If the buyer's small print could be "Agree to pay $1.6 M or market value, whichever is less."
|
|
|
COVID and the housing market
- Thread starter mimico_polak
- Start date
That's not fair either. Either you split risk or one side takes it. A contract where either side grabs the upside while leaving the other party to hold the downside is crap.
I guess my only question now is…where do I sign up for my bailout?
I’ve also had an increase in payments? Won’t someone think of the Polaks?
No builder would ever sign off on that deal and would only adjust to market value on a house that was complete and he needed to recover whatever he could in a plunging market.
As long as the builder doesn't unethically pad the closing costs he is only meeting his contractual duties to his suppliers and shareholders. The buyer is often playing the greed game as well, hoping inflation will make him rich.
I would be shocked if there was ever any mention of guaranteed future pricing in the sales literature. Verbally there could very likely be suggestive phrases that would be worthless in court.
The problem as I see it are clauses with no oversight (eg buyer agrees to pay for utility hookup but builder marks it up by an order of magnitude and says too bad you agreed) and the clauses that allow builders to increase price near closing at their whim. Any changes to price should be based on some external quantifiable metric (appraisal, inflation, change in material prices etc). As with most things, those with the power and wealth dont want the light anywhere near their cash cow.
Everybody wants the best product and service at the least possible price and now that public outrage at not getting what you want , right or wrong has become a media baby , you get this as a news story .
Real estate Karens
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
Real estate Karens
Sent from my iPhone using GTAMotorcycle.com
Mad Mike
Well-known member
I see two issues being discussed. First is the practice of builders adding mystery costs at closing time -- I think consumers should be protected against this.
The second is the risk of buying prebuilds. That's always a speculation game. In a hot market, an endless number of people will gamble the price today will be less than the value tomorrow - everyone in that video expected the tide would be rising on prices, unfortunately for them, their gamble on black came up red.
I think that's the way it ought to go. Prebuild speculation greed is one of the key things that drove up home prices... so those who got caught in the downturn are now paying the price. A few have learned the hard way, and hopefully, many more who are thinking about entering this risky game are watching and learning.
The second is the risk of buying prebuilds. That's always a speculation game. In a hot market, an endless number of people will gamble the price today will be less than the value tomorrow - everyone in that video expected the tide would be rising on prices, unfortunately for them, their gamble on black came up red.
I think that's the way it ought to go. Prebuild speculation greed is one of the key things that drove up home prices... so those who got caught in the downturn are now paying the price. A few have learned the hard way, and hopefully, many more who are thinking about entering this risky game are watching and learning.
Don't forget government intervention. BoC isn't helping those already involved in the target zone. Builders are seeing loss of interest and committed buyers are seeing red.
Can they legislate contract controls with regards to extras?
I would like to see any extras backed by receipts with a maximum mark up, 20-25%, not the $50,000 for utility hookup that should have been include in the original price.
Prebuild speculation is on the buyer. Think like Kevin O'Leary. While I don't particularly like the man, he makes a point. SHOW ME THE MONEY. No "I think" "It should" "Maybe" "Supposed to" "Probably".
"But I want it", while putting on rose coloured glasses.
This too will pass. How many years do you figure until the next one?
Mad Mike
Well-known member
I'm not blaming BOC, they appear to serve the whims of the PM who printed way too much money, and added way too many gatekeepers for years. In the last couple of years the BoC gave the economy a few hundred billion $$$ to wallow in -- this is their way of cooling off the consequences (inflation) it created.
But I don't see a connection between the BoC and the trouble faced by those who speculated on pre-build real estate. Inflation was no surprise -- it happens when you flood the market with money. Rising interest rates were no surprise -- that's the magic elixer for fighting inflation.
Dumb money chasing easy gains is no surprise, either is the plight of dumb money speculators when the ride is over.
As Robert Stanfield put it "You can't unscramble an egg." JT just keeps making bigger omelettes.
The party in power has to decide on which action will alienate the fewest voters.
JT has to face the builders with dropping sales, buyers feeling cheated, tradespeople facing declining work and rates, hopeful uncommitted buyers still unable to purchase and renters plus those against his other questionable antics.
The opposition always has the cure, until they're in power.
For the economy to recover the voting public must trust the government. No party IMO has that trust
Mad Mike
Well-known member
Move that video to the Jokes thread.
DownUnder
Well-known member
Does the speaker not care that the guy was making a complete mockery of the proceedings? How is this garbage tolerated?
Mad Mike
Well-known member
I think this short is a clear metaphor for the way the Liberals operate.
They don't listen.
They conflate unrelated issues when opposed or questioned.
They can't communicate effectively.
Wow I hate that stuff unfortunately they all do it. Can never answer a question just read a script. What is wrong with saying I do not know ffs?
Sent from the future
Sent from the future
Sadly if anyone thinks that it's just the liberals that pull these stunts they're very much mistaken. I've heard this shite from both sides.
Speaker should have the power to dock a weeks pay from any member that is being obstructionist/wasting time. That should make parliament free for us. We would still be overpaying.
Idiots all around. I blame the Speaker.
‘Answer the question or GTFO of the chamber’
How is this poo even allowed? Idiots on both sides.
And as we all know, PO is also an investor in real estate which he nicely hides under his wife’s name. Nothing wrong with it, but it’s disingenuous of him to pretend to care about increase in housing hurting normal Canadians.
|
|
|
|
|