You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
First thing to consider, you can't kick out tenants just so that you can increase rent. If you do that, you either have to keep the unit empty for a year before listing it again or you need to work out a compensation with your tenants.
Now regarding what I'd do, I always ask myself about what kind of cashflow or ROI can I get investing in anything. Thus, what kind of cashflow is your condo generating? If it's closed to 0 or even negative, then, sell it and move your money elsewhere.
Canadian bond yields a tad over 3% as of today. That should serve as a guideline. If you can't generate at least 3%, look somewhere else. Because Canadian bond is pretty much the lowest risk product on the market. And if you have to take any risk and do < or = to bond, it makes no sense.
Canadian RE is in its relative peak. Everything else staying equal, there isn't much room to move up. The forecast I am getting from most market observers are predicting a 15-20% correction before whatever policy Carney cooks up would come into effect.
Some have mentioned that the problem is the price, I don't personally agree to that. I still believe it's a question of supply rather than anything else. Remember, real price of anything is usually dictated by supply/demand. Now we have more supply but demand is relatively flat, and therefore price is going to drop.
Stock market, I think we are on the verge of another huge industrial revolution. This time is all about AI and robotics. It's going to propel our economy in scales that even the invention of steam engine and internet pales to come even close. And yes, I do believe it's within the next 2-5yrs time. The question becomes, do you have time to kinda park that money in the stock market and forget about it?
Investment is about giving resources and TIME to allow opportunity to pan out. Conventional metrics such as PE or whatever is really only a good indicator for companies that are in a stable market without much ability to break out of its current form.
With that explained, now I'd suggest 2 things:
1. RE - If you believe in it and makes you sleep better, check your cashflow. If condo is no good, take it out and look for opportunities. During the 2008 RE crash, my family basically went on a shopping spree. We offered 30-50% of asking price (I shit you not) and cash deal. Ended up picking up a few properties at ~40% of market value (in our own estimate). Now, I don't think our RE market is this desperate right now. Thus, just research inside out of any particular area you like. So much so that if I ask you what rent can be had or what's the average price psqf, you can give me the answer without thinking. Then if a good deal comes along, you can grab it before anyone else.
2. Stock - If you like this better and want the inherited benefit of it (it's highly liquid and the sky is the limit), find companies that suit you... I like companies like TSLA, MSFT, NVDA and TSMC. I might be biased as I have position in all of them, but they are companies that I can sleep on without ever checking their stock price. If it's a company that you need to constantly look at, don't do it. It's not good for your brain. And even though many of these don't really pay any significant dividend, you can use things like the wheel strategy to kind squeeze money out of it. I employ them at a very low risk level and only sell options and never buy. I average about 8% yield and that pays for the food to our table and my mortgage.
Again, not an investment advise, but I alway focus on cashflow on whatever opportunity when it comes to money. It makes no sense to hold on to something and wish that it goes up or down. That's speculating, not investing.
The process for me selling this condo started with the fact we had a tenant under market rates ( she's now given me notice to leave at the end of this month). We need some cash to do some projects in our house and we were weighing the idea of refinancing/Heloc vs selling. In my uneducated opinion I didnt see the upside of the Condo market over the next 3-5 years being as high as the equity market.
We will be left with a chunk of money that we could buy property or invest in equities etc. Leaning towards equities as my investor ( i don't do this by myself anymore as I end up watching the damn stocks all day and really don't know what I am doing).
That being said I'd be interested in buying a second house instead of another condo but it feels like the price is out of reach in the Lower mainland. I haven't really spent time looking other places ( other than some vacation rental spots like Osoyoos etc but those arent strictly investments more for family usage plus defer costs by renting out. ). The idea of going out of market to purchase ( Calgary ? Saskatchewan? US? ) seems a bit far fetched for what i am able to manage in my day to day. But maybe its easy , I don't really know. My Advisor suggesting if I want to still be in the real estate market that I look at REITS etc .
Anyway we accepted the offer which was at assessed but subject to financing so we will see if that goes thrrough .
@rymack Are you going to take a loss on the condo if you sell? A lot of people are concerned about taking a loss on real estate, but it's just like any investment, sometimes they just don't work out. Taking a loss and moving the capital to another investment is common.
I can't imagine anyone with real estate bought in the last five years is positive cash flow, unless you put a huge down payment, which wouldn't make sense for an investment property. I would say if your real estate is cash flowing $0, I would for sure keep that. At least all your expenses are covered. Even if you're a couple hundred negative a month, I could argue it's still worth keeping.
The important thing is to have a plan for the capital if you sell. If you just sit on cash, I would rather just keep the real estate as long as your cash flow can support the monthly loss. If you don't have real estate then your only real option is the stock market. How comfortable are you with the stock market?
For the majority of equity investors I would suggest ETF's only. Buying individual stocks is a losing battle on average. TSLA for example can swing 40%, not for the faint of heart (even though I'm a long term believer).
Not taking a loss at all. I bought this in 2010 lived in for a few years and then when my wife and I got together we bought our first house around 2013. A bit disappointed the market dropped but it is what it is
Where we really screwed up in hindsight is when we sold our first house and moved to our second in 2015 was that we didn't sell the condo and keep both houses. I considered it but we were about 25k short to make it comfortable.
I had to transfer money from some of my accounts into my chequing. Banks must have a flag in their system that notifies them when someone's chequing is over $20k because the next day we got a call from the bank: "We were just wondering if we could talk to you about investment plans?".
I think my stupid bank wouldn't even let me transfer anything more than $20k in a day / a single transaction. The one time when I needed to do that, I needed to call in and talk to an agent, and get the agent to do the transfer for me.
Obviously, they also asked what the transfer was for.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by westopher
The whole world has gone down a road no one can recover from, and it's nothing to do with governments, it's because so much of the general public is so fucking stupid.
RS.net, where our google ads make absolutely no sense!
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: vancouver
Posts: 920
Thanked 319 Times in 174 Posts
Failed 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eff-1
Bridge financing comes with ridiculously high fees. I'd avoid at all costs if you can.
We had a similar situation last year. Bought our new place before selling our condo. Coincidentially, our condo hit the market in May 2024 with possession of our new house in September, giving us the summer to find a buyer.
My take is this: Figure out what the absolute minimum price you need to sell your condo to make the new purchase agreable. Once you know your bottom line number, take the first offer you get that is above that amount.
You'll always ask yourself later if you could have got more, but you'll never regret taking an offer that is above your minimum. The sooner you get peace of mind that your condo is sold, and you can focus on the excitement of moving into your new place, the better.
The first offer we received was a total lowball and so we didn't entertain it, but the second offer we received was in our acceptable range so we took it. Could we have gotten more if we waited? Maybe, but we don't have any regrets because we avoided the risk of waiting it out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westopher
Good advice. Greed and the wouldofs couldofs can really end up putting you in a shitty spot and is the mentality where the "investment" part of homeownership starts to outweigh the fact you need to live somewhere, and it's going to be a hell of a lot more beneficial to your quality of life to enjoy it than it is to squeeze and extra 20-30 or even 100k would. Don't get me wrong, you need to be able to afford it, and afford to live, but you need to have reasonable expectations and not be motivated by the investment side of it. If it's your home, you aren't an investor. Lifestyle needs to be put above profits.
We negotiated to asking price from the first offer, and also negotiated payment date being 2 days before possession date, so we had EVERYTHING in order to move over 2 days and already have the money in our account on the day we needed to pay for the new place. That was where our realtor was invaluable. No dicking around with storage, or bringing mortgage or anything, which was well worth the extra 10k or whatever we maybe could have squeezed.
Yep that's exactly what our plan is. We can afford the new place even if we fire sale our current home for significantly under market value. Got an open house this weekend so fingers crossed we get an offer we can pounce on!
We ran the numbers with our mortgage broker thanks to the suggestion from EvoFire and in the worst case scenario where selling doesn't make sense, we would be able to afford both places if we rent the first place out.
I considered that but having no experience with renting below market, I wondered if the lease rules are almost militaristic in their expectations. I'm not worried about my end, more worried about finding the right person who wouldn't narc me out
This is the website for the rentals. If you click on Floor Plans > Midrise, it'll show you the market rental prices.
It also lists the sq/ft but with so many Letters, I have no idea which group I would've been designated to.
Also this is a partnership between Anthem & Hollyburn so take from that what you will. I wonder if below-market rentals are exempt from the 3% rental increase (meaning higher % YOY).
Yep that's exactly what our plan is. We can afford the new place even if we fire sale our current home for significantly under market value. Got an open house this weekend so fingers crossed we get an offer we can pounce on!
We ran the numbers with our mortgage broker thanks to the suggestion from EvoFire and in the worst case scenario where selling doesn't make sense, we would be able to afford both places if we rent the first place out.
To give you a bit more perspective on the whole mortgage thing.
We took the keys at our new house before we closed on the old one. We did have an accepted offer though. Our mortgage broker managed to get a larger than required mortgage for the new house at a few basis points higher than the lowest he can get, but it covered the whole amount we needed. Once we've closed out the old place we refinanced the whole thing and got market rate for the house.
There's quite a few ways to play the game without ending up with a 10% bridge loan over 3 months.
Well, purchase offer accepted on a home in Marpole. Despite the talk of the market slump the area has been very competitive for anything decent, so we're relieved.
The slump was only for garbage, less desirable areas.
Detached is hot unless you're asking $2M for a tear-down
Somebody's not payin' an arm and a leg for property taxes this year
Spoiler!
Quote:
As heavy rains pounded the Fraser Valley and other parts of B.C. in November 2021, Chris Rampersad drove away from his home in the dark at 2:45 a.m.
When the trucker returned to his Chilliwack Lake Road home about 3 p.m. after a long day of work, he found there had been a small landslide that stopped about five metres short of his house.
Dirt, trees and other debris had come down a steep slope above his home. While there was some mud and water at the back of his house, there was no major damage.
Rampersad was relieved.
He believed he had got lucky.
But things got worse from there.
The next day, the RCMP showed up and told him he had to evacuate because of the potential of a massive landslide.
Less than a year later, Rampersad was called into a meeting at city hall in Chilliwack, where an array of more than a dozen officials, including from the province and the Fraser Valley Regional District, told him that geotechnical reports of the landslide risk showed his home was no longer safe to live in and there was no way to fix the problem.
In 2024, he found out the province had assessed his property’s value at $2: $1 for the land and $1 for the home. The year before, his property had been assessed at $780,000.
Then provincial officials told Rampersad there was not going to be any financial help.
Tara Richards, the deputy minister of emergency management and climate readiness, wrote him in 2024: “I know this is not the outcome that you had been hoping for and that this may be very difficult news to receive.”
He was advised to move from the property if he had not done so already.
Similar news was delivered to five other property owners in the Chilliwack River valley who also faced increased landslide risks as a result of the torrential rains in 2021, often called atmospheric rivers, that caused billions of dollars of damages across B.C. and resulted in thousands of people fleeing their homes.
During the more than 2½ years after the slide, Rampersad said he thought the government was working on a solution, determining whether it would buy out his and other properties at assessed or market value.
In 2023, George Heyman, who was then environment minister in the NDP government, told reporters he was aware of the six property owners and he was in discussions with local government officials and that he and Bowinn Ma, then the emergency management minister, would be having more talks with their colleagues.
Said Rampersad: “I never thought the government would provide no help.”
He says the B.C. government never provided a reason for rejecting financial aid or a buyout of their properties.
This month provincial officials told Postmedia the reason the six property owners did not receive assistance was because buildings must sustain damage to be eligible for the province’s disaster assistance program.
This despite hundreds of millions of federal dollars that flowed to the province to help offset the cost of damage to homes and the other costs borne by B.C. residents hit by the deadly rainstorms in 2021. The federal government has estimated its share of the storm damage will be $3.4 billion.
The government’s disaster financial assistance program “is unable to provide compensation for damage or erosion of land,” the Emergency Management Ministry said in a written statement sent by public affairs officer Lee Toop.
The province, under David Eby’s NDP government, did not respond to Postmedia’s questions about why it does not have a provincial buyout program. Other provinces have bought homes at risk from floods and slides, including in Alberta, Quebec, New Brunswick and Newfoundland.
In a written response, the Emergency Management Ministry said buyouts are the responsibility of municipal governments.
Rampersad and the other five property owners are in the Fraser Valley Regional District, where officials pointed the finger at the province, telling Postmedia any questions on buyouts should be directed to the B.C. government.
In a short written response, Jennifer Kinneman, the chief administrative officer for the regional district, called buyouts a “provincial decision.”
Experts in natural hazards risks say the B.C. government likely won’t consider a buyout in this case because it is trying to avoid creating a precedent, which might put it on the hook for more buyouts as landslide risks increase because of climate change and as risks become better understood for existing properties.
Glenn McGillivray, managing director of the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction and an adjunct professor of disaster and emergency management at York University in Toronto, says it is a major consideration in B.C. because there is so much terrain susceptible to landslides and hazards like debris flows along steep slopes, ravines and creeks.
Concerns about landslide and debris flow risks were reignited five months ago when a mudslide swept through a home in Lions Bay along the Sea to Sky Highway corridor, killing two people and damaging two other homes.
Just two months before that, a woman was killed in Coquitlam when her home in a forested area was swept away by a debris flow triggered by heavy rain.
“They just might open that door that, you know, that they wish they had never opened before,” said McGillivray.
There is little question that the costs could be significant.
In a high-level review in 2023 for the Fraser Valley Regional District, BGC Engineering identified more than 3,600 properties that face steep-creek risks that include floods and debris flows. That is more than the 2,700 properties at risk of flooding.
There are properties at risk to landslides and debris flows on Metro Vancouver’s North Shore and along the Sea to Sky Highway to Squamish and Whistler, and in the many other steep-valley communities in B.C., show other reports.
The province has said that landslide risks are increasing from heavy rains, floods and wildfires. Fires can make soils less stable.
Even if a small fraction of properties in B.C. susceptible to landslide risk became candidates for buyouts, the cost could be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
Alberta set aside $137 million for a buyout program after devastating floods hit the southern region of the province in 2013. Quebec had spent $50 million by 2022 to buy out properties after repeated flooding in Gatineau, a figure expected to rise. New Brunswick spent $8 million on buying out homes after flooding in 2018. Newfoundland bought out homes after a 2009 landslide.
The idea behind buying out properties and relocating people is that it costs less in the long run because government is not paying repeatedly for damages from natural disasters.
When done properly, it can be cost-effective, according to the 2023 report Buying Out the Floodplain: Recommendations for Strategic Relocation Programs in Canada.
One of its authors, Jason Thistlewaite, a University of Waterloo associate professor with the school of environment, enterprise and development, says higher levels of government are often leaving natural hazard risk mitigation to local governments, which in turn may fear setting a precedent for future buyouts.
“So, it seems to be being done on a case-by-case basis,” observed Thistlewaite.
While most buyouts have been in high-risk flood areas, there’s no reason they cannot be used for other hazards, he said.
Landslide is a risk that is generally excluded from homeowner insurance, according to the Insurance Bureau of Canada. That’s because landslides are considered unpredictable and damage can be extensive. Rampersad’s home insurance did not cover landslides.
The Buying out the Floodplain report recommends having a buyout program ready to implement before a disaster and establishing a federal program to assist provinces and municipalities.
A different approach in the past
While the province today says local governments have responsibility for buyouts, it has taken a different approach in the past.
The province, under an NDP government, provided funding to help buy out 63 properties for $17 million in Grand Forks after devastating flooding in 2018.
The province, under a B.C. Liberal government, bought out properties in the Chilliwack River valley in 2009 and 2011 after landslides and mud flows hit those properties, shows a Postmedia review of B.C. land titles records.
In 2009, just months after a major rainfall caused a slope failure on a property on Auchenway Road, the B.C. government provided money to the Fraser Valley Regional District to buy out a home for $185,975, which was later donated to the Fraser Valley Conservancy.
A restrictive covenant attached to the title stated the Ministry of Public Safety had determined “the most cost-effective solution to address the risk of the residence on the lands were to remove the residents from hazard by purchasing the land and prevent future residential occupation.”
The property bought out in 2009 is on the same road as two of the six properties that this time have received no financial aid or a buyout.
In 2011, the B.C. Transportation Finance Authority bought a parcel of land for $1 million on Chilliwack Lake Road, several kilometres west of Rampersad’s property. The land and road had been inundated by a landslide and flooding in January 2009 from the same heavy rain that hit the property bought out for $185,975. A geotechnical report assessing the damage noted that there was risk of future debris flows that could affect properties on both sides of Chilliwack Lake Road.
Erv Warkentin, Rampersad’s neighbour, was unaware of the details of the earlier buyouts.
“Maybe they figured people had forgotten about it,” he said.
Warkentin now lives elsewhere with family, but says he tries to stay at his property a couple of days a week despite the risks.
Warkentin and Rampersad say they had no knowledge of the landslide risks when they bought their properties in 2017 and 2019. Warkentin’s place was built in 1985 and Rampersad’s in 1979. A large shop was approved to be built in 1996 on Rampersad’s property, where a geotechnical report determined it was safe to do so.
There were and are no restrictions attached to the land title for either property, show property records.
Geo-technical reports commissioned by the Fraser Valley Regional District after the 2021 landslides show there is not only increased risk to their homes but to Chilliwack Lake Road, which provides access to homes to the east, the Ford Mountain jail, Chilliwack Lake Provincial Park and a number of other recreation sites.
The recent geotechnical reports, and others dating back to the 1980s, were only added to the regional district’s pubic online map system in 2024.
A report prepared by Statlu Environmental Consulting in December 2021 noted the hillside above Rampersad and Warkentin’s properties had likely been deforming for decades but the extremely wet weather had increased the likelihood of a major slide by 20 times. The report said it was not a matter of if, but when a major slide would take place, pegging the probability at 65 to 89 per cent in the next 10 years.
That slide would be about 100 metres wide and would destroy all structures at the Rampersad and Warkentin properties, killing anyone inside, before running across Chilliwack Lake Road, completely blocking it under several metres of debris, said the report.
“It is now almost certain that such a large landslide will occur,” said the report.
Patti MacAhonic, an elected director for the regional district that represents the Chilliwack River Valley, has been trying to help the six property owners get financial help from the provincial or federal government.
She says she has talked to anyone she can, including cabinet ministers, but has got nowhere.
She notes the six properties were assessed at about $5 million before the increased landslide risk.
MacAhonic believes buyouts should be a provincial responsibility because local governments don’t have the money or capacity to take on a longer-term program.
“These folks deserve justice and a fair resolution. They’re just in a terrible situation,” said MacAhonic. “They weren’t treated properly.”
Despite the province and the regional district each saying it is the other’s responsibility to examine any buyouts to reduce risk, the district in conjunction with the province recently awarded a $500,000 contract to BGC Engineering for a detailed stability assessment of the escarpment lands north of Chilliwack Lake Road, including the area where the six properties are located.
That study is funded with money from the province, with representatives of the B.C. emergency management, forests and transportation ministries, and regional district officials forming a steering committee to oversee the work. The district has noted that hazards from the slopes — landslides and mud and debris flows — are not well understood and have never been comprehensively assessed.
The study is meant to provide options to mitigate risk of slides, including early warning systems, protective works and so-called managed retreat, which uses buyouts of properties to relocate people to reduce risk. The latter is the very thing used in the past by the province in the Chilliwack River valley but not for these six property owners.
The detailed slope stability assessment, due in 2026, is meant to provide preliminary cost estimates for “priority” mitigation and risk reduction options, with special attention to areas where there have been recent slides.
A report in 2022 for the regional district of the risk faced by the six properties — which deemed all unsafe to live in — suggested as part of the study due in 2026, consideration should be given to putting restrictive covenants on properties outlining the landslide risks.
The measure is important so that future buyers will be informed of the limitations before purchase, said the report by Cordilleran Geoscience.
On a late afternoon this month, Rampersad stood at the edge of his driveway, looking up at a large evergreen tree.
He said he always had an idea that he would light it up one Christmas.
When there is no traffic, you can hear the Chilliwack River. “It’s why I fell in love with the place,” he said.
Article content
Married just recently, Rampersad said his thought had been that he would start a family at this home.
He was the first person in his family to buy a home, after saving for 10 to 12 years. His parents are immigrants to Canada from Trinidad.
Rampersad had moved a childhood trampoline onto the property but he knows it will not be used here.
Now, Rampersad is left paying a mortgage for a property that has no value on paper, that he has been told is not safe to live in, that he can’t rent out and where he has been told there is no way to reduce the landslide risk.
All these things are said in a steady, calm voice because, Rampersad says, he is a positive person.
But he acknowledged the ordeal has caused anxiety and depression, kept his mind buzzing, and hurt his health.
He said one of the property owners died recently.
On this afternoon, Rampersad stopped to watch a school bus go buy just below his property.
It’s a symbol.
It represents a life that will not be, at least not here, and the risk to people, not just to those who live below the escarpment but those who travel the road.
Rampersad said he still has a hard time believing there is not some way to reduce risk, and says the province should buy out his property and his neighbour’s, and at least find a way to reduce the risk to the road below.
He now stays with his wife in her place in Abbotsford but says he tries to stay here for a little time each week.
He remembers, more than two years ago now, when he says one of the officials at the meeting at Chilliwack city hall told him, “We will help you.”
Would you pay nothing? Cuz I thought the amount you pay is divided by the number of units. So you still pay the same even if value is less. And I wonder if your mortgage or heloc will get called.
We sink billions into the blackhole DTES and we cant bail this guy out for $780k or even his mortgage balance for fear it’ll set a precedent
Well, this could be a very slippery slope (no pun intended) with how climate change could play out. I'm not sure where I stand on this (don't know enough) but I could see how buying out these 6 houses could end up being the start of something extremely expensive for taxpayers. I wonder how home owner insurance fits into this - is there nothing that home insurance would cover in this case? I guess the fact that the home is actually liveable is the mitigating circumstance.
Should really be doing geotechnical assessments prior to purchase than or at the very least, designate certain areas as high risk
You can’t as a municipality or whoever would be overseeing the sales of these properties just let people willingly buy them and then say you’re SOL when something like this happens
If it’s crown land that slides onto your property, I’d be curious if you’d have any legal recourse
__________________
Dank memes cant melt steel beams
For a 15-20 year old townhouse, how much is a healthy CRF? 5k per unit? 10k per unit?
Impossible to answer your question. Depends on the condition, the deprecation report, what future capital projects are on the radar, the rest of the financials, etc.
As of last year, the the government requires a strata to contibute 10% of the operating budget into the CRF each and every year.
For a 15-20 year old townhouse, how much is a healthy CRF? 5k per unit? 10k per unit?
Depreciation report will state how "healthy / unhealthy" the complex is, based by upcoming repairs. Look at the engineers suggestion in the depreciation report.
Then take that suggestion, and cut it in half, because life spans of alot of stuff lasts longer than listed.
No different than your car mechanic telling you to flush the trans fluid and replace the air filter, but you drive it as is for the next 5 years without doing so.
My old condo had 6k/unit and was considered "healthy" with no major upcoming work in the next 10 years.
A 20 y/o townhouse complex with 15k/unit in reserves, but 2 million in upcoming repairs in 5 years, is in way worse shape than:
A 20 y/o townhouse complex with 3k/unit in reserves, but 300k in upcoming repairs for the next 15 years.
A 20 year old townhouse complex is basically "new" in my eyes, there is nothing major that needs to be done. (Hondaracer would disagree tho)
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Money i hate people who sound like they smoke meth then pretend like they matter.
Originally Posted by ilovebacon
Does anyone have a pair of 25 pounds one-inch hole for sale at a reasonable price?
Originally Posted by BIC_BAWS
pretty clean looking car tho... Kinda gay
Depreciation report will state how "healthy / unhealthy" the complex is, based by upcoming repairs. Look at the engineers suggestion in the depreciation report.
Then take that suggestion, and cut it in half, because life spans of alot of stuff lasts longer than listed.
No different than your car mechanic telling you to flush the trans fluid and replace the air filter, but you drive it as is for the next 5 years without doing so.
My old condo had 6k/unit and was considered "healthy" with no major upcoming work in the next 10 years.
A 20 y/o townhouse complex with 15k/unit in reserves, but 2 million in upcoming repairs in 5 years, is in way worse shape than:
A 20 y/o townhouse complex with 3k/unit in reserves, but 300k in upcoming repairs for the next 15 years.
A 20 year old townhouse complex is basically "new" in my eyes, there is nothing major that needs to be done. (Hondaracer would disagree tho)
Well.. 20 years is basically the end of all mechanical life spans, all your appliances, roof, and depending on the quality, windows.
So yea.. could be a hefty special assessment
__________________
Dank memes cant melt steel beams
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
