News   Jul 25, 2024
 734     0 
News   Jul 25, 2024
 660     0 
News   Jul 25, 2024
 504     0 

Beware if you're purchasing new to flip (Toronto Star)

BuildTO

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
242
Reaction score
1
Beware if you're purchasing new to flip


April 12, 2008
Bob Aaron
TORONTO STAR


A recently discovered policy of the Tarion Warranty Corp. could have an enormous impact on the thousands of buyers of new homes and condominiums who resell the properties without moving in.

The policy was brought to my attention by Vidas Augaitis, a colleague who practises real estate law in Collingwood.

In April 2005, two of his clients, whom I will call Deb and Chris, bought a new house in Wasaga Beach from Pinevalley Developments Corp. On closing, the buyers received a Certificate of Completion and Inspection and a warranty certificate from Tarion confirming that the house was enrolled under the warranty program.

When they closed the transaction with the builder, Deb and Chris intended to sell their existing home and move into the new one. For various reasons, they changed their minds and eventually decided to sell the new house. The resale closed on July 24, 2007.

In January of this year, Deb and Chris received a visit from a senior investigator with Tarion's enforcement department. He told them that they should have registered the house with Tarion when they resold the property, since he believed it had not been occupied during the period of their ownership. The Tarion representative pointed out that anyone who sells a new home in Ontario without registering it with Tarion is liable to a fine of up to $25,000 or a term of imprisonment of up to one year, or both.

Deb and Chris were told that they would not be charged under the warranty legislation if they registered the house with Tarion at a cost of $600. In addition, they might have to post a $10,000 performance bond.

It makes no difference to Tarion that the house had already been registered by Pinevalley and that the original warranty remains in place for seven years, even if the house changes owners. If a new house is not occupied between the first sale and the second, it remains a new house, and the seller must register – or re-register it.

Since this sounded rather bizarre, I checked with Tarion spokesperson Robert Mitchell, who confirmed that Tarion requires the house to be registered twice.

When the first buyer resells the home without moving in, Mitchell emailed me, "the home is still a new home – it has never been occupied. The moment (the first buyer) sells a previously unoccupied home they fall within the definition of "vendor" under the Act and they must be registered.

"The two registrations are helpful from a consumer protection perspective because the home has the benefits of all the warranties, including the delayed closing and deposit protection. Since it is (the original buyer) who will now be the one selling the home, taking deposits ... and setting up a closing date, it makes sense that they should have responsibility for those warranty obligations."

In other words, even though the one-, two- and seven-year Tarion defect warranties carry over from Pinevalley's enrolment of the house to all owners within the warranty periods, Tarion requires the second owners to be protected by a second warranty enrolment.

In response to Tarion's position, Augaitis, who represents the original buyers, told me that both parties to the second transaction were clear that this was a resale, with no expectation of, or need for, deposit or delayed closing protection.

The house has still not been registered a second time with Tarion. The warranty police are currently examining the gas bills to try to verify that the house had been occupied by a tradesman who lived in the house rent-free from November 2005 through April 2006 while he built a recreation room in the basement. If occupancy can be verified independently, then presumably the house is exempt from double registration.

The ramifications of this case extend far beyond one house in Wasaga Beach. In recent years, thousands of Toronto-area homes and condominiums have been "flipped" by buyers without being occupied. Is Tarion on a campaign to extract a double set of registration fees and performance bonds (or fines) from investors who buy and sell without moving in?

The logic of the warranty corporation's position in this matter completely escapes me.



Bob Aaron is a Toronto real estate lawyer whose Title Page column appears Saturdays. He can be reached at:
bob@aaron.ca
Website: aaron.ca
 
meh... move into the house for a few days or weeks or a month or something. Make sure to collect some evidence you were living there (ie a bill made out to your name at that address or something).

Then go ahead and flip if you want
 
Bob Aaron is a slumlord and a dweeb. His opinions are bias. Ignore them.

I have no evidence to the contrary, but if you can support your claim that his opinions are biased, I'd be interested to hear them. As a relatively new homeowner, I find his columns interesting and useful.

I've noticed that a number of our members have bought units with the intention to flip; the above article is relevant to them. If you think the article is in any way misleading, this thread is a perfect place to explain why.
 
Perhaps slightly more balanced than your first comment. :rolleyes:

Why would you call him a slumlord, unless you have actual evidence to back that up?

I read Aaron's column fairly regularly, and had the chance to hear him speak at a seminar about a year ago. He highlights legal issues in a way that most people can understand. As for his opinion, he is surely entitled to have one, isn't he? In this instance at least, I certainly agree with him.
 
They way I see it, if you're buying to flip you should be able to afford the $600 registration fee, and most likely the $10,000 bond. That's my two cents anyway
 
caveatemptor wrote:
Ever since I saw this guy in that CBC documentary on the condo market I smelled that something was off about him only to later learn that he was the head of some apartment landlord association. His agenda therefore takes precedence over honesty and that's just unfair to the public.

Have to say, I agree with caveatemptor hear. If Aaron is the guy I believe he is who was interviewed on the doc, he seems to take extreme measures to come across as creepy. He was interviewed with sunglasses on and wore a "come into my car little girl" 70's leather jacket. Forget that he was also the CBC "the sky is falling, all condo developers are evil, especially if you do ZERO research and expect to get your hand held" mouthpiece for the very skewed episode.

That said, I have no idea of his status as a landlord or if he's skewed (although columnists are, by their nature, skewed.) He's entitled to his opinion. I'm entitled to find him kinda creepy.
 
Ok - so far we've established that his physical appearance and dress might be unappealing.

The article brings up the possibility of a huge fine and/or imprisonment for real estate speculators. It is an issue of awareness, which is important for some of our forum members. No one has justified the initial response above, which was to ignore the advice in the article.


Redrocket: I agree that $600 is not much. The issue in the article, though, is that people aren't aware that they need to re-register in the first place.
 
I wonder if the same policy applies when reselling a new home before completion and closing of the new house. So if the original owners are yet to take posession of the house, but then resell it well before the occupancy date, does this policy still apply?
 
Ah, okay, I got my folks mixed up in the doc - sorry about that. Yes, I was thinking of the agent, not the lawyer. The lawyer I just found alarmist and attempting to get people riled up about common sense issues. There are a tonne of risks to buying pre-con, and if you talk to your lawyer they'll tell them to you. This guy was doing more than share the risks, he was trumpeting them for the scare factor. Just didn't seem very balanced.
 
I just got this notice from the Toronto Real Estate Board:


April 22, 2008 -- Tarion alerts REALTORS® to advise clients who buy new housing units and re-sell without first occupying them, that they have specific obligations under the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act.

Tarion also advises those who buy new housing units and re-sell without first occupying them are required to submit an Application for Registration as a ‘Vendor’ to Tarion Warranty Corporation, meeting specific terms and conditions.

They are responsible for the Deposit Protection, Delayed Closing and any material changes made after purchase from the builder. They are further required to provide Tarion with written confirmation that the builder will provide necessary warranty service or alternatively, specify how they will provide it.

In addition, Tarion points out that the warranty start date is the date of possession of the owner who occupies the unit. The new owner should be provided with the ‘Homeowner Information Package’ outlining the warranty coverage.


For more information visit www.tarion.com
 

Back
Top