$4M home in Vancouver at centre of bitter legal battle
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 вер 2024
- A $4 million home in Vancouver is at the centre of a bitter legal battle, highlighting the risks of unconventional agreements.
Subscribe to CTV News Vancouver to watch all our latest videos: www.youtube.co...
For the latest news, visit our homepage at CTVNewsVancouve... or follow our social media channels.
Facebook: / ctvbcnews
Twitter: / ctvvancouver
Instagram: / ctvvancouver
What a bunch of greed sellers … they got good money leave …. I dont agree with the previous comment about the « poor rich people » … whatever they paid it was hard earned cash. The sellers and their real estate agent are gross dishonest and are hiding behind loopholes in the law - totally gross greedy people and their real estate agent - Karma will come to them
If you listen apparently there is a 100k deposit that hasn't been paid back so... it's complicated
I understand it was to be given when they leave maybe the buyers saw red flags. I’ve purchased properties and sold and always vacated at the close date.
@@MM-my3pc issue is the buyer ghosted the seller when they asked for the money. broke the trust and now neither party trusts each other to hold their end of the deal. such a mess with a messy agreement.
@@MM-my3pc the buyer had no right to with hold the $100k in the first place . The house was sold for $4 million they only gave $3.9 million so they did not pay for the house . A security deposit for renting is a seperate thing and there is a max amount you can charge renters .
Very dishonest sellers. Shame shame shame. How can they say that they did move out because “they were not given proper legal notice”. They are crooks.
This is a new low for Canadian ethics
I can only guess where the sellers were born. Not here
One of the winners here is the lawyers
lol. they always win
Allow drug dealers to launder 100's of billions and this is what you get, a $4,000,000 house in a middle class area. A house that would cost maybe $400,000 anywhere else in North America.
400,000 not in Santa Monica
Both lawyers agree that you must have a lawyer, every one is concerned about their own money only
do not feel comfortable when some people suffer and he just laughs.
Negotiate a price based on September possession and done.
No rental. That was a dumb agreement.
Date of possession is not the same thing as the sale completion date and the buyer could lose their deposit and potentially be liable for the difference in sale price should they be unable to complete the purchase if they could not re-qualify for financing. These "existing owner becomes a fixed-term tenant" deals are somewhat common because of this fact for sales that can't complete within 90 or 120 days. The sellers have likely become "professional tenants" here.
What a nightmare ! Keep things simple …close date at 60 to 90 days. No rent back to owner….that just complicates everything. Even if you had lawyers involved. Keep the transaction CLEAN. Too many dishonourable people out there…
Vendor's lawyer is playing legal games.
he talks through his teeth
What is with $100K deposit that new owner is not willing to give back?
too much missing context...
The point was that the money was meant to be held until the sellers left the property. That’s their leverage to ensure they leave. Instead the sellers paid no rent as was agreed upon for the temporary stay they requested, and thereafter unilaterally insisted the buyer deduct the rent agreed upon from the deposit - thus violating the terms of the deal.
The new owners have zero guarantees that these people would leave if they pay the deposit since they don’t honour deals they sign. So, they refused to give the deposit until they leave - as was agreed to in writing.
@@leonardmccannon3136 So why was it set aside on appeal. What was the judges view? That they should pay the $100K and then they'd have the right to evict them at that point?
@@747Cone because the current argument is that the sellers are now defined as "tenants" and are protected by the rights they have at the RTB not to be evicted without a review. Essentially this went from a contract-law case to an RTB case (different jurisdiction) and since BC is one of the most heavily tenant-sided jurisdictions in North America, the buyers will unfortunately need to wait a long time to go through that process and essentially start over. The sellers clearly know the laws and are trying to take advantage of them over doing the "right" thing by the terms of the sale contract.
@@philisdaman99 Ok but I'm trying to understand what the terms of the 100K holdback is? The tenants/sellers are saying they'll move out once the 100K is released. Was it a term of the contract for the 100K to be released?
@@747Cone Can't be 100% sure but in a real estate transaction this type of holdback is usually for something like unforeseen damages that were not apparent upon showing that might be discovered during the buyers' final walkthrough upon taking possession or damage to the property that might occur between the sale and the closing. Obviously, taking possession never happened here so if these were the terms that's why the deposit would never have been released.
This arrangement is not uncommon. My friend did this. They were planning to build a new home, they were tied down on money so they sold their home and ask the buyer to honor them one year of lease. This is often written into the condition of the purchase order.
You can tell which commentators aren’t from Vancouver, they can’t get over the price of the house.
This report is incomplete as it doesn't contain information regarding the actual reason why the court went against the Tenancy Branch of BC decision that sided with the new owners.
left side wins?
It seems like everyone in BC are billionaires. Everyone just buys multi million dollar homes without a care in the world.
You are making a judgement that the new owners are billionaires ..
Lol absolutely not true
It's the $ame in Auckland, New Zealand, my Canadian married to an Australian (living there for some time), sister inlaw.
Just bought a 1970's ish 4 bedrooms, ×2 1/2 bath for 1.8 $ Million N.Z. ...
Prior to that, they paid over $4K
per month, with like the U.K. rent due weekly....
No. But BC is known to be a hot bed for CCP officials. And those from HK have equity from their properties over there same with some people from Taiwan.
@@patrickt49 All levels of gov should have stepped into BC 20 years ago when it was clear that money laundering was a huge part of GDP. Every level of gov fail, both liberal and conservative parties watched this all unfold.
This is not a new issue, but it's being sold as a new issue.
Canada offered citizenship to Hong Kong Chinese before 1997 and they flooded the area and drove prices out of sight until Canadians could no longer afford to live there.
What’s the point of lawyers if even they can’t do anything to help?
4 million for that piece of mud and brick? Must be a joke!
that's how we roll in vancouver.
@speedyfeint Yeah, you certainly are, rolling in the deep. Deep debt hole, that is.
@@A__SB yeah but the reality is; more than 50% of detached houses in vancouver are mortgage free.. i guess we have incredible amount of multi-millionares in this city.. which means all younger generations that don't have rich parents are pretty much f'ed.
Dont worry because Justin and Eby say they will sort it out
Chinese tucked up the market so it’s a horrible place to live now
The world is full of interesting cases.
No good deed goes unpunished. Sad how the seller made an agreement they now don't believe they have to honour.
Don't ever put yourself in a position of having to ask someone to return YOUR money to you.
$4 million for that dump lol
FR lol. The couple was from Penticton. They could've bought 3 new-builts of similar size for that kind of money
Vancouver blows lol
Remove one zero from 4 mill. That's what it's worth.
On what basis did the judge reverse the Board's decision?
Your question is a very good one.
Dont you need a lawyer to sell the house, what happened to those lawyers, did they just ignore the agreement of the sale?
That part is on transfer of the titles
The lawyer they are referring to is non straight forward case of the hold back for tenancy agreement that happened post sales
Buyer, cancel it. Not worth it. For this price, you can pay for a luxurious, full service retirement home for the rest of your life.
Go to North nanaimo, parksville, Courtenay. Comox.White Rock. Vancouver has turned into one huge overpriced slum.. and run by lefty parasites who love power
Give them their money if u want the house😮
there will never be any agreement when there are two stubborn parties.
Don't do anything out of the ordinary....in today's world, it always causes problems. There are indecent people who will look for loopholes and push all the envelopes......the sellers are to blame....leave the house you sold. Greedy, greedy, greedy.
$100,000 hold back, based on an average rent for $5000 p/mo of rent for a property such as this, which gives the sellers 20 months of pre-paid rent that the buyers are holding onto. Since the deal closed, as landlord and tenant, the landlord is entitled to hold onto 1 month rent as a damage deposit. The remainder of the hold back should have been reimbursed upon signing of the lease agreement. It's simple math and normal tenancy regulations. If you don't know how to be a landlord, you should not have entered into a landlord/tenancy relationship. As usual the realtors are not helpful in any of this or they would've advised their clients to refrain from signing such an agreement, that goes for both sides.
How is this even a thing? Looks like a game made by lawyers for lawyers. Morally, all that's needed is some hired muscle paid for by a portion of that 100K for reneging on the deal.
So never help or accomodate anyone in the future.
new comers bring their culture to change Canada into "something good"?
@@cao6496 Who built and made Canada good in the first place ?
@@robertl.6919 no doubt those great leaders of Canada like John A. McDonald. Some new comers bring in bad culture and make Canada a mess now!?! I dare not say so directly. Not political correctness. You know?
They're not landlords. They are the buyers. Omg...what freaks
Oh, poor, rich people . On both sides . 😢 how will they survive .
Ok, but why do you keep including the audio from the drone flying? Just mute it while you’ve got a voiceover going on.
The buyer did a favour for the seller and got burned. Only in Canada.
MORE LIKE A LEGAL JOKE. Does Ruins of Canada mean anything to you?
Why is this news?
Awful
Squatters are in breach .
it's ridiculous $4m for such a house, it's not even on the beach
It’s in Vancouver, & on the West side .. remember - the city of Vancouver is relatively small ( not ‘greater Van, just city of Van.) so home prices are very high.
I know its the move is to be closer to family but damn...Penticton to Vancouver...LOL.
Stupid rich people problems who cares!!
They are squatters plain and simple. Video doesn't explain why the judge sided with the squatters so I can only assume the judge is incompetent at best.
whats this hold back?
lawyers should be the first ones to be replaced by AI.
Do the legal notice and deduct rent from damage deposit. Case closed. Not a big deal unless one of them does not want this to go through and wants problems! Old babies, they have money but still did not learn anything from life. Rich fools.
The sellers should be deported and backcharged with interest.
Put the 100 grand in escrow with a lawyer. Then have the renters leave. Ta da. Fixed.
Sellers on some scam tactics
No, you clearly didn’t listen to the full piece because both sides didn’t keep their promise
Answer to all “cushy” side deals is “Thanks, but no.”
Both of them are rich people. It is not for us to worry about.
*tiny violin playing*
Never ever trust no one...Stay in your Bubble !
Got the cake, ate it..stepped up for more! 👀
Sassy seller and greedy buyer? who knows? who will care?
😂 CTV, always concerned about struggling millionaires
They are often promoting leftwing woke ideas but do they take breaks once in a while.
Shameless government doesnt nothing for us, so wack
Things become more costly once trust is gone.
Money the Root of all the Evil in the world 🙏😑👎🏻
Some advice don’t buy a house in that god forsaken city lol.
Messed up
Why sell and then rent? why not make a background check on the sellers. there must be a motivation why they are doing this. crying for 100k? when they sold the house for 3.9M? come on!
Who in their right mind would pay $4 mil for that place, what a joke!
Vancouver property prices are sky high.
Poor rich people, really breaks my heart to hear how they have to suffer.
*tiny violin plays*
only lawyers win
The so-called 'asset' or 'investment' class should not take up air-time with their squabbles over huge amounts of money...that the working class cannot even hope to attain......while pumping-up a bubble that disadvantages and hurts the working poor. NOT INTERESTED AT ALL.
money never ending desires to accumulate toys . abandoned castles , arent lessons enough
boycott the realtor and lawyer MASAO MORINAGA
1:28-- your clients are squatting. They sold their house and had a clear agreement to leave the premises by end of Sept. They didn't leave or continue to pay rent beyond Sept therefore they are squatters. Instead of defending them you should be telling them to get the fu$ck out.
The buyer didn’t release 100k for them to leave as agreed upon in the initial agreement
Both sides frankly didn’t do as they agreed hence the mess
@@bcatbb2896 not releasing money does not give someone to live in a place without paying rent. That is what the court system is for. They stayed in the house without paying....they are squatting.
@@pacman3556 thats up to the court to decide, not you or I. this thing is honestly just a mess to begin with, no trust at all. they never shouldve done such a agreement if they never believed the other side would honor their agreement. or atleast hash it out in plain letters on the contract
@@bcatbb2896 yes the courts can decide however by definition if you live in a house without paying rent then they are squatters. Don't need a court to decide that. It is clearly defined.
@@pacman3556 um, thats not how it works bro. i get where youre coming from, but the world doesnt work that way
They are squatters, never get into a situation like this. The owners should move in with the squatters and see how how long they stick around.
Bro that’s not what’s happening here
It’s both sides not keeping their promise so both sides are wrong and right
Who freakin cares sic of all this bull 💩
This will be the new normal (soon).
Masao Morinaga looks like a really good scammer
The buyer is probably an 18 year old foreign student from China.
Did you not listen. It's a retired couple that are the buyers.
it's a retired couple from Penticton. but at least we found the racist
4 million for that piece of sht? Bahhahaha
Eat the rich
We have more bigger news than this
Unsubscribing this channel
im not even subscribed.
It is not that smart to rent out a house that costs $3.9 million dollars 😮🫣.,
100,000 is 100,000. Enjoy
$50 the seller is Asian
Both the sellers and buyers are comrades from mainland China. 😱