Leaky Condo: $78K - $200K assessment (split from the Realtor 1 subforum)

[shermanator]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Would never buy a condo or a townhome, if you don't own the dirt it stands on you don't own a thing.

In my condo, I own a percentage of the building based on my square footage as it is only an 8 unit condo. I think it just depends on the condo building.

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

It's great to be able to get closer into the city, in a more desirable area, for a lower price, but when your 'home' value relies closely on upkeep you have no control over, and you're paying 1/3 of your mortgage payment in condo fees monthly, is the cost really worth it?

Personally I find that, unless you have a Property Management company manging your condo, condo fees are pretty reasonable. A large portion of these fees go towards utilities and home insurance. Again, it could just be my place.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by BurningYears

There is a thing you can do, get voted on to the condo board, then you are in control well you and 5 other people of the various ongoings in the building, where money should be allocated and who manages/fixes troubles.

Yeah, but the whole point of a condo is paying a bit of a premium to live "maintenance free" not to miss Flames games for condo board meetings.

[BurningYears]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

Yeah, but the whole point of a condo is paying a bit of a premium to live "maintenance free" not to miss Flames games for condo board meetings.

While the potential is there, you can always schedule them around the flames schedule if need be haha. I was choked when I was only able to see the first period of the SCF this year but PVR let me watch the rest when we were finished.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

The owners of a condo own the land in proportion to their overall interest. So if your unit has 1/20th of the unit factor in the building, you own 5% of the land. There is an argument to be made that 1/20th (or whatever) of a lot in the inner-city might be a better investment than 100% of a lot out in the burbs that was recently converted from farmland.

Might be, assuming you can find someone to buy it that doesn't read the strata board minutes properly and so doesn't realise what a shoddy peice of crap most condos are, they are built like cheap DVD players, just well enough not to break until the warrenty expires.

Also the condo market is primarily to younger buyers who want a shiny new place, therefore old condos, even well built ones lose value quickly (although ironically the only well built condos I ever saw were the ceder clad apartments they built in the 70's out here).

No I'd rather own my house, it may be a piece of crap house, but for reasons I will never understand, basic upkeep and maintenance is cheaper.

I can put a new roof on my house for 10 grand, my mates condo gets a tar a gravel reroof and they all get hit for 15 grand. Everything about condos in BC is a rip off, the price is stupid, the things badly built and even the repair costs are a rip.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I can put a new roof on my house for 10 grand, my mates condo gets a tar a gravel reroof and they all get hit for 15 grand. Everything about condos in BC is a rip off, the price is stupid, the things badly built and even the repair costs are a rip.

I have a condo here in Calgary, and the board is putting on a new roof, with the money being raised by special assessment. The cost is ~1500 per unit in a 30 unit building. 15 grand seems very high unless the roof had already leaked and caused significant damage.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Might be, assuming you can find someone to buy it that doesn't read the strata board minutes properly and so doesn't realise what a shoddy peice of crap most condos are, they are built like cheap DVD players, just well enough not to break until the warrenty expires.

Also the condo market is primarily to younger buyers who want a shiny new place, therefore old condos, even well built ones lose value quickly (although ironically the only well built condos I ever saw were the ceder clad apartments they built in the 70's out here).

No I'd rather own my house, it may be a piece of crap house, but for reasons I will never understand, basic upkeep and maintenance is cheaper.

I can put a new roof on my house for 10 grand, my mates condo gets a tar a gravel reroof and they all get hit for 15 grand. Everything about condos in BC is a rip off, the price is stupid, the things badly built and even the repair costs are a rip.

You're fortunate to own a house, but you're talking like both choices are the same price.
Being in Van, you should know as well as anyone that most people simply can't afford a house.
Good for you if you can, but if I wanted even the crappiest house in my neighborhood I'd be looking at close to $1 Million.
Heck, even East Van is getting very expensive for houses.

More so than "shiny new places" condos offer Vancouverites an option they can actually afford in areas they want to live. It's as simple as that.

Calgary is a different matter, but even then detached houses within inner city areas are getting very expensive.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

Actually, the builder of the Bella Vista condos is Prism Developments. They're still around and selling condos. Their website is here: http://www.prismdevelopments.com/con...umma-manor.htm This is their newest development, but if you click on "past developments" you get Bella Vista.

(Just in case someone is interested in buying one from them.)

Not sure they are the original builders. There is a video here:

http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/loc...ub=CalgaryHome

[Shades]

Originally Posted by chemgear

Not sure they are the original builders. There is a video here:

http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/loc...ub=CalgaryHome

The original builder was 7 Sevens, not Prism

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

You're fortunate to own a house, but you're talking like both choices are the same price.
Being in Van, you should know as well as anyone that most people simply can't afford a house.
Good for you if you can, but if I wanted even the crappiest house in my neighborhood I'd be looking at close to $1 Million.
Heck, even East Van is getting very expensive for houses.

More so than "shiny new places" condos offer Vancouverites an option they can actually afford in areas they want to live. It's as simple as that.

Calgary is a different matter, but even then detached houses within inner city areas are getting very expensive.

For the price of a condo in Kits if you have any sense you buy a house in Maple Ridge, which after you have paid down the mortgage you parly into a house in New West or Burnaby or East Van.

I am a child care worker and foster parent, not the highest paid gigs by any means, but by buying in the burbs and not pissing my money away on cars and holidays I have managed to buy a piece of crap house in East Van, now worth almost a million, and my ex wifes place in Pitt Meadows, worth far less than mine, even though it cost more to buy (being shiny and new).

I have always bought older cheap houses and paid them off as soon as I could, if it hadn't been for getting wiped out in the divorce 12 odd years ago I would have the mortgage paid and possibly be well into paying off a second place to rent.

[killer_carlson]

I;m a condo lawyer. I can't comment on this specific case, but what I can say generally is that over the last 6 months I have seen more large special assessments (cash calls) than in the last 3-4 years combined (or so it seems).


There are options outside of a special assessment though - borrowing is certainly an option, although the rates are not low. Also, I am aware that CMHC will step in for specific circumstances to assist in letting a person add the assessment to their mortgage, even if it puts the mortgage in excess of the current market value. (Very specific circumstances)

In these large, unexpected scenarios, borrowing would be an option for the owners to pursue. I'm surprised it wasn't discussed in the article.

[Shades]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I;m a condo lawyer. I can't comment on this specific case, but what I can say generally is that over the last 6 months I have seen more large special assessments (cash calls) than in the last 3-4 years combined (or so it seems).


There are options outside of a special assessment though - borrowing is certainly an option, although the rates are not low. Also, I am aware that CMHC will step in for specific circumstances to assist in letting a person add the assessment to their mortgage, even if it puts the mortgage in excess of the current market value. (Very specific circumstances)

In these large, unexpected scenarios, borrowing would be an option for the owners to pursue. I'm surprised it wasn't discussed in the article.

I'm not sure they would want to borrow $80,000 to $200,000 more to pay for the assessment especially if the units are only around $200,000 in the first place.

[darklord700]

POV condos maybe chastised on this board for being cheap but at least they don't have problems like this.

My point is don't buy from fly by night builders, buy from one who has at least completed 10 projects and will at least likely to be in business for sometime to come.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Shades

The original builder was 7 Sevens, not Prism

You'd think Prism would want to take it off their website then if they didn't build it, it's not like it's good publicity... Plus, they're using a derivative of the name (Bella Casa) for their project on 17 Ave SE. All of that would actually suggest they didn't know the place was bad, since otherwise they'd have sold off their units and never mentioned it again.

[Stay Golden]

http://www.calgarysun.com/2011/06/28...-by-repair-tab

Al Sajan, president of Seven Sevens, said the building was built to conform to all codes and standards, and said upon completion, the building passed all the required inspections.
“We had a clean bill of health, everything was approved.” he said.

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by fotze

He was fined $282,375 which represents approximately 75% of the tax evaded.

So he was fined 75% AND he had to pay the missing taxes as well?

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by bomber317

So he was fined 75% AND he had to pay the missing taxes as well?

Well, that's what they're supposed to do.

[bomber317]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Well, that's what they're supposed to do.

ok, just wasn't sure if he got away with just paying 75% of the taxes that he owed.

[Shazam]

Oh, not trying to be snide, CRA might have just gone with the 75% and left it at that. But they're pretty hardcore about getting GST.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by fotze

Calgary, Alberta, October 20, 2010… The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) announced today that Alnoor Sajan, the sole director of Seven Sevens Corporation, has pleaded guilty in Calgary Provincial Court to charges of evading the remittance of Goods and Services Tax (GST) for the period of 2002 to 2006. He was fined $282,375 which represents approximately 75% of the tax evaded.
Mr. Sajan began construction on a condo project in Calgary in 2002 and sold all of the units by April 2006. .

Sounds like a real winner

[Bigtime]

So that makes two crooks with the name Alnoor in Calgary, allegedly...