Rent Control / Condo Conversion Laws - looking for advice, legal or otherwise

[MickMcGeough]

First this is not a thread about rent control so please don't derail. This is about using the rent control laws to sidestep the one-year condo conversion notice law.

I'm looking for advice from anyone who's got more experience with this than I (especially legal types).

I've been renting an apartment near downtown for about a year. The building was recently sold to a development company who followed the new trend in sidestepping condo conversion notice laws and simply jacked the rent to over $2000, effective in September. Having only been there a year, I was paying $1000/mo for rent already but several tenants are in the $700 range.

From the homeless guys looking for illegal work across the street to the regular prostitutes at the immediate corner to the decaying rodents in the garage, this is not what you'd call a nice place. Nobody in their right mind would pay $2000/mo for this place, so there's no question as to what the intention of the new owner is.

I recently read the following article where some tenants in Mission had the same situation. Under threat of a class action lawsuit, the new building owner returned the rent to the current amounts and gave the tenants the one-year notice required by law for a condo conversion.

http://communities.canada.com/calgar...after-all.aspx

The tenants were going to watch the progress of the building and if it were converted to condos within the year past the date of the rent increase notice, the author of the article suggested that the tenants would have a legit case against the owner. I know the one-year notice law is new so there's likely no legal precedent for this but does anyone have any idea if we would in fact have a case here?

If so, how would I get it started?

[fredr123]

Pretty sure there's a guy on CP who is an actual lawyer who does a lot of real estate work. He might know. I think his name had something to do with fish...

[ken0042]

I'm not sure if that's the same story or not, but Global did a bit about a place trying to jack the rates up. Maybe send an email to Tony Tighe and see if he has any suggestions.

Edit- they also mentioned there being a new office for people like you to go to get help:
http://alberta.ca/acn/200705/2142877...C09440B3E.html

[Cowboy89]

http://gov.ab.ca/acn/200705/213854E1...D47794A49.html

From the looks of this there's recourse if they up your rent without three months notice and then convert to a condo within a year after that. Therefore should this happen they would owe you legal remedies. Not sure if there is any teeth vis-a-vis rent gouging as an incentive to get everyone out before that one year.

[4X4]

Just out of curiosity, how many suites are in this building? I find it a little reckless for a redevelopment company to risk a lawsuit, when a much more logical course of action is to serve 1 year notice and get all the permits in place during that year. In this scenario, you are allowing your tenants ample time to find other housing (yeah, I'm a big softie), plus, in the event that you don't get your permits, you still have (some) tenants left.
And with proper advertizing, there's no reason why temporary housing can't be sold to companies that have employees come for short lengths of time for this or that.

Condo conversions have a relatively simple formula. As long as the parking is there and a couple other things (evading my memory right now), it's a 'likely' that you'll get your permits.

Of course, applying for permits, getting them, then trying to rush everyone out of the building is one way to keep the building full until the very last minute.

[MickMcGeough]

There are 14 suites in the building. As they are, they wouldn't fetch much, I expect that the redevelopment company plans either to level the building or do some SERIOUS renovations to it before they are ready for sale. There's an empty lot immediately beside this building that was also recently purchased so it stands to reason that they are planning on building something much bigger.

I would guess that they intend to renovate/build as soon as possible, which is why they want everyone out so quickly. They can wait for permits while the renovations are being done and could conceivably begin selling before the building would have even been vacated if they played nice and gave the one-year notice.

[MickMcGeough]

Also, thanks cowboy for the links, it got me reading more about the new Bill 34 legislation and it turned out that the landlord cannot actually increase my rent for awhile yet. The new legislation states:

Effective April 24, 2007, rents cannot be increased unless 365 days pass since the last rent increase or the start of the tenancy, whichever is later.

The landlady believes that this means that any rent increases after April 24, 2007 cannot be increased again for 365 days, but that the first rent increase isn't subject to this law. That is to say that my rent could have been increased March 1, 2007 and she could increase it again on August 1, 2007, but then she couldn't do it again until August 1, 2008. I think this is incorrect. It seems to me that after April 24, 2007, any rent increase is subject to this law and the increase cannot be effective until a year has passed since the last increase, even if the last increase was prior to April 24, 2007.

You made my day Cowboy! If I'm understanding that law correctly, you just saved me a lot of headache.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by MickMcGeough

Also, thanks cowboy for the links, it got me reading more about the new Bill 34 legislation and it turned out that the landlord cannot actually increase my rent for awhile yet. The new legislation states:

The landlady believes that this means that any rent increases after April 24, 2007 cannot be increased again for 365 days, but that the first rent increase isn't subject to this law. That is to say that my rent could have been increased March 1, 2007 and she could increase it again on August 1, 2007, but then she couldn't do it again until August 1, 2008. I think this is incorrect. It seems to me that after April 24, 2007, any rent increase is subject to this law and the increase cannot be effective until a year has passed since the last increase, even if the last increase was prior to April 24, 2007.

You made my day Cowboy! If I'm understanding that law correctly, you just saved me a lot of headache.

Not sure whether you are or not, but it always helps to read the source material and any changes made to it. From my non-legal background I'd agree with you. However, if you get shoved aside by the landlord after discussing this, probably the best course of action is to start rounding up other tenants in the building and seek counsel. What I do know about the law is that there is what happens in the court room and also what happens out of the court room. Any lawyer I've spoken to about any civil or contract law issues has said that both sides' least desireable outcome is to go to court. It's costly, takes time, can be very public for corporations wishing to maintain a good image, and also scares possible investors away from the project. Just the possibility of a legal challange might result in an out of court agreement that suits you better should it come to that. Good Luck!

[MickMcGeough]

Hmm... how would one send an email to Tony Tighe, I can't seem to find any contact info for him.

[ken0042]

Hmm, I know with CFCN they had a link to contact Lea Williams-Doherty (sp). I only suggested Tony because he already had a story in place, and might be looking for follow up.

Maybe send an email to the Global newsroom, and make the subject something like "Rent Control Question for Tony Tighe"
globalnews.calg@globaltv.com

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by MickMcGeough

You made my day Cowboy! If I'm understanding that law correctly, you just saved me a lot of headache.

You are understanding it correctly. I stay in a boardwalk apartment and this rule really helped me this year. My last rent increase was February 1, and they were going to raise it the mininum # of months required after that (3 months I think). However, before they were able to, this new rule came into effect and now they can't raise my Rent until February 1, 2008 . As it stands, because of this I will be paying about $300 less than new tenants signing a lease, and I'm month to month .

[photon]

Originally Posted by MickMcGeough

The landlady believes that this means that any rent increases after April 24, 2007 cannot be increased again for 365 days, but that the first rent increase isn't subject to this law. That is to say that my rent could have been increased March 1, 2007 and she could increase it again on August 1, 2007, but then she couldn't do it again until August 1, 2008. I think this is incorrect. It seems to me that after April 24, 2007, any rent increase is subject to this law and the increase cannot be effective until a year has passed since the last increase, even if the last increase was prior to April 24, 2007.

Nope, she's wrong:

http://www.servicealberta.gov.ab.ca/...ds_changes.cfm

The fines are pretty huge as well.

How much notice is required before landlords convert a rental unit to a condominium?
Periodic tenants have to be given a full year’s notice to end the tenancy and rent cannot be increased during the year. How much notice is required before landlords can end a periodic tenancy to undertake major renovations (that require the premises to be vacant)?
Periodic tenants have to be given a full year’s notice to end the tenancy and rent cannot be increased during the year.

[Tron_fdc]

On a related note, what happens at the end of a lease? If I rent my house to someone for a year, can I outright toss them after 12 months for no reason whatsoever?

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

On a related note, what happens at the end of a lease? If I rent my house to someone for a year, can I outright toss them after 12 months for no reason whatsoever?

You still need to give the proper advanced warning. You can't just kick them out at the end of a lease. Usually if there is no advanced knowledge of them moving out at the end of the lease, it will turn into a month-month situation automatically.

[photon]

Yeah, one month notice at the end of a fixed term lease should be given (by either party). And if you are going to increase rents at the end of the fixed term, still 3 months notice.