discoverable on a visual inspection of the property, and I suspect that is pretty typical. The inspections just turned up garden variety “concerns” related to the age of construction (e.g., asbestos tape on ductwork).
I also think that the bank of Mom and Dad are going to get tapped again to come up with money to buy down their kids’ mortgages at renewal time. If they don’t then the kids may have to sell the home and the parents may lose some of the money they originally invested.
We may even see some of the kids boomerang back into the parent’s home. This happened to my brother and his fiancée. My father absolutely detested my brother’s fiancée. One night he turned to me and said that he didn’t mind that my brother had to move back home, it’s just that he didn’t want him to bring his pet with him.
The bank of Mom and Dad is getting more active on what type of property they will bank roll. The parents are now more concerned as to what the kids are buying. And if the property has a lot of issues from the home inspection, as most older homes in Victoria do, then they are less likely to pony up several hundreds of thousands.
Yes but once upon a time if you weren’t paying down at least some of the principal, that was called delinquency. Now it’s called negative amortization.
Correct. The residential mortgage delinquency “rose” from 0.09% to 0.14%. That’s from 1/1100 to 1/700. For perspective, in greater Victoria (assuming 50K total mortgages), this would mean about 70 mortgages delinquent instead of 45. Thats 25 more delinquent mortgages. A typical big-6 bank like TD probably has 15 customers delinquent total in Greater Victoria.
Still tiny rates of delinquency – near zero.
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2024/03/05/2840204/0/en/Equifax-Canada-Report-Reveals-Increased-Financial-Strain-as-Credit-Delinquencies-Continue-to-Rise.html
“Mortgage delinquency rates over the last 12 months saw a 52.3 per cent increase, from 0.09 per cent to 0.14 per cent.”
People are buying and refinancing properties every day, in that way it will be spread out the effect over time. However, the low interest rates of the past caused peaks in the number of purchases and re-financing in the Spring of 2021 and summer of 2019 and they are now facing renewals at a higher interest rate on their 3 and 5 year terms this year.
So why is there multiple references in the news story to networth and people owning multiple properties which had nothing to do with the requirement?
Case and point HHVer posting link thought number of properties had something to do with qualification.
Just curious do you think the PPT threshold increase (not exemption amount) was well rolled out by government/media?
If it does happen then it will happen to most people at around the same time. No way to predict when and if that would happen as it is dependent on too many variables.
Not really. BC Housing is suing them because they never lived in the properties, which is a requirement.
Marko while I totally agree with you that government screws up housing, there are lot of things screwed even worse by government here. I think it is likely that you will continue to see a decrease in the standard of living in Canada.
First time home buyers are mostly fodder when it comes to mortgages that go upside down. But it can happen to anyone.
I don’t think we are there yet, as I would have seen an increase in developers/contractors, and real estate agents that are heavy into rental properties trying to pull out more equity to keep their businesses afloat.
Mostly it will be first time home owners but followed by those that most people think are very knowledgeable and active in real estate. The commonality is that they have put most of their eggs into one basket.
One percent would be high for mortgage delinquency. Saanich itself has 50,000 homes. Assuming that 50 percent have mortgages that would make 250 homes with mortgages in delinquency which is about the number of homes currently for sale in Saanich. In the last 30 days only 95 homes sold in Saanich . A one percent delinquency would be devastating relative to the number of listings and sales in our community.
Even one-half of one percent would be troubling as properties under duress circumstances to sell would be setting market prices. It doesn’t take much to rock the boat when you’re in a small boat like Victoria.
Yes, but the interesting part is where they are seeing delinquencies jump: age cohort and locations. It also seems to reflect the loss of 1st time buyers in the current market now that downpayment gifts have somewhat been withdrawn from parents that would borrow it against home equity and pass it on.
I’m not going to dispute that there are folks who don’t make great financial decisions, but keep in mind the messaging from the BoC was ‘long and low’. When I picked up my last mortgage, I budgeted for the payment to double over the span of the mortgage. Seemed reasonable (to me) at the time. Mtg payments did double (and then some) for those of us with variables, not to mention the cost of living bumped up a fair bit.
I don’t have any sympathy for those that went out and bought ‘toys’, but I suspect there’s a decent number of folks who saw big cost of living increases without any income increase. I would not be surprised to see a lot more distress out there in the next 12 months.
That is a poorly written story. I had buyers buy into this program/project and there was never any qualification regarding networth that had to be met. For example, if you owned three houses in the Uplands but had an income below the qualifying threshold and you actually moved into the condo you qualified fair and square. I brought these concerns up right away (not sure if HHV or VibrantVictoria).
You have to remember this program was put together and written by BC Housing (aka government workers…not their money, why would they care?).
The same organization that randomly introduced (without any evidence) and administers the owner-builder exam that prevents people in rural areas of BC from re-building their homes after they are destroyed in forest fires.
The same organization that paid $26 million dollar for a falling apart hotel on Douglas when Chard Development bought the adjacent site (the old Whitespot location) for $7.5 million at a later date in a market trending upwards.
Why do you think Chard partnered again with BC Housing on the Douglas project? https://www.victoriabuzz.com/2023/07/540-unit-housing-complex-to-replace-former-white-spot-on-douglas-street/ It is easy to make a “business” arrangement more favorable when the other party doesn’t care, it isn’t their money. Not to mention they don’t have any real life experience.
Love the comments from CEO of Chard “He spoke to the relationship his company created with BC Housing in order to put forth the mutually beneficial proposal for the endeavour.”
Why have I kept bringing up the owner-builder exam for the last 8 years? Because it is a reflection of the entire government which is a complete joke when it comes to housing.
I just had my spec tax crown liens removed from all my properties and it didn’t cost me a cent, but it certainly pulled resources from people working on the supply side of the equation.
As I’ve started saying for the last couple of years we are so screwed on housing, it isn’t solvable. If you can afford a SFH and that is something you want try to buy in the next 24 months because it is going to be something only attainable to the 1%ers sooner or later and I think it might be sooner.
Telling us the delinquency rate as a percentage increase might be dramatic but a percentage of all mortgages in default might provide a more complete picture. It is not like ten per cent of all mortgages are in default. I suspect it is a fraction of one percent.
https://globalnews.ca/news/10335730/ontario-b-c-mortgage-holders-increasingly-missed-payments-q4/
Well, I guess those that needed big gifts for downpayments probably didn’t develop the financial discipline to save and manage money or actually have the resources to purchase homes. In the end, it just corrects itself with these folks.
Documents could reveal whether Martel was running Ponzi scheme
https://www.timescolonist.com/business/documents-could-reveal-whether-martel-was-running-ponzi-scheme-8396277
How does this happen? Were there no checks to see if buyers owned other properties?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/affordable-home-housing-lawsuits-1.7131524
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-bc-ontario-mortgage-holders-increasingly-missed-payments-in-fourth/
It’s also interesting that VREB chose to mention the 50% increase in townhome sales relative to Feb last year, without also mentioning the 29% increase in listings. Which resulted in a sales to list ratio of 55% (vs 47% last Feb) — hardly earth-shattering.
Also not mentioned: duplexes fell from a sales to list ratio of 116% last Feb (19 listed, 22 sold) to 35% this Feb (31 listed, 11 sold).
It’s the first time I’ve bothered to look at their detailed stats. You really have to dig deeper to get to the “truth” eh?
Interesting development, wonder if it will pass? Doubt it because it is green intiative, but it will be interesting to see what response there is from the NDP
Quite simply, this is what failed housing policy looks like, but rest assured BC MLA Sonia Furstenau has a solution, vacancy control. Mrs. Furstenau has introduced a private members bill to amend the residential tenancy act in BC to enable vacancy control, a form of rent control that limits how much a landlord can increase the rent when one tenant moves out, and another moves in.
Max , the Strat with the Marshall is a great combo for hard rock with a lot of overdrive , u must be very noisy
Kudos to Castle. Just bought some superb fir 2x8s and 2x10s for my basement. The stuff is hard straight and beautiful. No idea if it is pricey but is far nicer than the generic white soft twisty wood (spruce?) from the big boxes.
That’s the thing, even If you are the owner you are a tenant with a bunch of overlords ruling down over you. That Is not ownership. I actually have a Marshall stack and Fender Stratocaster that I frequently play down In my garage, very loud without issue. The Wife and I like to host parties from time to time as well with music…You know, having a good time In your own dwelling.
Mere postings offer a cooperating commission. The vast majority of my mere postings offer a rate to the buyers’ agent commonly seen in the marketplace. Also, success rate on my mere postings has been equal to those of my full service listings and yet I’ve had a lot of situations in my career when I first met my clients by setting them up on a mere posting (successful sale resulted) in the last 14 years and when they loop back around to me again they go with full service for a subsequent sale.
Two of my full service current listings are such scenarios where does clients used my mere posting in the past (and I still offer the same mere posting).
Marko, I would say “mere postings” have decreased as it lowers the audience as buyers with agents will be discouraged from bidding on the home unless there is a commission paid.
In Croatia where there is no organized real estate system whatsoever the real estate agent profession is growing quickly at approximately 3% commissions (all on the listing portion as there is no cooperation with buyers’ agents). Essentially, people are paying agents 3% to market and sell their homes via the Croatian version of Craigslist/UsedVictoria/FB marketplace.
I think on the whole people are placing a decent amount of value on not having to deal directly with the other party in a transaction.
and then in BC there is so much over-regulation that it will makes more and more daunting to do private sales. For example, when the BC government introduced the recession period instead of excluding private deals, they didn’t.
Now they’ve complicated the PTT exemption when it really didn’t need to be complicated.
I’ve been hearing the demise of agents and commission free fall narrative since 2010 (the year the competition bureau forced CREA into allowing mere postings aka for sale by owners on MLS) and literally nothing has happened. Appetite for mere postings has decreased in the 14 years I’ve been offering them.
The real estate industry doesn’t want you to have information, check out house sigma for way more info available than whats avaiable from the traditional industy.
https://housesigma.com/
I can’t wait for the day when sellers won’t pay the buyers agents commission and commissions free fall with competition.
Is the inventory declining?
It’s a shame the VREB stats don’t contain details about buyers. Would be interesting to know the numbers of first time buyers vs move-up/down-sizers vs investors for each property class.
Vancouver average house prices still off about 10% from summer 2023
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.7133177
BNN- February Vancouver home sales up 14% Y/Y, prices up 4.5%.
Quebec government:
In other words, after the first flood your property will be worth very little. No comparison with earthquakes, perhaps some comparison with wildfire caused damage in some areas.
Having lived in a high rise, I second what caveat emptor says, and of course this applies to any inhabitant of the condo, including owners occupying a condo not just tenants. Multiple fines can help end that behavior.
Lack of inventory to the rescue again.
Might actually be easier to deal with this in a condo. Egregious noise like Max describes is going to affect multiple people in the building or the whole building. Multiple fines from Strata corp might convince the landlord to evict the problem tenant. Failing that, the strata corp can evict a tenant for “A repeated or continuing contravention of a reasonable and significant bylaw or rule”
https://www.cbc.ca/news/climate/quebec-desjardins-flooding-mortgage-1.7129986
Can’t imagine fire and earthquake can’t be far behind. Likely still have lenders willing to mortgage, just end up with fewer options and higher rates for risk.
Hi Marko
That is correct, the exemption only applies to the first $500,000 (essentially saving $8,000).
Same thing can be said about a SFH neighbor…
Hey Leo, can you look into this with your government contacts -> https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/taxes/property-taxes/property-transfer-tax/exemptions/first-time-home-buyers
“And the property must:
Only be used as your principal residence
Have a fair market value of $835,000 or less (effective April 1, 2024)
Be 0.5 hectares (1.24 acres) or smaller, and
Contain only residential improvements
If all of the above requirements are met, then the purchaser will be exempt from property transfer tax on the first $500,000 of the purchase price of the property.”
I must have missed the last point in all the news releases and I don’t remember seeing it on the website until today but it would seem if you are buying up to 835k you are only getting a partial exemption to 500k and then you pay 2% between 500k and 835k. 835k to 860k is a sliding scale on how much of that first 500k you save. In conclusion, if buying up to 835k you are saving $8,000 maximum, not up to $14,700!
Marshall stacks, Fender Strats, with a super huge attitude problem, belligerent…Not a care In the world, renting the condo unit right beside you. You can only call the police so many times before they just give up.
Fair enough…They wouldn’t let me In anyway.
Depends on your life, for single and old people who like to travel and are financially secure it makes less sense to own and live in a house instead of a nice condo/townhouse.
Condo ownership Is just a really bad Idea IMHO. For starters you have a bunch of landlords (strata council) that you have to pay every month (strata fees) on top of a very expensive mortgage obligation that requires home Insurance and In most cases life Insurance and of course property taxes… All of that for an apartment.
Its no wonder the condo trend Is flat.
Leo, in the sale price to assessed chart, do you transition to 2024 assessment values at some point, or are you just using whatever values the realtors happen to use in their individual listings?
Great article. That sales:assessment chart is (as usual) great at showing the trends in SFH prices. Remarkable how consistent it is month to month, unlike medians and averages that fluctuate. For example, condos have been exactly 99% for three months straight, seems obvious the overall condo trend is “flat”. Unlike SFH which have risen 5% in 3 months.
Leo: Is it possible to give us all sales over a TEN year historical range instead of the twenty year range. Twenty years ago there were simply a lot fewer housing units. I guess I am wondering if we are at the bottom of the ten year range at this point?
Then…
So Its a tie…Kind of.