REVscene Automotive Forum - Vancouver's Real Estate Market

REVscene Automotive Forum (https://www.revscene.net/forums/)

- Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events (https://www.revscene.net/forums/vancouver-off-topic-current-events_50/)

- - Vancouver's Real Estate Market (https://www.revscene.net/forums/674709-vancouvers-real-estate-market.html)

Bit of a random question, but what if no paperwork was ever filed with a tenant?

My in-laws rent their basement suite. They have for many many years and never had the tenants sign any paperwork of any kind. The rent is cheap, and it’s a beautiful neighbourhood and clean property.

My father in laws health has quickly gone downhill over the last year. It is on the mend now, but I foresee my wife and I moving back to the area, or possibly in with them.

Does anyone have any idea how much of an issue it is going to be, to get the suite back?

Quote:

Originally Posted by hud 91gt (Post 8947339)

The rules of the Residential Tenancy Act would still apply, even if there is no written agreement. Based on your description, it's a month-to-month lease, and if your family wants to move into the suite, a two-month eviction notice would apply.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Great68 (Post 8947338)

Essentially what they're saying is that term vacate clauses aren't to be used as a tool for eviction of bad tenants. There are other mechanisms for that, whether they're easy or not is a separate issue.

Solutions and tools have to be effective and reasonable for people to use them. Otherwise, they will just look for alternatives to achieve the goals that they are trying to achieve. That is exactly how the end of a term lease has turned into a tool for landlords to evict tenants -- it's because all the other rules have gotten too stupid and blindly and unreasonably too much in favour of tenants.

Of course the government can enact rules (and laws) to do a lot of unreasonable things. But in this case, the consequences will be no private small time landlords would want to become landlords, and then the residential rental supply goes down. And then you just have to ask -- are the tenants really benefiting from this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by hud 91gt (Post 8947339)

Even if there is no paperwork being signed, the RTB would still consider a rental to be a legally binding rental contract since verbal contracts are still legally binding. The parties involved would just have to establish the fact that it is effectively a rental agreement. In your case, since the rental has been happening for many years, that would be extremely easy to establish.

In your case, I think the RTB is going to consider your arrangement to be a month-to-month thing, and the rental will be subjected to the same rules that any month-to-month rental is treated. That is to say, if your tenant doesn't want to leave, you're gonna have a heck of a difficult time trying to evict him, and much of it will become a matter of he-says-she-says, with the RTB almost always siding with the tenant.

Since your renter has been renting with you for an extended period of time, I suspect you guys would at least have a decent relationship, and that he would act at least somewhat reasonably. I'd talk to him and verbally prepare him for a move, encouraing him to look for a new place without specifying a hard deadline, and throw in some freebies as incentive for him to leave. If you agree on something -- like a rental termaination date or the number of rent-free months, get those down on paper and have both of your sign.

It's a bad time to be a landlord right now, and I wish you good luck in your dealings.

Any guesses on which building they're referring to?

Quote:

Engineer banned from working in B.C. after Surrey tower fails to meet building code

An engineer who has worked on Canadian embassies around the world has been banned from working in B.C. after an investigation found his designs for a condo tower in Surrey were not up to building code standards.

John Bryson finished his structural designs for the building in 2013. The provincial regulator launched an investigation into Bryson's work the following year, after someone filed a complaint, and found certain aspects of Bryson's work did not meet certain requirements of the B.C. Building Code used at the time — particularly with respect to wind and seismic design.

The building has been completed and occupied, but neither the regulator nor the City of Surrey is making public which of the city's condo buildings is the one in question, saying only it is a "highrise residential tower."

Neither body has expressed any immediate fears that the building is unsafe. On Tuesday, the city said in a statement that there is "no information of any present public safety concerns," but added it will now be working with the strata corporation to determine whether there are any safety issues with the tower.

The city, citing confidentiality concerns, declined to provide a reason for withholding the address.

Bryson, whose name was on the door at his own Vancouver-based firm, resigned as a registered engineer on April 1 after signing a notice admitting to unprofessional conduct. The regulator, Engineers and Geoscientists B.C., also ordered him to pay $240,000 in penalties and costs. Bryson did not respond to request for comment.

"This is a rare but very serious offence," Ann English, CEO of EGBC, said in a disciplinary notice posted to the regulator's website. "The public deserves to have confidence that their homes are being designed to the current standard, and it's a serious matter when that trust is betrayed."

At the time Bryson was working on the Surrey tower, the 2006 B.C. Building Code was in effect, but the investigation found parts of his plan drew from a newer, national code instead.

A consent order detailing the case said some of the national guidelines were stricter than B.C.'s building code and some were looser, but it did not go into further detail. Investigators also found that the improper guidelines were used to design only certain parts of the building, not the entire structure.

The consent order also said some parts of Bryson's design were incomplete and certain mandatory calculations weren't done at all.

As for whether the building is structurally sound, the regulator's investigation only looked at whether the building was designed to the code that was current at the time. It's now up to the city and the strata corporation to determine whether the tower is safe.

In a statement, the city said it is "legally obligated" to rely on design professionals to be honest about abiding by building codes when they submit their paperwork.

"The city relies on letters of assurance provided by the professionals who designed the building, such as architects and engineers, which confirm the building had been designed and constructed according to the B.C. Building Code," said an emailed statement from Rémi Dubé, who manages the building division at the city's planning and development department.

"In this situation, where it was determined at a later time that the building was not built to the applicable code at the time, the city will be following up with the Strata Corporation to determine if there are any safety issues that would impact occupancy."

The regulator fined Bryson the maximum allowed: $25,000. He has also been ordered to pay $215,000 to cover the cost of the regulator's five-year investigation.

An online biography posted by his firm, Bryson Markulin Zickmantel (BMZ), said Bryson had more than 45 years of experience as a structural engineer. It said he worked on more than 200 highrise residential buildings across B.C., Mexico and the United States.

The site said Bryson also worked on more than 80 seismic upgrading projects and once made seismic assessments for Canadian embassies in New Delhi, Seoul and Tokyo.

There is no suggestion in the consent order that there are any issues with Bryson's other work.

^^ nope I wonder what will happen to the people who purchase it? Will they be also to sue the developers and get their money back and then some? Coz the market went up a lot higher than when they purchase it during pre sale? Will they torn down the building and rebuild it?Also who wants to rent/buy that apartment now?

Not surprised at all. I remember seeing a building near SMH that was using light gauge interior framing on exterior walls. Now was it corrected after I seen it? Dont know but I do know that it cant fly not only for structural reasons but also weathering issues and no way our engineer would allow anything like that and hes basically in house.

Point is happens more than you think this guy just got caught.a

Quote:

Originally Posted by Presto (Post 8947347)

Any guesses on which building they're referring to?

Ultra

Quote:

Originally Posted by Traum (Post 8947341)

I get it, I get both sides, I'm neutral. I rented for 5 years so I can relate to their side, but I own my own home so I can relate to the property rights aspect. But, I know that for every shitty tenant out there is an equally shitty landlord.

Like this Gem:http://www3.telus.net/bryster/pqh5vf5qsax21.jpg

I will agree though that the current NDP government seems to have enacted policies that more heavily favour the tenants. They have definately picked their side.

^^ Let's hope people don't get stuck with shitty tenants.
Honestly though I think if the locations is good rent isn't going to go down much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Great68 (Post 8947377)

Spoiler!

Why so much trouble when weather worm.
Much funny, very foreigner.

PogChamp

An article from 2008, lol.

https://i.imgur.com/gJ1esGy.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by twitchyzero (Post 8947386)

slumlords' days are numbered?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...ters-1.5128773

yup! im getting the FUCK OUT. Tired of dealing with asshole renters, tired of strata fees and special levy's that magically pop up whenever the strata retards decide to buy a new painting for the common space walls.

https://www.rew.ca/properties/R23673...t-vancouver-bc

anyone wanna buy our rental property!?!?!? ME SELL YOU CHEAPER THAN 1 MILLION. Wife did a good job staging the place for sure. I did the painting!!! if you have any beef with the paint, you can kiss my ass.

:yuno::yuno:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Badhobz (Post 8947457)

Not only that, but i'm noticing rents are trending lower. I've decided to sell my condo instead of renting it out too.

im surprised, we had an open house yesterday and already got an offer. i thought it would take a million years in this market.

Desirable places in desirable neighbourhoods will always have demand. Just people paying 600k for some shoebox on top of a mall in the burbs should be slowing down.

now if i can only sell my Richmond piece of shit and then move into high point Langley or something similar to that, ill be good to go till I expire.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Badhobz (Post 8947626)

im surprised, we had an open house yesterday and already got an offer. i thought it would take a million years in this market.

That’s great. Hopefully the offer was good haha

Quote:

Originally Posted by Badhobz (Post 8947626)

im surprised, we had an open house yesterday and already got an offer. i thought it would take a million years in this market.

As Westopher said. Only difference is, 2 years ago, you'd have 6 offers, all over asking and your agent would tell them to come back with their best offer, then you'd pick which one was highest and cleanest.

The money is still there, buyers just have more leverage now.

I'm sooooo grateful we got out when we did. The poorly kept and overpriced units in our complex are still on the market and dropping price like crazy. We went pretty aggressive with our pricing and staged well. Some of the neighbors thought we left money on the table. We were pretty much the last ones out, with a clean, reasonable offer. One guy over-renovated, took too long to get his place listed and is now, losing his shirt.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fliptuner (Post 8947632)

There have been 2 units on our floor that have been on the market for months now. I actually think one of the units started the process of listing his place last August and it still hasn't sold. He periodically puts it up for sale and will take it down after a few weeks because he's either not getting good offers or isn't getting any offers at all.

There's another family that has been trying to sell their 3 bedroom unit since December and haven't sold yet, either. Open houses every week and they get a fair amount of people that show up to them but it's still unsold.

^^ what area? I guess because 3 bed rooms are pricier? I've been thinking about getting a 3 bed room apartment vs town house right now. I'm not sure if it's a better idea but you don't have to deal with wasted space like the stairs and as my parents get older they don't have to climb that many?

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDMDreams (Post 8947642)

East Van (Grandview-Woodlands area)

I remember reading how some people in this thread have said that stairs become a bit of a hassle in a townhome, especially if you have older family living with you. The constant use of stairs does add stress on joints, and that's a consideration that's often overlooked.

Just to give a bit of a comparison in pricing

Friend of mine is currently renting in the Alvar right off the Burrard St. Bridge and he's paying $2000/month rent. https://www.realtor.ca/real-estate/2...nue-vancouver?

The only difference in his unit is he's a few floors higher and doesn't have a fireplace, but the layout is the same. He chose to rent there cause him and his gf both work downtown, but they've decided to move out to New West because for the same price, they're getting a 15xx sq ft 2 floor townhome. The Alvar condo is ~15 years old, and the townhome is about 18 years old. Not much of a difference in age, so they decided to go with the bigger space. Obviously commuting will be much longer, but it's something they were willing to sacrifice in order to have a bigger place.

This was basically a long winded way of saying it depends on your priorities and what is most important to you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacemanrick (Post 8946854)

Here is a perfect example of rental income cash flow analysis for an owner not matching the current price of a property. This 1,440 apartment in Coal Harbor at the Cascina on the 22nd floor is currently available to be rented out out at only $5,000 per month. The same 1,440 square foot apartment is for sale on a lower floor (15th floor) for $2,888,888 and is assessed at $2,935,000!

The $5,000 monthly rental income would only cover the mortgage payment on a $1,000,000 mortgage. What about the other $2,000,000 required to buy the property? What about the strata fees that are a whopping $1,008 per month? What about the $600 in property tax per month? Take out the rampant speculation, foreign money being dumped here, and money laundering ...then either rental income has to go up a lot or the price has to come down on the property.

https://vancouver.craigslist.org/van...850923798.html

I have been following another fully furnished 1,440 square foot condo for rent at the Cascina in Coal Harbor. Last week they were asking $4,500 per month rent and the monthly rent has now just been lowered to $4,200 per month.

These rental numbers make absolutely no sense and are bonkers for renting a $3,000,000 property. If my kids were older and out of the house I would sign a 1 year lease on this property in a heart beat. Why would anyone pay $3,000,000 (or even $2,000,000) for this property + pay $1,000 monthly maintenance + $600 monthly property tax when they could rent it furnished for $4,200 per month???

https://vancouver.craigslist.org/van...887576642.html

just going off by memory but i remember rent took a long time to catch up in price from the shortage

now that things are slipping a bit, i'm surprised how quickly rentals have supposedly caught on

Well what do you know? NDP actually fixed the rental crisis!