Crumbling real estate markets in BC
Ben Rabidoux over at The Economic Analyst has a post focusing on the falling markets in Vancouver and Victoria.
As VHB points out the last two years saw 2 & 3 days in February with daily sales under 100. We’re now 5 sales days in and we’ve seen 3 sales days under 100.
Sales better pick up in the remaining 15 business days or the market is at risk of having a worse february that 2009, the worst year in recent memory.
We’re not hearing much about it in the local media, but the real estate market in Vancouver is seeing rising listings, sagging sales and dropping prices.
Over at Vancouver Peak 604x points out the lack of reasonable reporting on this topic in the local media and brings up the topic of conflict of interest.
He’s put together a form letter with contact info for the broadcast standards council. Here’s an excerpt:
We all remember the false and misleading behaviour of the news media during the technology “bubble” of the late 1990s and early 2000s. In both the US and Canada many people lost substantial sums of money due to the cheerleading of certain media outlets. After the dust settled it was found that many of these media outlets and “economic correspondents” had conflicting interests – owning the stock of companies they were actively reporting on and actively pumping.
The same is happening today in Canada with news reporting of the current real estate market. Many reporters and news organizations, most notably Vancouver’s branch of Global TV (CTV network), are delivering hyped up media and false/misleading reports on the status of the real estate market in BC. I believe this is also true for CTV’s Toronto reporting. A defining characteristics of such coverage is (i) one-sided reporting (i.e. “prices are about to take off”), and (ii) interviews with real estate agents and staff of real estate companies who have a clear conflict of interest in the current market. The behaviour goes beyond sensationalist headlines designed to boost circulation and sell ads – these news correspondents appear to be actively pumping the market for personal gain.
Read the full post here.
February 7th, 2013 at 6:19 am 1
The market is getting so bad its almost scary. Yikes.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 6:21 am 2
I think this is awesome. Some lady down in Florida filed papers to claim “Adverse Possession” of the vacant, foreclosed house right next to her house. She then rented the house out for $1500 per month. The lady (who is a writer for a Florida newspaper) collected $13,500 in rent for a FREE house before she was arrested for identity theft. But it sounds like she is going to fight the charges based on Florida’s Adverse Possession laws which go back hundreds of years and allow people to lay legal claim to unoccupied real estate.
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/crime-law/cops-say-west-palm-woman-rented-out-neighbors-fore/nWGRF/
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 6:24 am 3
@Joe Q
I say bring it! I’m not scared of a real estate crash at all. I think the prospect of real estate prices that go up year after year for eternity and never-ending waves of HAM washing ashore to be far scarier than any real estate crash.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
52 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 6:40 am 4
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
8 
37
February 7th, 2013 at 7:32 am 5
Actually, we have only had 4 days so far in February, so we are at 3 out of 4.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 8:23 am 6
What kind of loser RE bull spends ALL day every day lurking around and posting useless crap on a RE bear site?
A) RE agent with absolutely nothing better to do and is in denial
B) recent specu-vestor who is now crapping his pants
C) HAM sponge who is wondering where all the HAM went
D) and most humorous – all of the above
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
52 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 8:37 am 7
Argh…hate how realtors are pumping Teranet’s Canada-wide gain of 3% in 2012.
Hot debate. What do you think?
14 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 8:44 am 8
@LocustLand
I enjoy having Bull! Bull! Bull! around as it reminds me how ridiculous people sound when then try to argue against the risk of a crash in Vancouver.
The funny thing is, the most credible bullish arguments on this site (or anywhere else for that matter) have come from people like Jesse and VMD when they’ve listed out scenarios that could possibly be bullish.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 9:06 am 9
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
0 
33
February 7th, 2013 at 9:13 am 10
Good luck getting financing for the rental when all of your equity has been destroyed plus it is easy to say “when house abc gets to price xyz then it is an obvious time to buy”. The problem is that when house abc gets to xyz price there will be no appetite for real estate at all, much less as an investment. Oddly enough when this feeling of disgust towards real estate occurs it will be a good time to buy
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
24 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 9:16 am 11
I think CRTC should be involved in investigating the misleading media:
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/RapidsCCM/Register2.asp?lang=E
Hot debate. What do you think?
19 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 9:20 am 12
“40% drop here?
Hahahah. You got to be insane!
A $600,000 house in Surrey with 2 basement suites dropping to $360000??
I’ll buy them all well before that price. The rental income of $3000 a month will provide a stable income after the mortgage is paid!!”
Wonder how that rental income will look like at 5-6-or 7% interest rates? Bloody hell people are thick. The only reason why that house in Surrey is “worth” $600k right now is because the borrowing costs are pretty much free right now. Let’s see how these clowns manage to hold on when rates start going up. I know people that are on the EDGE of their affordability limits right now because they maxed out as much mortgage as they could at 2.85% variable rate! LoL they are screwed.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 9:22 am 13
@RealktyCheck
What if there are no renters in Surrey for your “bargain” acquisition? What if a 40% drop results in a knock on effect of massive layoffs and people simply move back to wherever they came from?
The dream of getting something for nothing on a “sure thing” will evaporate before your eyes. This IS what happens of course. People will “buy the dip” and get wiped out.
So, please DO buy all you can afford. The more money committed, the more there is to bleed out… When the time comes, whatever you made in the past (or saved on rent) will be a drop in the bucket compared to what is taken out by those who know more than RE.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 9:23 am 14
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
3 
21
February 7th, 2013 at 9:33 am 15
@RC
You might, but then you have to make sure all the suits are tenanted, fix the boiler etc. (or pay a management company to do so). It might work out to be a good investment, but if prices don’t go up, it won’t be a great investment. Books like Rich Dad Poor Dad were premised on getting people to make these kind of investments which, at the time weren’t popular because they take a lot of work and there is quite a bit of risk involved. Real estate is a lot less sexy when the price isn’t going up.
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 9:44 am 16
Love the form letter. One thing I’d add is the conflict on interest media outlets have with their main source of advertising revenue.
Hot debate. What do you think?
14 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 9:51 am 17
“40% drop here?
Hahahah. You got to be insane!
A $600,000 house in Surrey with 2 basement suites dropping to $360000??
I’ll buy them all well before that price. The rental income of $3000 a month will provide a stable income after the mortgage is paid!!”
You assume rent to stay the same in that situation?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
23 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 10:00 am 18
Indeed you will.
I always wondered who exactly are those people who buy on the downward slope of a real estate bubble, oblivious to the fact that the bottom is still well off. I think we now have the answer.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 10:04 am 19
Vancouver’s 10 Worst Rental Buildings:
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/Photos+Vancouver+worst+rental+buildings/7928879/story.html
Even one building on the West Side made the list: 104 W. 11th Ave.
Like or Dislike:
3 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 10:21 am 20
The comment below by Q is a sad example of how so many Canadians think that criminals are awesome. It’s the cultural trait behind the fact that there have been essentially no white clollar crime prosecutions and convicions in Canada. It’s also why judge’s scentences are habitually law and the reason why if you are scentenced to 4 years, you get out in 4 months.
“I think this is awesome. Some lady down in Florida filed papers to claim “Adverse Possession” of the vacant, foreclosed house right next to her house. She then rented the house out for $1500 per month. The lady (who is a writer for a Florida newspaper) collected $13,500 in rent for a FREE house before she was arrested for identity theft. But it sounds like she is going to fight the charges based on Florida’s Adverse Possession laws which go back hundreds of years and allow people to lay legal claim to unoccupied real estate.”
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
10
February 7th, 2013 at 10:31 am 21
@Democrass: If she successfully manages to claim adverse possession and has the paperwork to back that up, I’d say there’s plenty to admire about it. If it’s a low-grade Craigslist rent scam, then yeah, lock her up.
Like or Dislike:
8 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 10:32 am 22
@Democrass:
The article I linked to does not say the woman was convicted of any crime. All it says is that she was charged. She remains innocent until proven guilty. And she may have a sound legal defense is Florida’s adverse possession laws so what she did may in fact not be criminal. So it’s slanderous for you to portray her as a convicted criminal.
Far from being criminal, squatters’ rights have a long history in English Common Law (from which Canadian and American legal systems are based) that goes back centuries. The notion that the people who are occupying, using, improving, investing in, farming, cleaning, maintaining, even paying property taxes on otherwise unclaimed, unoccupied, unused property gives people legal claim to property has a long history in our legal system. These principles are partially what underpinned the colonization of the Americas (Europeans were improving the land, making it more productive) and underpin legal understandings of property rights.
Hot debate. What do you think?
12 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 10:37 am 23
I think Chicago is going to have a hard time loving Canada pretty soon. The first four items on this list are about to disappear:
“Other reasons Chicago admires Canada:
-Our banks are stable.
-The housing market “never went pop.”
-Debt and spending have been kept at more reasonable levels.
-The “gold-rush-style energy boom.”
-The loonie trades at par with the U.S. dollar.
-Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s “ambitious trade agenda.” (However, the editorial notes that many Americans have never heard of him).
– Half of the Chicago Blackhawks are Canadian.
“Land of the north, Chicago is calling to you,” the piece concludes. “Calling your sesame bagels, smoked meat and Tim Hortons double-doubles. Calling your low rates of gun crime, and universal health care. Calling your oil, especially your oil. We hope some of that Canadian good fortune rubs off on our city.””
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/chicago-has-a-crush-on-canada-heres-why/article8329918/
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 10:51 am 24
For links to all of Ben’s recent presentations, go to:
http://vancouverpeak.com/Thread-Ben-Rabidoux-says
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 10:54 am 25
Here is Garth Turner’s take on what is happening in Vancouver (BC) right now:
http://www.greaterfool.ca
Hot debate. What do you think?
20 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 10:57 am 26
RealtyCheck re Buying houses in Surrey
1. So why were you not buying them 9 years ago when they were at that price?
2. The reason why people like you can’t buy these properties on the way down to support prices is because you are already ‘all in’ on real estate. As your equity evaporates and goes negative with your current holdings you would not be able to get financing to buy more.
3. I doubt you can get $3000 per month rent on a property valued today at 600k in Surrey. Maybe $2500 minus expenses you may net 2k if you can keep it rented. Maintaining and managing a low end house in Surrey with 3 suites is a fair bit of work. May as well get a job as a property manager with being a handy man on the side.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 11:03 am 27
You cannot make this stuff up.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/02/07/let-me-take-you-home-its-gorgeous-inside-calgary-real-estate-agents-sexy-advertisement-stirs-controversy/
Hot debate. What do you think?
14 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 11:24 am 28
@Q: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squatting#Canada
What is BC law on that one? What is the BC Provincial limitation to register a claim to abandoned property with the Land Title Office?
A web site listing unoccupied foreign owned properties would also be interesting. Homeless people could consult this list. They need a place to stay and the owners obviously aren’t using the place…
BTW, did any property from the last unpaid property tax sale role ultimately change hands?
Hot debate. What do you think?
15 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 11:29 am 29
A request for the knife-catchers buying on the way down:
When you do your renos, please use a slightly better grade of laminate and go with clean classic fixtures. Since it’s all borrowed money and you’re going to lose it all anyways, the future buyer might as well get a place that has decent renos and doesn’t need 99 cent laminate torn out and thrown away.
Thanks!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
47 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 11:30 am 30
On the Florida woman claiming adverse possession of her neighbour’s foreclosed property:
The reason I linked to that story isn’t simply because I find it amusing that a humble lady can throw up her finger to the system and may get away with it. This isn’t just a one-off story. There have been several stories in recent weeks, profiled on Zero Hedge, about people in Florida using adverse possession laws to lay claim to foreclosed, vacant real estate. This is part of a growing trend in the USA and it speaks to a huge vulnerability in US property rights system and to civil society and the state itself.
For our entire lives, Canadians and Americans have been living in an economic system with fairly stable property rights. Yes, there have been some conflicts around Native land claims. But generally, we do have a stable system of individual property rights. We’ve never experienced anything like what they’ve gone through in Spain or Eastern Europe or various countries where property rights systems have been overthrown and people have been dispossessed of property en masse (that happened in North America before our living memories to the Natives).
What’s interesting about these cases from Florida is it is exposing a vulnerability in the modern property system when you have the kind of massive foreclosures and massive supply of empty houses just rotting on the landscape. If you read the American media and blogs, you will see many Americans who own homes and who have been responsible and who did not take out huge mortgages during the bubble, people who had their homes paid for and never took out lines of credit–those people are complaining about all the empty houses that are rotting in their towns. These houses just sit empty and vandals come along and spray grafiti and strip it for copper and maybe squat there and leave the whole property looking like a huge mess. These is a huge movement in the US right now to try to compel the banks to clean up these properties. But the properties are in legal limbo because the banks say they are not liable and the owners who were foreclosed on and forced out say they are not liable for maintenance either. Some municipalites in the US have started cleaning up these properties and sending the bill to the former owner and the former owner says, hey man, I got foreclosed on, it’s not mine anymore. And the town doesn’t care because they just want the bill paid. So this is a huge problem in the US. And homeowners who were responsible and who were not foreclosed on are suffering the effects because when one house sits vacant and get spray painted on it brings the property values down on that whole block.
So individuals are taking things in their own hands. Some homeowners are saying I don’t want that abandoned house next door to bring down my property values and I can’t wait for the bank to clean it up so I am just going to go over there and clean it up. Some people may not be intending to take adverse possession. But I bet in this lady from Florida’s case–the fact the property was immediately adjacent to her house will be significant in court. In effect, she has a property interest in that next door property–she has an interest that it is maintained and doesn’t become an eyesore because that would bring down her property values. She also has an interest to prevent wanderers or squatters from moving in. Dangerous homeless people with guns could move into that abandoned house next door. She doesn’t want to live next door to that. So you see, this is the unraveling of civil society and the state and the rise almost of a form of Hobbesian anarchy.
The concept of ‘Terra Nullus’ is important when you think about squatters rights. Terra Nullus means empty land. There is a long history that actually precedes English Common Law that ‘empty land’ may be claimed by anyone who starts living there and working the land to improve it. This was the basis of the colonization of the Americas (although, the colonizers ignored the fact the land was not empty and there were people already living on it!!!). We can conceptualization the sheer ocean of millions of foreclosed, vacant homes as Terra Nullus just waiting for someone to move in and make improvements and lay claim to the property. This represents a huge vulnerability to the stability of our property rights system which the banks who issue mortgages rely on. But this vulnerability does have legal basis because squatters rights do exist.
Hot debate. What do you think?
16 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 11:38 am 31
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
1 
29
February 7th, 2013 at 11:42 am 32
@Bull! Bull! Bull!
Please do tell. What model(s) of weapons are registered in your real name…
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 11:49 am 33
You can get $1500 for a Surrey basement?
They why are they all around $500 – $900 on Craigslist?
Entire houses are going for less than $1500 because IT’S FUCKING SURREY!
http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/search/apa/rds?zoomToPosting=&altView=&query=surrey+basement&srchType=A&minAsk=&maxAsk=&bedrooms=
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
88 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 11:53 am 34
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
3 
13
February 7th, 2013 at 12:34 pm 35
@space889
Use it or lose it. Nobody is taking your property if somebody lives there.
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 12:37 pm 36
Q, Democrass,
I think this woman could have played this smarter. I’d have put the rent into some kind of trust to cover expenses, or not charged rent at all, just made the renters sign an agreement to keep the place up. If that’s all she’s looking for is to have the place lived in.
Banks should not be allowed to mess around, leaving empty houses to rot, year after year after year, the threat of this kind of adverse possession will hopefully make them think twice next time before the bank CEO writes himself a nice fat quarterly bonus check based on fraud. Or not. The rule of law got tossed out a long time ago, saying that only ordinary people need to pay attention to at their own ongoing suffering is bogus.
Like or Dislike:
7 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 12:37 pm 37
Vancouver’s new searchable Rental Standards Database
“The City publishes the Rental Standards database to:
Motivate property owners and landlords to keep their properties in good order for renters
Help renters make more informed decisions about where they live”
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/metro/city+Vancouver+database+lists+problem+rental+buildings/7927154/story.html
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 12:48 pm 38
– Half of the Chicago Blackhawks are Canadian.
***************
Really? That impresses them? Really?
Like or Dislike:
6 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 12:49 pm 39
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
1 
17
February 7th, 2013 at 12:51 pm 40
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
1 
21
February 7th, 2013 at 1:18 pm 41
@LocustLand, @Groundhog
“personal abuse doesn’t advance your argument.”
My post was really just a general statement and not necessarily directed at any one poster. But thanks for stepping up. Way to take ownership of abuse!
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 1:32 pm 42
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
1 
21
February 7th, 2013 at 1:45 pm 43
@Bull! Bull! Bull!
Somebody’s getting testy!
9 straight months of price declines will do that to a Bull! Bull! Bull!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 1:54 pm 44
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
3 
14
February 7th, 2013 at 1:58 pm 45
Still dreaming:
Van West, relisted for $19,680,000
List in June, 2011 for $19,990,000, only 1.6% drop after more than a year:
http://www.realtylink.org/prop_search/Detail.cfm?MLS=V988781&REBoards=All&From=MLS
Like or Dislike:
9 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 2:13 pm 46
Honestly, I wouldn’t pay $1500 for a basement suite even if it was in Vancouver, never mind Surrey. In Vancouver, I don’t think basement suites should be more than $1000 and the $800-$900 range is probably more reasonable. In Surrey, I would knock that down to $500 – $700 for a basement suite. You can rent entire houses in Surrey for $1500.
Hot debate. What do you think?
15 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 2:27 pm 47
I wouldn’t even pay $150 for a basement suite in surrey!
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 2:38 pm 48
Hey VCI admin I think it is time for an IP ban on Bull! Bull! Bull!. He is here as a troll only and just repeats the same “bears are always wrong” BS over and over again. Six posts today that add nothing to the forum.
Hot debate. What do you think?
20 
12
February 7th, 2013 at 2:56 pm 49
New inventory graph:
http://vancouverpeak.com/Thread-Inventory-Graphs?pid=401#pid401
Over the last 30 days the average daily increase was:
73
At this rate we would reach 15,000 in 8 days (Feb-15-13)
At this rate we would reach 20,000 in 77 days (Apr-25-13)
and 25,000 by July 2, 2013
Thanks PaulB for the numbers!
Hot debate. What do you think?
18 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 3:16 pm 50
This market is going to get so bad so fast I think it will even surprise most bears. If this continues by the time the fall market comes there will be absolute shock and panic in this city. I fear for the local economy when values continue to go down. Disposable income will be a thing of the past.
Hot debate. What do you think?
16 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 3:18 pm 51
I regularly check up on the mega mansions going up on Crystal Creek, in Anmore. I haven’t been up there for a while, so I was a little surprised to see a CBRE sign advertising a court-ordered sale of 9 lots. These were on sale for a long time, advertised at around $600,000. Somebody’s big dreams just went kablooey. 1403 Crystal Creek is another court-ordered sale. And in other news, it looks like the first balloons of desperation have popped up here and there. Enjoy an early spring, bears.
Hot debate. What do you think?
18 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 3:27 pm 52
Please do NOT ban bull!bull!bull!…..
He’s obviously an idiot, and I find his posts quite amusing.
We will probably appreciate the comic relief he provides in the weeks and months to come….
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 3:42 pm 53
@Bull Bull Bull
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090306201700AAgsoEt
there’s very few places you can take an AR-15 here in vancouver
frankly, people like you (that need to own killing machines) are a little off.
..but we knew that already..
can’t wait to watch you go bankrupt (just try not to take out a school bus or a maternity ward, you psycho)
Hot debate. What do you think?
5 
5
February 7th, 2013 at 3:42 pm 54
“What is BC law on that one? What is the BC Provincial limitation to register a claim to abandoned property with the Land Title Office?”
The BC Land Title Act expressly outlaws adverse possession. Not surprising as the Torrens system used in BC was designed to prevent that sort of thing.
http://www.cba.org/cba/sections_realprop/pdf/BritishColumbia_June2012.pdf
Like or Dislike:
8 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 3:44 pm 55
Do no fret about Bull Bull Bull.
This site attracts interest because it provides information and statistics not readily available in the mainstream media.
In doing so, it also attracts interest from those looking to buy real estate, buyers who are concerned about the direction of the market.
Trolls like Bull Bull Bull are here because they are agitated this information is being shared and that people are gaining a solid understanding about the bubble and what is going to happen. Posters like Bull Bull Bull are merely making feeble attempts to counter this rising trend.
Anyone successful in real estate, who is confident about the ability of the market to continue expanding, has neither the time nor desire to spend time on this site.
Which tells you all you need to know about Bull Bull Bull.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
27 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 3:57 pm 56
How’s this for tiny condos?
http://news.yahoo.com/poor-cages-show-dark-side-142611366.html
Like or Dislike:
3 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 4:01 pm 57
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
16
February 7th, 2013 at 4:05 pm 58
best place on earth?
During past several years, the number of hit and run claims reported to the police have increased dramatically.
http://vancouver.ca/police/organization/operations/traffic/traffic-services/hit-and-run-team.html
Like or Dislike:
3 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 4:08 pm 59
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
1 
15
February 7th, 2013 at 4:11 pm 60
http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/11/global-house-prices
interesting to compare us, canada, china, australian, especially in the price to income and price to rent
the chart for vancouver would be worse than that for canada, which is already bad on the metrics compared to other countries
if i were an international investor, the us is looking like a good bet
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 4:17 pm 61
@patriotz re: Torrens Indefeasible Title in BC
Thanks for posting! A more detailed opinion for BC can be found here:
http://www.marymacgregor.ca/article14.htm
Of course nothing prevents amending/restricting Indefeasible Title to beneficial Canadian Residents by the Legislative Assembly.
Dual citizen terrorists are on the Federal chopping block to lose Canadian citizenship, so why not the property rights of absentee foreigners distorting the RE supply by holding vacant property?
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 4:33 pm 62
@Short’em High
So if someone like say yvr2zrh has a house in Vancouver that he decides to keep but not to rent out while he works in Europe for a couple of years, then according to you it’s ok for me to squat in the house and file adverse possession after 2 years to take possession? After all, he’s not using the house.
Is that how you justify taking all the land from natives or the poor?
Like or Dislike:
1 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 4:33 pm 63
At last, a Chinese New Year fluff piece! Now featuring wobbly narrative.
…don’t let that bother you!
…don’t let that bother you!
…don’t let that bother you!
…don’t let that bother you!
…don’t let that bother you!
Hot debate. What do you think?
12 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 4:33 pm 64
Bull Bull Bull! is welcome in my books.
Reality Check why don’t you go sell used Honda’s in India. Preferably a place with no internet.
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
5
February 7th, 2013 at 4:41 pm 65
This blog needs Bull! Bull! Bull!
He provides some fodder for discussion and adds to the entertainment value of the blog.
Wihout him there would be no conflict on the blog. You know how boring that would be? It would be like a movie where the hero faces no obstacles or oposition. Imagine Raiders of the Lost Ark if Indy just cake walked to the Ark with no opposition. That’s boring.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 4:50 pm 66
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
16
February 7th, 2013 at 4:52 pm 67
@Bull! Bull! Bull!, you totally made me limpy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 4:55 pm 68
“Dual citizen terrorists are on the Federal chopping block to lose Canadian citizenship, so why not the property rights of absentee foreigners distorting the RE supply by holding vacant property?”
It’s the same reason why Conrad Black is allowed to live in Canada. I trust you have little trouble figuring it out.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 4:56 pm 69
@space889 re: @yvr2zrh hypothetical abandoned home.
The law presently says that the Province will defend @yvr2zrh’ claim to his home, but I would support changes to the law that would require @yvr2zrh to at minimum engage a caretaker or other security service to defend the claim while the owner is non-resident. Of course, the owner could also sell to a resident or take on tenants which is basically the intent of my comment.
The system we have now encourages foreign plutocrat criminals to park money in our neighborhoods thus creating further incentives for even more vacant properties as the constrained supply artificially drives up prices and rents. Foreigners need to be disabused of this idea. The benefits of Canadian residential property should be reserved for the interests of Canadian Residents.
Like or Dislike:
5 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 4:56 pm 70
BC couple with a rental investment property that’s losing $1K/month! The rental property is assessed at higher value than the principle residence too!
http://business.financialpost.com/2013/02/06/family-finance-rrsps-to-the-rescue/
Hot debate. What do you think?
9 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 5:01 pm 71
“Vancouver reigns as the most expensive city in North America to live in, even more so than swanky locales such as New York and Los Angeles, according to annual rankings by The Economist.”
http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/blogs/insight/vancouver-ranked-north-america-priciest-city-155659088.html
Like or Dislike:
7 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 5:16 pm 72
@Short’Em High #69:
I agree 100% Let’s ban foreign ownership. Let’s allow adverse possession by local citizens on all real estate owned by foreigners!
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
12
February 7th, 2013 at 5:20 pm 73
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
1 
14
February 7th, 2013 at 5:23 pm 74
@Short’em High
So basically you support stealing as long as it fits with your sense of moral code. Seriously, why should yvr2zrh be forced to sell his house while he works outside of Canada? He would still be paying property taxes in Canada on his house. If he is only staying away for say 5 years, why should he be forced to sell when he leaves and buy when he comes back? Potentially at adverse time in the market cycle?
if you are concerned about foreign blood money coming in to Canada and buy up real estate, there are some very simple solutions under existing law. One is money laudering laws. Make the foreigners or the foreign student proof how they got the $4M or $5M in legitimate means, or else reject the money. Seriously, how many Chinese government officials can amass $4M CAD legally? Even assuming they are investment genius? Off course Canada really doesn’t enforce this because they prefer to have the money come in rather than reject the free money. The only reason it is clamping down on immigration now is due to the drain on social services, along with undesirable characters coming in, and vote getting among PC voter base. We don’t need to weak property rights law to achieve this.
Frankly what you are proposing would make buying real estate extremely risky as it is wide open to abuse. Fraudster can easily take possession of people’s homes while they are away on a 2 weeks vacation. Even without adverse posession laws, there are reports of people coming back from vacation finding their homes sold to total strangers. Granted those cases were done with identify frauds and likely help from agents and lawyers but still causes tons of problems for both the owner and the buyers who are all victims. With adverse possession laws, the owner can be totally out of luck unless they can afford to pay huge legal bills while paying mortgage on a property they no longer own, and having to find shelter. Total financial ruin regardless of what happens.
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
6
February 7th, 2013 at 5:31 pm 75
How about adverse possession of real estate owned by non-Canadians. I would support that. If we are not a Canadian citizen and you leave your real estate holdings sitting vacant, local people can occupy that real estate and come to own it through adverse possession.
None of this would apply to real estate owned by Canadian citizens. So Canadians could go on vacation and not worry about someone taking over their home through adverse possession.
Adverse possession would only apply to real estate owned by non-Canadian citizens. I believe this could be done with a simple legislative change by the BC Government in Victoria. I would vote for any party advocating this policy.
Real estate is a special class of property, it is ‘real’ property. That is why there is a tradition of treating real estate with different laws than just regular property like a pair of shoes or a car. Real estate brings economic benefits, it is place based and community based. It is essential for the functioning of the economy and the society that people can access real estate.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 5:34 pm 76
How about adverse possession of real estate owned by non-Canadians. I would support that. If we are not a Canadian citizen and you leave your real estate holdings sitting vacant, local people can occupy that real estate and come to own it through adverse possession.
None of this would apply to real estate owned by Canadian citizens. So Canadians could go on vacation and not worry about someone taking over their home through adverse possession.
Adverse possession would only apply to real estate owned by non-Canadian citizens. I believe this could be done with a simple legislative change by the BC Government in Victoria. I would vote for any party advocating this policy.
Hot debate. What do you think?
5 
6
February 7th, 2013 at 5:36 pm 77
Adverse possession: it used to be the case, for example acquiring rights by prescription, in common law. The problem is it became a legal nightmare with endless “he said, she said” cases. Consequently it was legislatively outlawed in 1966 in B.C.
Having suffered with a prescriptive claim (defeated fortunately) I can attest that the proposals to bring back such claims would be a nightmare. The Torrens land title system is arguably the most advanced, sophisticated and cheapest to maintain and operate in the world. Try a land registry jurisdiction, such as in the UK and find property title disputes that can go on for generations.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 5:43 pm 78
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Realtors+prep+Lunar+Year+upswing+sales/7934733/story.html
omg this article is so pukey…
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 5:49 pm 79
“Anyone successful in real estate, who is confident about the ability of the market to continue expanding”
Was successful because he was lucky, not because he was smart.
Like or Dislike:
3 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 5:58 pm 80
Right on, pukey…
Lunar New Year is one of the times of the year when the Chinese visitors who are drawn to Vancouver tend to come, which is something the real estate industry noticed and catered to with receptions and sales events. The result, McNeil said, has been “quite a few transactions out of that time period.”
Who cares for long term damage and society deterioration, we are eagerly getting ready to warmly welcome our locusts and take better pose for backdoor prick.
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Realtors+prep+Lunar+Year+upswing+sales/7934733/story.html#ixzz2KGh9ybST
Hot debate. What do you think?
19 
4
February 7th, 2013 at 6:07 pm 81
The soaring costs are putting decent homes out of reach of a large portion of the population while stoking resentment of the government, which controls all land for development, and a coterie of wealthy property developers.
Housing costs have been fuelled by easy credit thanks to ultralow interest rates that policy-makers can’t raise because the currency is pegged to the dollar. Money flooding in from mainland Chinese and foreign investors looking for higher returns has exacerbated the rise.
Hong Kong plight of poor living in cages, cubicles triggers political vow to action
Vancouver? NO! It’s Hong Kong!
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 6:10 pm 82
if this is indeed a credit bubble as I believe, the best way to make housing truly affordable is to require 25% down payment with 25 years amortization only. mortgage insurance is offered for primary residence only, requiring 15% down payment, and capped at $300,000 per mortgage. capital gains on the sale of primary residence is subject to capital gain tax if sold within two years of purchase.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 6:15 pm 83
A good op-ed in the WSJ, courtesy of Zerohedge:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-02-07/economy-built-illusion
Some excerpts:
“Asset inflation often produces something called “wealth illusion,” the belief that pricier asset holdings necessarily make one permanently richer. Illusions are dangerous. Eventually, painful reality intervenes.”
“German banker and economist Kurt Richebächer provided some of the earliest warnings of the dangers. In his April 2005 newsletter, he wrote that “there is always one and the same cause of [asset inflation], and that is credit creation in excess of current saving leading to demand growth in excess of output.”
“But an economy built on an illusion is hardly a sound structure. We may be doomed to learn that lesson once again before long.”
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 6:16 pm 84
@space889 re: …”what you are proposing would make buying real estate extremely risky”…
Exactly. There should be significant risk for those who think nothing of tying up perfectly good year-round shelter on a whim for parking money or securing a criminal safehouse destination.
It’s good to see a lively discussion on the issue.
Personally I think it would be hilarious to see the vacant homes of visitors abusing land investment privilege finding their home occupied by squatters (at least temporarily) and those incidents prominently featured on foreign news outlets.
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 6:18 pm 85
New Listings 248
Price Changes 80
Sold Listings 92
TI:14527
http://www.paulboenisch.com
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
132 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 6:22 pm 86
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
41 
4
February 7th, 2013 at 6:28 pm 87
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
10 
24
February 7th, 2013 at 6:34 pm 88
Condopocalypse
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 6:35 pm 89
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
2 
18
February 7th, 2013 at 6:39 pm 90
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
17
February 7th, 2013 at 6:40 pm 91
From the Vancouver Sun article on CNY and Rich Chinese Buying Vancouver Real Estate.
“To me, (Chinese buyers) are a leading indicator,” McNeil said. “What I mean is, when Chinese buyers are active, it is a little bit of a bellwether (for the overall market), and the Chinese are active.”
Buyers are taking their time, McNeil said, but for developments in good locations with “fair values, prices aren’t coming off and are selling very well.”
He added that locations with established neighbourhoods, good schools and proximity to rapid transit are popular.
—————————
Yeah, I can see wealthy Mainland Chinese buyers consider proximity to rapid transit as being SUPER important to their buying decision.
Why take the Bentley when you can ride the Canada Line?
Maybe Mr. MacNeil is trying to get his real audience – brokeass first time home buyers – off the fence.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
57 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 7:11 pm 92
Can someone educate me on when a house is considered sold for the daily stats.
Is it when a deal is accepted?
Conditions are lifted?
Or when title is transferred?
Thanks
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 7:56 pm 93
Um the daily inventory growth is high, mostly because of low sales and close to no expiries. I’m getting worried… vicariously
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
30 
1
February 7th, 2013 at 7:58 pm 94
+123
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 8:15 pm 95
Ooh 92 sales! Things are happening. Phones are ringing …or some sh!t.
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 8:21 pm 96
djb I think it’s when subjects are removed.
Hot debate. What do you think?
10 
0
February 7th, 2013 at 9:16 pm 97
“Adverse possession would only apply to real estate owned by non-Canadian citizens. I believe this could be done with a simple legislative change by the BC Government in Victoria. I would vote for any party advocating this policy.”
Any party putting forward such a proposal would be so batshit crazy that the rest of their policies would surely be pure comedy gold.
YEAH! THEY’D BE CALLED THE NATIONAL FRONT.
Hot debate. What do you think?
8 
8
February 7th, 2013 at 9:21 pm 98
… or GOLDEN DAWN. Haha. What a joke this topic is.
I’m not allowed to talk about Mainland Chinese money moving to YVR without being voted down but the guy who wants to terrorize foreigners by having squatters take over their property is voted up. Too funny. And of course these squatters amount to targeted action with the blessings of a benignly racist government that would condone their actions by being slow to act out against vandalism or to restore these buyers’ rights. But it’s OK because it targets what? Wealth? Or foreigners? Or wealthy foreigners. It’s hard to guess the greatest evil here. As long as you don’t guess envy… you get voted up.
Hot debate. What do you think?
13 
9
February 7th, 2013 at 9:23 pm 99
inventory graph:
http://vancouverpeak.com/Thread-Inventory-Graphs?pid=401#pid401
Over the last 30 days the average daily increase was:
73
At this rate we would reach 15,000 in 8 days (Feb-15-13)
At this rate we would reach 20,000 in 77 days (Apr-25-13)
and 25,000 by July 2, 2013
Thanks PaulB for the numbers!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
2
February 7th, 2013 at 9:47 pm 100
#31 “Personally, I would love to see Vancouver go Mad Max”
+1 Lululemon combat gear.
Hot debate. What do you think?
7 
3
February 7th, 2013 at 9:54 pm 101
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
26
February 7th, 2013 at 9:58 pm 102
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
24
February 7th, 2013 at 10:06 pm 103
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
2 
14
February 7th, 2013 at 10:16 pm 104
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
17
February 7th, 2013 at 11:11 pm 105
At this rate, inventory will reach 425,000 by July, 2017. Can’t wait!!!
Hot debate. What do you think?
5 
5
February 7th, 2013 at 11:30 pm 106
It’s a little crazy that a western cosmopolitan city depends on a Hail Mary from Beijing to save the housing market. We have smart people from all over the world here and we are waiting for a Chinese Godot to come and save the market. But he’s right though, CNY will be the bellwether of the market.
Emotion is running high on both side of the aisle. Posts on anything anti-China (or anti-Chinese) are highly upvoted here. A bit unnerving.
A friend bought a house last year, he overbid because he’s afraid Godot would outbid him. He said “buying a house nowadays is tricky. You have to buy a house the Chinese will want to buy eventually. I almost bought a house but it has an outdoor pool. That’s not popular among Chinese buyers.” These are common conversation among people who bought recently.
If Paul start posting 200+ sales days a week from now, how many will have reasonable doubts about the crash? How many will want foreign ownership rule changes? How many will give up and jump in? I know at least two person who would.
However if sales are slow even after the Chinese New Year, that will damage the collective psyche across the aisle. We learned from Bosa that Chinese godots didn’t really materialize last year. So if this month sales is under last year’s sales, that’s it, the jig is up. Godot is not coming to save us.
Economists, analysts, experts will jump over each other to proclaim publicly the market is dead. 4-5 years from now, they want to be featured in an article with this to their name “(Insert name here), who predicted the housing market crash in Vancouver”. They will consume airtime after airtime, articles after articles. Even Tsur, Helmut etc will jump in. Who wants to be David Lereah when it’s all said and done?
If Vancouver market is kneecapped now, this would be the equivalent of breaking the neck.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
2
February 8th, 2013 at 8:59 am 107
@RaggedyRenter
Thank you! This blog is so much beyond RE for me.
Never heard of this play before =)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMz1-Kgz_DI
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
February 9th, 2013 at 9:41 am 108
@raggedy:
No need to strain brain with doubt.
Curse was set in motion on 4th day of 4th month.
We will hit bottom in 44 months.
Full recovery not for 44 years.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
February 13th, 2013 at 11:18 am 109
2013 will be a disastrous year for vancouver RE . I left vancouver in 2000 and sold my yaletown condo 777sq for 200k. Miami is a better city trust me, sunshine and beach. I don’t know why people wanna stay in vancouver .
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
February 16th, 2013 at 12:51 am 110
Have you heard the old expression Buy Low sell high? For those that think we’ve hit the bottom or soon to hit the bottom the time to buy is now.. If less people are buying you can get great deals now.. http://BCHomez.com
Like or Dislike:
0 
0