Tales from the Trenches

In other Tales from the Trenches I’ve talked about the importance of accomplishing sufficient diligence on any property purchase to say that you have done ‘Due Diligence.’ It’s worth repeating here because it’s so important. The notion of doing or accomplishing your own Due Diligence is what allows you to make a buying decision. Will you buy or not buy? In this Tale, a deal falls through because of a lack of diligence regarding financing conditions.

https://barrymcguire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Lost-Deposits-on-Collapsed-Deals.mp3

Download the audio file HERE.

Our would-be investor was purchasing the property from a fellow member of the Canadian Real Estate Investment Network (REIN). The transaction was using the standard Alberta Real Association MLS contract, which includes some buyer terms. A couple of those terms required the seller to provide certain information to the satisfaction of the buyer. When our buyer went to apply for financing, the lender made those buyer terms part of the seller’s financing conditions.

Now, one issue that affected our buyer’s view of the diligence he had to perform was that the seller was also a very reputable REIN member. Now, the standard contract specifically says that buyers and sellers are totally responsible for accomplishing their own diligence. But when I was talking to our buyer after the transaction went sour, he said: “you know, I was kind of relying on the fact that everyone knows the seller and everyone thinks he’s a good guy and…”

What happened was that the lender issued a commitment letter that incorporated requiring the seller to provide the information as set out in the contract. Our relatively inexperienced buyer heard from his broker that getting mortgage approval was, “looking good.” He translated that into, “ I’ve got a mortgage approval,” and he removed his financing condition.

Then, as the process moved forward, the seller provided information that the lender deemed inadequate and the loan was refused. Our buyer was unable to get replacement financing and he lost the deal. He also lost his $5,000 deposit. The buyer was lucky that the seller was able to resell the property at a slightly higher price, which meant the seller wasn’t going to sue the buyer for losses over and above the $5,000 deposit. The buyer was also lucky that it was such a small deposit, but a loss is still a loss.

If you’re buying and/or selling real estate anywhere in Alberta, Barry is the lawyer you need to get the job done right. Use the form below to get in touch now!

[contact-form]

“House/Home Inspection” image by Mark Moz used under CC Attribution 2.0 Generic.

Are you looking to buy a property with a secondary suite? Ideally, you want to buy properties with legal secondary suites. But guess what? A Real Property Report doesn’t prove a suite’s legality in Alberta.

https://barrymcguire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Real-Property-Reports-and-Secondary-Suites.mp3

Download the audio file HERE.

Here’s some background. A Real Property Report (RPR) is a two dimensional drawing prepared by a professional land surveyor according to their manual of surveying practice. The current, standard Alberta Real Estate Association contract used by all MLS realtors requires the seller to provide the buyer with a current RPR and written evidence of municipal compliance (city bylaws and permits). So, if you are a buyer and you and your realtor use the standard form contract, you are expecting to see an RPR as described above.

Let’s say you are a very careful investor and instead of just getting the RPR as part of closing documentation, you make it a condition of contract that the seller supply the RPR and compliance for your review, say, 10 days prior to closing.

The seller provides a nice, relatively new, legible RPR and it has either a nice compliance stamp or a letter from the municipality confirming compliance or non-conformance. That meets the seller’s obligations under the contract and you are a happy camper thinking you now have proof of a legal secondary suite.

But wait! On a closer examination of the RPR and compliance you notice there is no reference to, or evidence of, that secondary suite. That’s because the surveyor only makes his/her RPR drawing of the outside of any buildings or improvements. S/he doesn’t go into the house and look in the basement to see if there is a secondary suite.

So, when the RPR is sent off to the municipality for a compliance application, all the clerks see is what the surveyor drew. Like the surveyor, they also have no idea that there is a secondary suite and so the compliance notation doesn’t take into account—and certainly does not legalize—the existence of that secondary suite.

For more information on legal vs. illegal suites in Edmonton, check out my previous blog post.

[contact-form]

This Tale is about the legal process in Alberta (and some other Canadian jurisdictions) of selling property as part of an estate after someone dies. A long-time client got in touch to say that her Dad had passed away. I knew her Dad and had done seven or eight real estate transactions for the family over the last 15 years. Dad was a great guy and I was very sorry to hear of his passing.

My client said it was a simple estate; basically a bank account, some personal possessions, a few stocks, bonds, and mutual funds, and an acreage where Dad still lived at the time of his passing. There was a Will appointing my client as sole executor and an estate lawyer was already on working on probate.

https://barrymcguire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/probate-sales-need-patience.mp3

Download the audio file HERE.

For a quick review, probate is the process whereby an executor, usually through a lawyer, makes application to the Probate Court here in Alberta for what is known as a Grant of Probate. The application process involves the executor gathering in all the assets of the deceased, figuring out whether the deceased owed any money, checking for bank accounts, insurance policies, RRSPs, LIRAs, RESPs, TFSAs, etc., and also involves a determination of whether there are beneficiaries or dependents of the estate. It’s a long paper process that can be a pain in the ‘you know what,’ extremely time-consuming.

Fortunately, my client is a very organized person and had provided the estate lawyer all the estate information and the application for probate have been submitted to the Probate Court.

The most difficult asset to deal with was Dad’s acreage. My client had retained a realtor to list the property and during the listing process they had a meeting with the estate lawyer. The estate lawyer informed my client that the probate process is lengthy. The probate clerks are currently working on applications for probate submitted four months ago. Their process has changed so that if an application for probate is rejected, once the corrected application is returned to the Probate Court, the application goes to the bottom of the pile taking another four months to rise to the top.

The Probate Court is very careful with probate applications, knowing from experience that wills and estates are fertile ground for misrepresentation, little white lies, and outright fraud. They are especially careful if there are beneficiaries.

The saying amongst estate lawyers is that you can count on your probate application being rejected at least once. In today’s probate world, that would mean an application would take eight months to work its way through the process and for the executor to have his or her Grant of Probate. This kind of timing is more typical than not across Canada. I just ran into it through my involvement in a British Columbia probate application.

With that background and understanding of the timing, the estate lawyer said to my client and the realtor, “don’t list the property until we have the actual, approved Grant of Probate”. Everyone agreed and then the property was promptly listed with a couple of offers coming in almost immediately. Those offers were written, acknowledging that probate had to be obtained, but the buyer maintained the right to withdraw from the contract at any time on two weeks notice to the Estate.

My client went to the estate lawyer and asked what they could do. Without much hope, the estate lawyer talked to the judge in charge of the Probate Court. The judge said, as you might expect, “Why the heck did the property get listed? Almost every probate application on my desk has a piece of real estate to deal with. Why should I make an exception for you?”

The estate lawyer said he understood what the judge was saying, but that it was a good offer in a tough marketplace; the estate and the executor did not want to miss being able to close. The market could easily get worse and the buyer already had the right to withdraw. Reluctantly the judge agreed to give an Order of the Court directing the Land Titles Office to allow the executor to sign paperwork that would allow the sale to go ahead. The rest of the estate would have to wait. The offer to purchase was amended to now show a fixed closing date.

The judge drafted the order using the accepted offer to purchase for details and sent it to the estate lawyer for registering at the Land Titles Office, which he did reporting to me that he had done so and he was going to send me a copy of the registered order. When the order arrived on my desk, I noted that Dad’s name in the order was not the same as Dad’s name on title to the acreage. Dad had used two last names during his lifetime with slightly different spellings. The estate lawyer advised the judge who agreed to make changes. The judge was a little testy because he had to come in on the weekend having been in Northern Alberta on the circuit court.

Meanwhile, we heard from the buyer’ s lawyer who wondered whether or not we were going to be able to get him paperwork to meet the new fixed closing date. At the same time he gave me the names of his clients showing first, middle and last names for both the husband and wife. Uh oh, the judge used the buyer’s names from the offer to purchase, which were different than the names provided by the buyer’s lawyer! A mad scramble ensued and the problem was solved with an Affidavit of Identity where the buyers swore that the names on the transfer of land and the names in the judge’s order were the names of the same people. The Land Titles Office accepted this and the deal closed.

Not waiting for the Grant of Probate and causing the estate lawyer to deal with the probate judge costs the estate an extra $2,500 in legal fees. Our legal account was about $800 higher than normal because of all the time expended. On the other hand, the sale went through at a good price. More importantly, the possibility of a falling market was avoided.

If you’re dealing with real estate as part of a will or estate, get in touch with Barry now. Use the contact form below or visit Contact Page.

[contact-form]

“Last Will and Testament” image by Ken Mayer. Used under Creative Commons Attribution Generic 2.

Wow, a recent bombshell of a legal case from the Ontario Court of Appeal is causing huge ripples in the Canadian real estate world. In the Courts and in the world of precedent there is a pecking order. The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court in the land. The Ontario Court of Appeal is the court of last resort in Ontario. Ontario is Canada’s largest common law jurisdiction. Therefore, any decision from the Ontario Court of Appeal is extremely influential. It recently ruled that marketability of title and marketability of property may be linked.

https://barrymcguire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/guaranteeing-title.mp3

Download the audio file HERE.

The case in question was MacDonald versus Chicago Title Insurance Company of Canada, which you can read in full at the following link: http://canlii.ca/t/gmc53. For a clear and cogent summary—including why this matters to real estate buyers and sellers across Canada—check out an article called “The New Marketability of Title Paradigm after MacDonald” written by Jeffrey W. Lem and Megan J. Lem for building.ca: https://www.building.ca/features/new-marketability-title-paradigm-macdonald/.

The key piece of information, according to Lem and Lem, is that, “The Supreme Court affirms that good and marketable title now includes freedom from latent defects.”

[contact-form]

“Law3” image by Rafqi Jamil, used under CC Attribution ShareAlike 3.0

An investor recently showed up in my Edmonton law office with this absolutely marvellous Tale about a unique property seller in Alberta and the magic of having the right real estate investing strategy for the job.

https://barrymcguire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/unpredictable-seller-motivation-and-agreement-for-sale-magic.mp3

Download the audio file HERE.

An acquaintance had introduced our investor as a real estate expert to a gentleman who had a real estate problem. The problem was that the gentleman owned a 4-suite apartment building, but wanted to leave town. He had worked hard his whole life in Alberta, was recently retired, and planned to move to Eastern Canada. His well located apartment building was mortgaged for about $700,000 with about 3.5 years left on the mortgage term and all suites rented, albeit at about $200 per suite per month less than what those same suites would have rented out a couple of years ago. Overall the apartment was break-even cash flow with mortgage pay down of $12,000 per year.

The gentleman, who was a knowledgeable investor himself and had worked in various aspects of the real estate industry over his whole career, had purchased the property with his daughter. The daughter was very busy with her own life and wanted nothing to do with the property. The investor was familiar with the building location and thought that a conservative valuation would be $850,000-$900,000.

A bit of head scratching goes on and our investor finally says to the gentleman, “why don’t you just sell the property? You seem to have a fair amount of equity and even with payout penalties, a sale would put a good chunk of change in your pocket.” “I don’t want to do that,” said the gentleman. “I have to move pretty quickly and I just do not want to go through the trouble of listing the property, dealing with realtors and potential buyers, providing all of that material you always have to provide, only to have offers fall by the wayside. Even though I’ve been in real estate my whole life, I’ve always hated this part of the process. I just want to get rid of the property and protect my daughter. For myself, I don’t care; it’s protecting my daughter and getting rid of the stress. Plus, I don’t think there is that much equity, it’s not enough for me to chase.”

Our investor then suggests keeping the property and turning it over to a solid property manager. Although the market is down now, in a couple of years rents and values will be back up and the mortgage will be paid down. That would preserve equity and be a nice part of retirement. Or, what about a joint venture with a knowledgeable real estate investor who could take over the property and manage it in a trouble-free way, again, giving the gentleman a chance to share in the property upside.

The answers were, “no” and “no.” Property management costs too much and the gentleman had never liked joint ventures. Plus, wasn’t our investor listening? The gentleman wanted to get rid of the property, period.

Our investor was out of ideas. The gentleman said… wait for it… “ I can tell by our conversation that I can trust you and you have a lot of real estate experience. You could buy this property by way of Agreement for Sale (AFS).” Flabbergasted and dumbfounded are the words to describe our investor’s reaction. But, inclined to keep going, he asked, “how much do you want?”

The gentleman responded that he wanted protection for his daughter but no cash, but also no adjustments. If our investor would take over responsibility for the security deposits and not ask for a rent adjustment in a proposed mid-month closing, the gentleman would take a zero down deal and throw in the insurance and tax adjustments. Our member continues to be flabbergasted and dumbfounded, but he agrees and further says that he will have his wife purchase the property and he will personally guarantee the AFS. The guarantee will assist on the daughter protection side of things. Payments under the AFS will be exactly the same as the payment under the underlying mortgage.

This is the classic low/no equity AFS deal. The most amazing thing is that the gentleman made the offer. No one even knew he wanted to get rid of the property. Essentially, the gentleman took our classic AFS question and turned it around on our investor. Basically he said, “are you interested in buying my apartment building for no money down but you have to take over my mortgage payments, taxes, insurance, and all repairs and maintenance?”

Now, as a sideline we always talk about not taking advantage in a deal. Our investor told the gentleman that he was incredibly grateful for this amazing chance to pick up an apartment building for no money down. But he still felt the gentleman should consider taking any of the three steps described above or any other step that would actually get him some money in his pocket. In that regard, our member told the gentleman that if he changed his mind or came up with a better deal from somebody else any time up until closing, our member would simply walk away. “No way”, said the gentleman. “I like you, I trust you, I like the deal—especially you adding your personal guarantee—and I’m going to close with you. When would you like to go and meet the tenants?”

[contact-form]

“Reverse Mortgage” image from https://www.aag.com/ is used under CC Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0

My law firm in Edmonton, Alberta is the corporate registered office for many corporations. We get lots of letters addressed to those corporations because that’s part of being registered office. Anyone who wants to send something official to a corporation can send it to the registered office. Those official notices are often notices of trouble…

A recent letter was no different. It was a scary letter!

https://barrymcguire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/corporate-matters-matter.mp3

Download the audio file HERE.

A big, downtown law firm sent a notice that named two numbered corporations and demanded payment in full of a mortgage balance of about $150,000. Further, they attached a Notice of Intention to Enforce Security. In that document they referred to one of the numbered corporations as an “insolvent person.”

The first thing we did was search our records. That search showed that in 2008 one of the numbered corporations was struck from the Corporate Registry for failing to file the required annual corporate returns.

The next thing we did was get a copy of title for the property named in the Notice of Intention to Enforce Security. Then, we dug out the minute book for the numbered corporation for which we are still registered office. The minute book told me who the principals of the corporation are, and then my memory bank kicks in.

I remember acting for the client in purchasing a 28-suite apartment building about 20 years ago. A review of the title confirms my recollection that the seller carried all of the financing. No other financing had been put on the property in the last 20 years. Our client got a great deal when he bought, and the building is probably conservatively valued today at about $2.8 million.

So, about $150,000 left on a vendor take-back mortgage on a property worth $2.8 million, with the mortgage apparently in default and the titleholder insolvent! Not a pretty picture.

With that background, it was time to contact the client who was on vacation and took a few days to reply to email. Firstly, our client advised that the vendor take-back mortgage is not $150,000, but somewhere around $50,000. And, he was very sure that he had records including letters back and forth and cancelled cheques along with amortization schedules. This means he can prove what he paid over the years and what the actual balance should be.

On the issue of the struck corporation, our client says that he has been meaning to re-register the struck corporation, but just hasn’t gotten around to it. He asks that our corporate department here  start the ball rolling to reinstate the struck corporation. We say we will, but in the back of my mind I have a nagging fear about the reinstatement. Struck in 2008 and now it’s 2017, that’s a long time! Can the corporation be reinstated? 

On checking with our corporate department, they tell me that under Alberta’s Business Corporations Act (BCA), a corporation dissolved for more than 5 years cannot be revived for any reason (see s.208 (1.1) BCA). Under previous legislation, a corporation could apply to the courts for reinstatement but that right has been taken away.

Further, and even worse, s.229 (1) of the BCA says that all property of the struck corporation is now vested in the Crown. Our previous title search, however, showed that the property was still in the name of the struck corporation. That means, so far, the Crown (Provincial Government of Alberta), had not taken any steps to perfect their interest. That was at least minor good news. Still more research to do on this particular point and what it exactly means.

But wait, it gets worse! My first thought when I confirmed that the title-holding corporation had been struck from the corporate register is, what about tax? Our client bought 20 years ago and the property had at least quadrupled in value. The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) always says taxes are payable when there is a disposition of the property.

What was the tax effect of the corporation being struck with ownership now potentially vested in the provincial Crown?

Back over to our corporate department, who took the problem to our tax consultants. Their first look at this mess is that the corporation being struck along with the provisions of the BCA leads to the CRA treating the situation as though the property was sold at fair market value. In this case that could result in a $500,000 tax bill.

So here is the ugly picture. We have a corporation that, according to the legislation, no longer owns a property. The CRA treats the statutory non-ownership as a sale at fair market value. The corporation didn’t get a dime out of the “sale.” And, even worse, the corporation still has a big tax bill, along with interest for late payment and penalties. Not fair, but that’s the way the legislation reads.

It’s hard to believe that what seems to be a relatively innocuous and simple administrative mistake or error in judgment would have these disastrous consequences. At the moment our client remains in big trouble.

Our expert tax consultants say there may be a way around the problem.

But, like all big tax problems, there is going to be a ton of research required on the accounting and legal side of all the issues. Then a legal opinion about a tax repair plan will be drafted.

At this moment, the plan is not drafted and the jury is still out on whether a plan can be drafted that has a decent chance of being accepted by the CRA. The tax repair plan will have to essentially reverse the effects of the corporation being struck and the relevant legislation referred to above. Folks, such a result is not guaranteed. And, as you probably figured out, this will not be cheap or easy for our client.

So those are the nuts and bolts of our client’s dilemma all starting with a decision not to keep a corporation that owned valuable real estate in good standing at the corporate registry. Stay tuned.

[contact-form]

“Post Letters Envelope Leave” image by 3dman_eu used under CC Universal 1.0 Public Domain Dedication.

I heard from a Calgary investor recently about dodging an expensive bullet.

Houses with legal suites or houses zoned for legal suites are all the rage in Alberta. What’s not to like about adding a secondary suite to a single-family home effectively turning it into a duplex with amazing positive cash flow? Everyone likes that. Tougher to do in Calgary, though. I hate to say it, our Calgary cousins are not nearly as advanced as we Edmontonians on the secondary suite issue. The City of Edmonton has amended bylaws to allow secondary suites all over the city and in most zoning situations.

City of Calgary, not so much. In Calgary, secondary suites are only allowed in certain areas. Calgary City Council is divided on whether to expand the areas where they allow secondary suites.

https://barrymcguire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/deep-diligence-saves-half-a-million-dollars.mp3

Download the audio file HERE.

So, in Calgary if you find a property with a secondary suite that is perhaps grandfathered or is in one of the areas where the zoning allow secondary suites, it can be a jackpot. But, as with all potential purchases, you have to accomplish adequate diligence. Here’s an amazing story in the investor’s own words.

Hi Barry,

I thought you might find this interesting. A possible “Tales from the Trenches” for Calgary.

I have been pursuing a house in Mayland Heights. Great lot, raised bungalow. Existing suite from 1960. However, the city only knew about it as a single-family home. No problem, I thought… I’ll just update it to legal status once I purchase it. It is RC2 so permitted use. However, after pulling title…

REGISTRATION NUMBER *** *** ***

20/10/1977

SUBJECT TO CALGARY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

First call to the city, they said it probably only applied to noise and that yes we could build a suite. 

But something just did not feel right to me, so I did more research. I looked up the property according to the Airport Vicinity Protection Area (AVPA) regulations. And after looking up AVPA Regulations and asking the City to look into it we find out that this property can never be more than a single-family home. So, no secondary suite. No infill development exit strategy.

We never put in the offer. Our JV’s (Joint Venture partners) once again mentioned how pleased they are working with us, as our meticulous due diligence saved us making a half-a-million dollar mistake.

Interestingly, CBC news recently reported on the issue of airports, zoning, and secondary suites in Calgary. City officials have debated making a request to the Province of Alberta regarding housing rules near airports. A provincial regulation from the 1970s restricts development in communities that are in an air transit flight path. The rules are in place to prevent buildings that would interfere with air traffic. Low height infill like basement suites wouldn’t affect airplanes, although airport officials speculate that noise complaints might rise if there were more people living in the flight path.

One classic diligence lesson that our investor so obviously understands is that when you ask a question and the answer is, “probably,” that is not an answer to a diligence question. You will recall our investor called the City of Calgary to ask about the AVPA regulations and the city said, “it probably only applied to noise and that yes we could build a suite.” Makes sense does it not? Why would airport related regulations that are really mostly about not building tall buildings in aircraft flight space care about a suite in a basement?

Logic would tell you they don’t care but logic would be wrong. You have to nail down the answers to your diligence questions.

[contact-form]

“View of Calgary downtown from International Airport” image by Qyd used under CC Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0

I’ve been doing Tales from the Trenches for 15 years. These are amazing stories from real estate investors, mostly from Alberta, Canada because that’s where I practice law. Tales began as a segment during meetings of the Real Estate Investment Network (REIN), which I continue to do. And then about 4 years ago, it became a podcast, too.

Lots of those stories are about mistakes made and lessons learned. Feedback tells me you find Tales not only interesting, but also very useful in organizing your own real estate rules and how you invest. I love doing Tales and you love hearing them.

We post Tales on my blog website, where we are at 99 podcasts and counting. The 100th podcast is a big deal, at least in my mind. But, what should I talk about? Fond reminiscing about doing 99 podcasts, how I love the feedback, how many folks we have helped, why that feels good… what to do?

Today the lightning bolt struck. I know what I’m going to say!

Of course, it’s a story. But, instead of a typical Tale about mistakes made and how to avoid those mistakes, this Tale is all about success. It’s all about an approach to real estate investing that has a high percentage chance of creating success. You can up your chances of trouble-free real estate investing by listening to this great story, a very positive Tale from the Trenches.

Download the audio file HERE.

This is the story of new Canadians, who in 2003 thought they would like to supplement their incomes with a revenue property. They bought a duplex on the central south side of Edmonton, close to the University of Alberta, but not too close, and started down the investment real estate road.

Today, 14 years later, they are retiring and moving on to the next phase of their lives. It was time to sell the duplex. When they came to see me to sign their sale paperwork, we were in my boardroom going through the details. I’m always interested in what my clients have been doing and how their investments have worked for them.

So I asked them, “how has it gone, what has your investment experience been like?”  I love their response! Here’s what they said:

“The property has not given us one bit of trouble over 14 years; this was a trouble-free investment for us. We bought the duplex for $360,000 and are selling for $795,000. Plus, it has been great positive cash flow over 14 years.”

“That’s fantastic,” I said “what a great story. What is the secret of your success?”

Why is this such a great story? It’s a classic illustration of what I’ve always believed brings real estate investing success. Buy a decent property in a decent area and manage the heck out of it.  That’s it! Of course there are ups and downs and problems to solve. But if you buy that decent property in a decent area and manage the way my clients managed, you just can’t help but be successful. And that’s tonight’s Tale from the Trenches.

[contact-form]

“Edmonton Canada Day Fireworks 2012” by Kurt Bauschardt (with modifications) used under CC Attribution-ShareAlike Generic 2.0.

This episode of Tales from the Trenches contains two stories about transfers: one is about transferring mortgages and the other is about transferring property.

In theory, many mortgages are assumable, but in practice lenders in Alberta (and elsewhere) have been tightening up on their regulations. Some lenders just won’t allow it at all, while others require full re-qualification. This Tale explains how a real estate investor got the bank to agree to a mortgage assumption after he held a property for just seven days!

Rollovers are when a property is transferred from your personal name to your corporation or vice-versa. My Edmonton legal firm, RMLO Law LLP (formerly Ritchie Mill Law Office), helps people with rollovers all the time. But we always caution our clients to get additional accounting advice because capital gains might be an issue. In this Tale, the example is an investor who rolled over a property and had to pay the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) $30,000 dollars in tax…

Download the audio file HERE.

For all your Alberta real estate law needs, contact Barry and he’ll sort you out.

[contact-form]

“3D Home Inspection Big Check” by http://www.ccpixs.com/ used under CC Attribution 2.0 Generic.

The first part of this Tale is about an Alberta landlord with tenant problems. The renter usually paid on-time, but then the rent started coming late. The tenant’s girlfriend left him, and when our landlord went to check on the property it appeared to have been taken over by a biker gang! Eventually the property appeared to be abandoned, but the landlord was afraid to go back. Moral of the story, nip problems in the bud before they grow to become out of control.

In the second part of this Tale, we have a problem with a buyer who disappeared, but whose caveat comes back to haunt the seller. If you would like to sell a property by way of agreement for sale, the buyer will register a caveat on the title. That is the buyer’s protection in the transaction. But what happens if the buyer then changes their mind and walks away from the deal? Their caveat might still be on title, which you as the owner/seller need to address before you can sell the property to someone else.

Download the audio file HERE.

If you’re buying or selling real estate in Alberta, you need a lawyer.

[contact-form]

“Neon Real Estate Sign” by Chris Griffith used under CC Attribution 2.0 Generic.