It is abundantly clear, that The Municipality of the Town of Oakville having allowed this developer and this builder to impose “Occupancy“, CONTRADICTING A VERY EXPLICIT CLAUSE within it’s own Subdivision Agreement is simply inexcusable!
I visited the site again last week (as a buyer I do every week, photographing, chronicling and documenting everything) and it is becoming increasingly more obvious that the Municipality has acted in a manner that has seriously compromised many of the buyers.
Again, I am literally staggered by all the highly educated people involved here (try to get such a senior job without some credentials behind your name!), who purportedly are doing their best to fulfill the jobs for which they get paid, only to end up in such devastation being handed out to the very people that they are paid to protect!
Isn’t that the very definition of a dichotomy?
Now let’s understand that there is a lot of money at stake here.
The 18 homes that comprise this brand new collection of homes, have been sold in the $1 Million to $1.5 Million range so we know that somewhere around $20 Million Dollars will change hands when all is done.
The Municipality earns a considerable amount of clear profits from Permit Fees, Registration Fees, Hook-up charges, taxes, levies, and the like, in the lead up to property taxes for life!
I guess you could say that this offers fertile ground for “conflict of interest“.
Now, I’m not saying that the Municipality are guilty of anything here other than apparently breaching their own contracts to the detriment of each consumer that trusted in them to at minimum, make sure that all provisions of their contracts that protect the consumers are honoured!
Not unlike in looking at the Municipality in Condoland (Toronto), all city coffers are heavily dependent upon this massive cash-flow!
So, I don’t think I’m out of line when I say that Municipalities bend over backwards for developers.
And after all, aren’t they really looking out for the best interests of the community by insuring all that employment and cash income?
Well, yes but!
The question comes down “at who’s expense“?
The quick and easy answer in this (and consistently in development no matter where I look) “the CONSUMER“!
Yes those every day men and women investing their most sacred investment . . . their home, and they are the ONLY ones putting up any money!
So in this case, the Municipality had it’s lawyers draw up a very thorough and comprehensive Subdivision Agreement, that according to the Purchase and Sale Agreement for each home, was to be attached and form a part of that Purchase and Sale Agreement.
The buyers (consumers) were obligated under law to each and every provision set out in both documents.
If all is proper under law, each and every provision set out in both documents MUST BE HONOURED BY ALL PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT(s).
For a little clarity here, the parties to this “collective of two agreements“, although naming parties other than those set out in the AP&S, include all parties named in both.
The Subdivision Agreement is between the Municipality of the Town of Oakville and a developer, who way back in September 19, 2011, drew up the site plans, grading plans, etc. for what was then a wooded run off area on Lakeshore Road, for an 18 house subdivision, to be registered as a (Parcel Of Tied Lands – “POTL“).
The Municipality’s lawyers did a very good job of constructing a comprehensive undertaking, setting out responsibilities and obligations of each party.
Despite my repeated requests over twelve months, for delivery of the Subdivision Agreement (referred to by not attached to our AP&S) I recently (my home is over 11 months late) had to drive up to the builder’s head office and demand it!
Now, when someone doesn’t give you an answer or a requested document in this business, it should be like a siren going off!
In this scenario, each of the 18 AP&S names an individual buyer (consumer) trusting in the integrity of all parties involved, and a builder (the developer developed the land getting everything approved and then sold the “18 Lots” to these guys that (falsely) called themselves builders.
I’ve said many times here, developers and builders are “anyone with money“.
They can lack knowledge, business or construction expertise, industry experience, intelligence, integrity . . . . . all they need is money!
This builder is your quintessential unqualified, and proven unethical builder.
He has blatantly lied to me so many times that now, if his lips are moving I read it as a lie!
Each week when I attend the site, I come away feeling more and more bad for the buyers who have been forced to Close by this builder.
One family has been living there for almost a year!
The photo below was shot just last week, clearly showing the disgusting conditions that these buyers (consumers) have been and are required to live in, when all the while, buried deep with the Subdivision Agreement’s Schedule M Clause 39 (you can see why this builder refused to give it to me until I showed up and demanded it) the developer was required to meet the conditions set out in the Subdivision Agreement which were:
Clause #39. “that the owner constructs a board on board wood fence around the perimeter of the lands to a height . . . . . . prior to occupancy of any dwelling on the lands“.
The AP&S was a lengthy and as usual ridiculous contract (but if you want to buy you have to sign) fundamentally stripping buyers/consumers of any right,s regardless of what the developer or builder chose to do after your 10 Day Rescission Period ended.
Does this at all sound like a level playing field to any of you out there?
So, based on all these legal documents, undertakings and all, consumers would have least have to admit that they had access to everything pertinent on which to rely, justifying their willingness to part with a friendly million and half dollars!
I found the Municipality’s response to my initial inquiry a couple weeks back, a little more than confusing:
The clause pertaining to the installation of a fence around the perimeter of the condominium block is a condition set out in theSubdivision Agreement that needs to be satisfied and despite its specifics on being completed prior to registration, the Town needs to act reasonably in the application of the clause
OK, “what is ‘reasonable’ about someone paying upwards of a million and a quarter and having to live for over a year in the conditions that this photo (taken last week) shows?
And last week when I went to this totally untrustworthy and proven dysfunctional builder, he actually told me that that crooked wooden lamp pole and the many other wooden lamp poles were “permanent fixtures”, when in fact they are not.
I was born at night but it wasn’t last night! This guy hasn’t got a clue on what is going on around him, but he is constantly willing to make such ridiculous statements!
While he was holding back disclosure (a possible legal hurdle that I intend to address down the road) of the Subdivision Agreement, that stated he could not impose closings onto the buyers/consumers, he also told me “there are no fences“!
A chimpanzee in a suit could (so I did) walk him around to the front of the project where the municipal required signs were and showed him the Registered Site Plan with its’ fence running around the entire perimeter of the site plan.
Now, I’ve confessed to not having an education, but please don’t confuse yourself into thinking that I’m stupid!
Had he complied with the law and given us full disclosure as requested, all of that was buried deep within the Subdivision Agreement (he still hasn’t complied to my instruction to him to supply me with Schedule “F” which addresses the electrical distraction system) I would have put a stop to this a long time ago.
Again, I’m not affected, as of yet specifically because of my ability to understand the contract that we have and exercising my rights under it.
And I’m just getting started on this!
I’ve written to the Municipality asking them to justify what they mean by “reasonable” as the outcome of the “breach of the Subdivision Agreement“, has materially affected each owner that this builder has chosen to impose Closing on!
Since notifying the Municipality the builder has tried pushing through another five (5) Closings, despite having been given written notification that doing so was in “breach of the Subdivision Agreement“.
The Builder cannot do this alone as they need an “Occupancy Permit” from the Municipality, who obviously see it more “reasonable” to accommodate the builder and developer to get their money, at the distinct expense of buyers/consumers who are now being forced to Close on their purchases and live amidst this chaos, dirt and noise!
My question is: “what incentive does the developer and or builder have to do what they are legally obligated to do under the Subdivision Agreement“?
When asked, their answer consistently has relied on “a deposit that the Municipality required from the Developer and Builder so that if they don’t finish their work and honour their obligations, the city will get it done and pay for it out of this deposit“!
I’m sorry folks, but that’s simply not good enough!
A contract is a contract is a contract!
The Municipality, though negligence has allowed this mess to manifest (they must have known it was coming – there’s a whole bunch of development going on, and maybe that’s the problem as the same developer is doing tons of projects in Oakville $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ ) by failing to hold the other party (the Developer) to the Municipality’s own Subdivision Agreement at the direct expense of loss of “quality of life“.
Again, I will ask “how reasonable is that to the buyers (consumers)“?
I can tell you that if the builder and developer were held to the “Integrity” of that Subdivision Agreement and there was NO MONEY to any player until the terms were met, integrity would prevail.
The Municipality owes this to all buyers and it has seriously failed in honouring its obligations to its own tax payers!
In this case study, there is no integrity, the Subdivision Agreement proves meaningless, and all that has been achieved is that the consumers that bought these places are allowed to be abused by having to Close at the insistence of a proven money-hungry builder who hasn’t been able to get the job done (it’s over a year late!).
As I said, since my having given this builder, and the Municipality “Formal Notice that Closing were restricted by the Subdivision Agreement” (the Municipality guy was going on holidays and will look into it when he gets back I guess . . . . . ? ) the builder has been working hard to push through five more Closings!
You see, that’s when the builder gets all of the money.
And the consumer, who put up all that money, now has to live indefinitely in a construction zone that has already perpetuated itself for over a year!
The inexcusable punch line here is that the consumer is being “screwed over“!
All the homes are completed exterior wise anyway, therefore no obstacles in the way of the developer competing the grading, fences, sodding, roads, remove the temporary electricity poles (they are actually imposing on the buyers that have Closed without compensating them) etc., and at least putting up the show that they are interested in satisfying the significantly disrupted lives of those buyers!
These jobs are minimal in the overall picture of things, but not to those families being required to live in this nightmare!
As people are already in the homes, it is paramount that the Municipality step up, admit the mistake that they have made, and insure that all the work is now completed immediately, before winter sets in (sod, landscaping, etc.) and these poor people have to live through another mud infested lifestyle!
The builder and developer, now flush with cash, can take their time.
The buyers (consumers) trusted in the Municipality and the Municipality has let each of them down, big time!
The Municipality “OWES IT” to these buyers (consumers) to get all provisions (including but not limited to, the grading, the fences, the road, telephone poles, etc.) set out in the Subdivision Agreement honoured immediately.
Please share your comments and opinions, as this is not an isolated case and it is important that consumers start to come together and fight this type of abuse.
Municipality of the Town of Oakville