The Metro Vancouver Real Estate Thread

[Krissy]

Originally Posted by Vin

It's ok, Burnaby will attract more people to live there soon, plus the fact that by being debt free they can make the city even more liveable.

http://vancouversun.com/business/commerc...l-burnabys-coffers-to-tune-of-1-billion?
utm_term=Autofeed&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#link_time=1502954173

Is it me or does anybody else think Vin's bias is getting annoying?

[retro_orange]

Originally Posted by Krissy

Is it me or does anybody else think Vin's bias is getting annoying?

Yes, it's almost auto-generated.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Krissy

Is it me or does anybody else think Vin's bias is getting annoying?

Getting? I was banned for a month for arguing with him before he hit double digits in posts.

[whatnext]

More evidence on how dangerously reliant BC has become on shilling real estate:

Economic experts are raising concerns over the province's financial reliance on B.C.'s booming real estate market and the new government's promise to try and cool the market down.

The 2016/17 public accounts released earlier this week recorded a $2.7 billion surplus.

Real estate revenue accounted for a big part of that high number, largely due to a 32 per cent growth in the Property Transfer Tax revenue, which brought in roughly $2 billion in total revenue last fiscal year...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/real-estate-economy-1.4260288

[whatnext]

The costs of homeownership in Vancouver can total as much as 79 per cent of typical household income, according to the latest RBC Affordability Index – far greater than the 30 per cent maximum recommended by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.

Using the Index, Ratehub created a housing affordability map for major cities across Canada, and calculated the national average. The map was created by examining utilities, mortgage payments and property taxes in each major city to calculate the percentage of pre-tax income Canadians are spending on housing...

http://www.vancourier.com/news/housing-c...-cent-of-vancouverites-income-1.22118424

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Krissy

Is it me or does anybody else think Vin's bias is getting annoying?

Getting?

You must be new here.

He's about 15 years old and only posts news that confirms to his bias. It's incredibly tiresome and unproductive.

If there are stats that don't back up his preconceived biases they are discounted. Reminds me of a certain someone... He lives in a big white house, has ridiculous hair... can't quite remember his name tho.

[Vin]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Getting?

You must be new here.

He's about 15 years old and only posts news that confirms to his bias. It's incredibly tiresome and unproductive.

If there are stats that don't back up his preconceived biases they are discounted. Reminds me of a certain someone... He lives in a big white house, has ridiculous hair... can't quite remember his name tho.

Present the facts buddy. Counter what I have if you don't agree. Calling me names does not achieve anything here, does it? 15 year-old haha.

[LeftCoaster]

Are you older? If so you had me fooled.

Which facts would you like to refute?

Most of your comments are emotional anecdotes so please present a claim you feel strongly about and I will do my best to provide evidence to the contrary or admit I agree.

It's like a good ol fashioned Festivus airing of grievances!

Someone get the pole!

[Vin]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

Are you older? If so you had me fooled.

Which facts would you like to refute?

Most of your comments are emotional anecdotes so please present a claim you feel strongly about and I will do my best to provide evidence to the contrary or admit I agree.

It's like a good ol fashioned Festivus airing of grievances!

Someone get the pole!

Perhaps they are grievances, but they are based on fact-based gripes.

Re. No new downtown malls planned: I remember you claiming there wasn't a demand for retail and that street retail would do better for this city. But facts show it otherwise. PC seems to be all filled out while the street shops are languishing in many parts. You also doubted Brentwood would ever get lux stores. Let's see who would get this right in a year's time.

Restrictions of building tall towers in Vancouver: Burnaby is getting lots of developments due to their more liberal policies, enabling more housing and high density mixed development projects to be built while earning the city some good tax dollars that Vancouver is losing out.

So, which other things I've stated are biased and not based on facts but pure emotions?

Anyway, I believe this city needs to be shamed into improving itself.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Vin

Re. No new downtown malls planned: I remember you claiming there wasn't a demand for retail and that street retail would do better for this city. But facts show it otherwise. PC seems to be all filled out while the street shops are languishing in many parts.

Fact: There are currently 8 vacant suites in CF Pacific Centre. 4 of them have backfill plans which include retailers such as Fido. A mall bursting at the seams would not be backfilling retail space with a Fido if there were a healthy line up of retailers ready to take the space...

Any new mall development in this retail environment would have to drop their rates to uneconomical levels to entice retailers to take the space.

You also doubted Brentwood would ever get lux stores. Let's see who would get this right in a year's time.

I'll admit this one took me (and most of the real estate industry) by surprise. It remains to see which banners and in which form these retailers come to Brentwood but if and when it happens I will admit I was wrong.

With that said, if it does happen it's almost guaranteed to be a bought deal.

Restrictions of building tall towers in Vancouver: Burnaby is getting lots of developments due to their more liberal policies, enabling more housing and high density mixed development projects to be built while earning the city some good tax dollars that Vancouver is losing out.

Fact: Vancouver has substantially more development than Burnaby, both on a dollars invested metric and square footage under construction metric.

Vancouver 2016: $2.7b, 6,937 units
Burnaby 2016: $0.8b, 1,799 units

and just so you don't think it was a one year anomaly:

Vancouver 2015: $3.2b, 7,732 units
Burnaby 2015: $0.9b, 1,774 units

It's honestly not even close, and 2017 for Vancouver is tracking above last year month to month.

I encourage you to check the sources yourself, might change your tune (but I doubt it).

Vancouver:http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/statistics-on-construction-activity.aspx
Burnaby: https://www.burnaby.ca/City-Services/Building/Tabulation-Reports.html

With that said I do agree that the City of Vancouver could be more hospitable to developers, but it is more a matter of simplifying the rezoning/DP approval process, not some blanket loosening restrictions on building tall towers.

So, which other things I've stated are biased and not based on facts but pure emotions?

I dunno, hit me with some more of your rampant musings. This is fun.

[whatnext]

So, the BC Libs ill thought out first time homebuyers assistance (essentially a second mortgage) was used in 7% of all home sales in Metro in the first quarter, no doubt helping to push prices up still further, I wonder if the NDP will (sensibly) end this program?

https://betterdwelling.com/applications-for-bcs-down-payment-assistance-program-slows-down/

[Sheba]

Vancouver real estate developer faces lawsuits, extradition to U.S.

Mark John Chandler claimed “to be one of the biggest real estate developers in Canada” when he reached out to a New York money lender in 2011, according to court filings.

Now, the Vancouver developer faces the prospect of being shipped to the U.S. to face charges in an alleged “fraudulent scheme” involving Los Angeles real estate. The FBI alleges in court documents that Chandler may have used investors’ funds to “support his lifestyle.”

Closer to home, Chandler’s 92-unit latest Metro Vancouver condo development sits empty more than a year past its anticipated move-in date, mired in a complex tangle of legal disputes, including homebuyers alleging breach of trust, private lenders launching foreclosure actions, and a municipality seeking to recover more than three years’ worth of unpaid taxes.

Corporate records show Chandler is the director of the Newmark Group and several other companies named in a series of lawsuits and foreclosure involving the Newmark condo development in the Township of Langley called Murrayville House.

Though the legal disputes involve tens of millions of dollars (two creditors who have already obtained judgments against Chandler’s companies worth more than $12.5 million, according to legal filings), they may not be the most pressing item on Chandler’s plate this week: he’s to appear Friday in B.C. Supreme Court, where the U.S. seeks his extradition in the Los Angeles case dating to 2009, according to documents filed in court.

...

Last month, a lawsuit was filed on behalf of 34 individuals and B.C. companies each claiming to have bought strata lots last year in the Langley development. The notice of claim alleges each buyer entered into agreements of purchase and sale with numbered companies controlled by Mr. Chandler, paying deposits usually between $150,000 and $250,000 each, money that was to be held in trust. The claim alleges that, in breach of the agreements, Chandler’s numbered company “entered into contracts for purchase and sale for each of the strata lots with third parties.”

Last week, responses were filed on behalf of Chandler’s numbered companies, with one claiming “the true nature of the transactions between the plaintiffs and (the numbered company) was as loans. … Notwithstanding the terms of some of the documents signed between the plaintiffs and (the company), it was never intended that the plaintiffs would actually become owners of the units in question.”

The response also says, as of the date of its filing last Thursday, construction of the Langley project has been completed and the “units are becoming ready for sale,” adding “the Murrayville Project has suffered substantial cost overruns.”

...

Chandler’s past dealings with B.C. regulators include a 2006 order from B.C.’s then-superintendent of real estate, W. Alan Clark, ordering the developer to stop marketing units in several Vancouver condo projects, after Clark found the information before him raised “a serious concern and a likelihood that Chandler, acting on behalf of the developers, has sold one or more development units in the developers’ developments to more than one purchaser.”

...

The Township of Langley claims it is owed almost $300,000 in outstanding taxes on the Murrayville development, according to information provided by the municipality, with each of the 92 units to be individually put up for sale at a public auction later this month unless the taxes are paid. The delinquent taxes must be paid by certified cheque by Thursday at 4 p.m. or they will go to auction.

The following morning at 10 a.m., Chandler’s extradition hearing is scheduled in downtown Vancouver. Chandler is required by law to appear in person at Friday’s hearing where his defence lawyer is expected to argue against his extradition, said John Gibb-Carsley, a lawyer with the federal Justice Department, who is acting on behalf of the U.S. in the case.

[whatnext]

Poor little princess gets burned in attempt to scam her way out of foreign buyers tax:

A Hong Kong businesswoman is suing her ex-boyfriend over ownership of a property in Richmond, B.C., which she purchased but claims was put in his name in an apparent move to avoid paying the 15 per cent foreign buyers' tax.

In a notice of civil claim filed in B.C. Supreme Court, Jennie Wu is asking the court to name her as sole owner of the property as well as granting her exclusive possession.

Ex-boyfriend Johnny Chu is still living in the house, according to the suit.

Wu's claim says she paid the entire purchase price of the property without any contribution from Chu.

According to B.C. Assesement, the Langton Road property in question sold for $2,349,900 in January, 2017.

By putting Chu's name on the title instead of her own, Wu avoided paying a foreign buyers' tax of approximately $352,485...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-co...me-to-avoid-foreign-buyers-tax-1.4301071

[osirisboy]

How was she "scamming"? I would be tempted to do the same thing. 352,000 in extra tax is a huge amount of money

[Pinion]

...by not paying the tax she's obligated to pay as a foreign purchaser of multiple houses? That weak law is one of the few protections we have from the further destruction of our city.

She can obviously afford it but chose to commit fraud instead, and was too stupid to think about the consequences.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

How was she "scamming"? I would be tempted to do the same thing. 352,000 in extra tax is a huge amount of money

Uh, seriously? She wanted to buy property in Vancouver, she's not Canadian hence she is subject to the foreign buyers tax. To avoid or "scam" her way around it, she put said property in her boyfriend's name, who she claims didn't contribute any money to it. Now she's screwed. It's not her name on the deed no matter what she says.

I'm amazed she's stupid enough to expose herself as a fraudster, but maybe she has no real business dealings in Canada. I bet she is now on the BC gov't and CRA radar, but I'm sending both an email just in case.

[officedweller]

Similar to schemes where people put assets in their children's name, only to have the children's assets seized for being proceeds of crime (i.e. kid is a drug dealer).

[Cypherus]

This has been going on since the foreign buyers tax has been introduced - using family money from overseas to buy property in BC under the name of a permanent resident who is receiving the money (usually via bank draft hidden in the pocket when re-entering Canada, or EFT subject to the common $50,000 US restriction in China). Just the other day I watched a mid-50s Chinese women on the Quick Coach bus transfer money from her mainland China bank account, using her cell phone app, to her Canadian bank account. I am sure she was reporting only $10,000 a year in Canadian income to the CRA, but the CRA has taken notice of these situations and are clamping down on these people.

[Alex Mackinnon]

Originally Posted by osirisboy

How was she "scamming"? I would be tempted to do the same thing. 352,000 in extra tax is a huge amount of money

Well, now she's subject to the $2.346M stupid tax.

How wasn't she scamming? If I said here, let me buy you a house so I don't have to pay tax, and then sued you for posession; am I really buying you a house? Intent is pretty freaking obvious here.

I'd bet she'd also claim she has no income in Canada either, and not declare money coming in.

[Feathered Friend]

I went past the Second+Main sales centre at around 9:30am, and people were already lined up. This shot is at around 1pm; note the food truck in the background.