I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again here and now.
This story is the story that just keeps on giving!
I’ve talked about how the Municipality of the Town of Oakville compromised the buyers in this Oakville development of 18 allegedly “high end” detached houses.
Last month I explained how I had been chasing after the Subdivision Agreement stated in the Agreement of Purchase & Sale for a year and only managed to get my hands on it after dropping everything and driving all the way up to highway #7 north of Toronto to this builder’s head office and demanding it.
When I did finally get home and a chance to read it, everything became abundantly clear to me as to why I had not been given this “critically important document“.
It must be considered “critically important” as it is stipulated in the AP&S and anything set out therein, should be studied.
That’s just good common sense, but it is common sense that is most often missed it seems when it comes to buying real estate.
I read every word in every document, thus my demanding it for a year!
A casual scan of this Agreement took me to “Schedule M“, Clause 39 that stated that “NO Occupancy could be granted until the developer completed certain obligations under the agreement, including but not limited to the fence around the perimeter, the grading and sodding, etc.“.
When I approached the Town of Oakville about this serious breach (many owners were forced by the builder to accept “Occupancy” despite the obvious contradiction within the legal requirements) the first person to respond told me that the Town “was trying to be reasonable“.
That reassured me until I realized what their interpretation of “reasonable” was and “reasonable for whom“?
Apparently “reasonable” to the Municipality meant that the builder and developer could get paid as quickly as possible, despite causing considerable inconvenience and discomfort to the buyers (consumers).
You see some of these buyers (consumers/tax payers) have been living in a rugged construction zone with all the dust and dirt, noise and debris, without a proper roadway, basically in a situation that you have to experience to know just how intrusive and uncomfortable it really is!
I had also been given the run around for a year on a number of other requests like my request for the Rules and Regulations relating to the POTL component of the property (the road is condo and the homes are not).
So after a year of chasing I also got my copy of the Rules and Regulations of the POTL only to discover that, contrary to what I was being told by the builder, the Rules were in fact agreed upon prior to my even having bought!
That’s right, they did NOT disclose to me that the POTL had already been registered!
I found out by doing the math built into the lie about my “having signed for the Rules” at the time of executing the AP&S.
Fortunately my extensive log of communications with this builder showed the lack of integrity undermining this misrepresentation.
This leads me to “strike 2” (think baseball here) in this rigged (against the consumer) game that is being played with respect to these homes.
You see, when a condo gets registered, there is to be a “Turn Over Meeting“, at which a board of directors consisting of the owners of the newly formed POTL accept the management and control of the POTL.
The documents show that the POTL was registered in December 2014 which was before I even purchased!
Once the condo is registered, owners are required to pay the monthly maintenance fees, a portion of which forms the “Reserve Fund“.
So, it appears that the Municipality was again trying to be “reasonable“, which again means allowing the builder to get away with things AT THE EXPENSE OF THE CONSUMER (buyers).
You see, when the POTL was Registered there were no buyers living there (construction hadn’t even started) so my question is “who were the board members of this newly formed POTL condo corporation“?
I am told that they actually built the sub-road, but there is to this day no blacktop on the road yet people are living there!
This isn’t “Consumer Protection” folks!
It IS “Consumer Exploitation” of the worst kind!
The Town of Oakville and this Builder have been notified of my blogs and advised to read them.
I am now requesting a formal reply from both parties as both have gone surprisingly quiet after becoming aware of my Blog.
The thing that stumps me is that the POTL was actually registered but not disclosed to buyers.
The builder got their green light to move onto the money stage and the consumers are left living in the chaos of a full blow construction site that is Registered but the laws have been skirted (owners have no representation on the board of directors).
The developer and builder are given a green light to do whatever they want to do, but they cannot even answer simple questions like the one I’ve posed about the wooden telephone polls.
I asked the builder and he says “they are the permanent polls” when a chimpanzee in a suit could tell you that they are NOT!
Same story on the fence!
Builder tells me “no fence” yet the registered site plan shows one!
I am anticipating a third strike but I just haven’t come across it as of yet.
I have requested Schedule “F” of the Subdivision Agreement weeks back and as usual have not been given my copy!
This is how it works with this builder and apparently how it works with the Municipality of the Town of Oakville.
I cornered the Municipal Inspector on site a couple weeks back and shared with him my concerns about these ugly wooden polls throughout the neighbourhood and was more than shocked that he could not verify or support my position which was that “they are temporary“.
Question #1 – Who has been paying the monthly maintenance fees on each of the 18 homes?
Question #2 – Has the required Reserve Fund contributions been made?
Question #3 – Who are the Board Members?
Question #4 – Why has none of this been disclosed to the buyers (consumers), especially those required to live in this chaos (chaos that was in burdened onto them, despite the Subdivision Agreement)?
Municipalities earn a great deal of money from developers and builders (and consumers after the fact in taxes) but it seems clear that the only one’s being “taken care of or ‘protected’“, is the Municipality itself, the developer and the builder.
And as usual, Mr. and Ms. Consumer get left out in the cold!
Municipality of the Town of Oakville