Construction Trust Claims: How to Protect Yourself Caught up in the moment of construction work chaos and scrambling to complete jobs, it is all too easy for invoices to accrue and accounts to build up. While construction liens provide one way to secure payment due to contractors and subcontractors, preventing one’s lien rights from expiring requires meeting strict deadlines, which are often missed. Construction Trusts The Construction Lien Act creates a scheme for statutory trusts which exist for the benefit of contractors and subcontractors. All amounts received by an owner, other than the Crown or a municipality, that is to be used in financing a project constitute a trust fund for the benefit of contractors. Similarly, all amounts owing to a contractor or subcontractor, whether or not due or payable, or received by a contractor or subcontractor, on account of the contract or subcontract price of improvement, constitute a trust fund for the benefit of the subcontractors and other persons who have supplied services or materials to the improvement who are owed amounts by the contractor or subcontractor. Owners and contractors who hold funds in the trust can only apply those funds for purposes consistent with the trust. Otherwise, the corporation or person who is the trustee along with the officers and directors of a corporate trustee, and any person “who has effective control of a corporation or its relevant activities” which could include employees or agents of the corporation, may be held personally liable. This can often make a difference from a recovery perspective, especially if the payer is a corporation, and the corporation is insolvent. According to St. Mary’s Cement Corp. v Construc Ltd., the following elements must be proven to establish the existence of a trust: The plaintiff who is owed did supply services or materials: This can be established by oral testimony or substantiated through documentation including invoices, communication confirming services and materials provided (ie. By e-mail, text, etc), account statements, etc. The project is considered an “improvement” pursuant to the Construction Lien Act: According to section 1(1) of the Act, an “improvement” means, in respect of any land (a) any alteration, addition or repair to the land, (b) any construction, erection or installation on the land, including the installation of industrial, mechanical, electrical or other equipment on the land or on any building, structure or works on the land that is essential to the normal or intended use of the land, building, structure or works, or (c) the complete or partial demolition or removal of any building, structure or works on the land The contractor would have to describe its role in the project, the work it was hired to complete, the work that was in fact completed, and how it fits under one of the three categories above. The plaintiff is owed monies on the project The defendant(s) received money for the improvement: The plaintiff would need to demonstrate that the defendant(s) – be it the owner of the property, the general contractor, or a higher-up sub-contractor – has received funds for work completed. This information may be obtained by way of a request for information under section 39 of the Act. While construction trust claims may be a useful tool for contractors and subcontractors who are seeking to collect on unpaid accounts, the flipside of this is that owners, contractors, and sub-contractors who are trustees need to be cautious in order to avoid exposure. In addition to keeping proper records, trustees should keep trust funds separate from their general accounts. When trust funds for the project are mixed with other funding and expenses in one general bank account, it is much more difficult for a trustee to account for the trust funds and as a result, the trustee is more likely to become exposed. For more information or any other questions regarding construction trusts, please contact our construction law team of lawyers. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Construction LawMay 12, 2017June 23, 2020
Targeting the Few Bad Agents in A Growing Toronto Real Estate Market Toronto’s real estate market is currently facing unprecedented growth. Hefty real estate commissions and a lagging economy in other job areas have attracted many people to the career of a real estate agent. While the majority of agents complete a transaction in the client’s best interest, it is clear that there are not enough legal regulations to protect the public from the few bad apples in the bunch who complete deals for their own financial gain. One example of the perfectly legal but shady practice is a “double-ending deal”— i.e. where the real estate agent represents both the buyer and the seller, collecting a commission from each side. While double-ended deals can be fine if the agent clearly communicates their role, conflicts and what they can and cannot do, these types of transactions expose both sides to a high level of risk that their agent may not be acting ethically. Not only do these transactions give rise to conflicting duties to the client (and it is unclear which client the agent is fully advocating for), they can result in both sides paying more for the transaction, despite the agent’s promise of a lower commission rate. Last November, a CBC Marketplace investigation revealed six real estate agents making promises in clear violation of the Real Estate Council of Ontario’s regulation and Code of Ethics. Captured on hidden cameras, the agents promised open house walk-ins that if they chose to use them (the seller’s agent) to buy the property, they could “control the sale” guaranteeing that the buyers would win the home purchase or that they would use insider information to leverage their offer over others. Another concern is about agents who offer “exclusive listing” sales where the buyer’s agent encourages them not to put their home on the open market but instead sell it within the agent’s pool of potential buyers. The research is clear: higher prices are obtained for homes that are placed on the open market. Usually, the one to two percent savings that the agent offers to buyers willing to go through these transactions is paltry compared to the higher price they would have seen on the open market (see this Huffington Post article). Sellers should always be the ones to decide when the solicitation of offers ends. A buyer should be wary if their agent pushes for “one-and-done” offer rounds or to avoid multiple rounds during a bidding war. If the seller’s agent also represents the buyer they should present their own client’s offer first, not last. Other red flags are poor or non-existent photography in the MLS listing (which makes open house walk-ins the primary way of selling the property) or lack of communication with interested buyers (which dissuades growing interest in the property). While I agree with some commentators’ position that an outright ban on double-ended transactions would offer an easily-enforceable solution, I also believe that more should be done to raise the standards of entry for the profession as a whole. Right now, it only takes 213 hours to become a licensed real estate sales professional and the focus of the model is on individual agents, instead of the brokerage as a whole. Placing more responsibility on the brokerage to oversee their agents’ conduct is also a solution that should be considered. With that being said, the best protection from the few unscrupulous agents in the industry is buyers and sellers who know their rights and how to spot practices that raise red flags. If you are in need of a real estate lawyer, please visit our website and contact one of our real estate lawyers today. If you are in need of any other services or have any questions, you may also contact our Toronto office directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiUncategorizedMay 11, 2017June 23, 2020
How Some Gyms are Trying to Avoid Rights under Gym Contracts Read your contracts carefully! Beach season is coming, which means many gyms are launching “free” trials in order to entice customers to enroll in lucrative contracts at their gym. However, many consumers looking to get in shape are unaware of the recent trend by gyms to classify their contracts as “student tuition agreements” in order to avoid contractual obligations to their members. Why does the classification matter? Organizations such as gyms, sports clubs, dance classes, martial arts clubs and hot yoga studios, previously had their contracts classified as “personal development services.” Since many consumers are vulnerable to unscrupulous practices in the area, the government has introduced the Consumer Protection Act to regulate these services. Some of the consumer’s rights under “personal development services” include the following: the contract must be in writing and delivered to the consumer (if a copy of the agreement is not received, a consumer can cancel the contract at any time within one year); consumers have a 10 day “cooling off period” where they can cancel the contract for no reason with no penalty (the “cooling off period” starts upon receipt of the contract); the agreement is limited to one year (the contract is deemed not to be renewed unless explicitly authorized by the consumer or the contract has a one month’s notice opt-out provision); initiation fees cannot be more than double the price of an annual membership; and if the consumer is paying in monthly installments, the total amount cannot be more than 25% of the amount of the contract if it was paid upfront. If these contracts are classified as “student tuition agreements” all of these rights are avoided. Student tuition agreements can have automatic renewals for more than one year and there are fewer requirements to provide consumers with information. Many gyms are requiring that consumers pay for their memberships using a credit card, which allows gyms to charge payments months in advance, automatically renew the membership and directly bill late fees. For personal development services, there is an implied right that the gyms must provide a reasonable use of their premises and equipment to their members, something completely disregarded in “student tuition” contracts. Usually, gyms guarantee that there is working fitness equipment, premises which are clean and sufficient space for members—otherwise, the contract can be cancelled with notice (see Findlaw Canada’s Article). It is now common for prospective members to show up for the “free” trial class, and then be pressured into signing a “student tuition agreement” by a gym that will never provide a copy of the contract. Furthermore, the default is that the start of the contract is deemed to be the date of the first free trial class (consumers must correct this date before signing the contract). Consumers should also ensure to check the billing date of the contract—if a member signs up a few days before the end of the month there is a chance he or she could be billed for the whole month even though he or she didn’t use the facilities/classes during that time. Visit the Government of Ontario website for more information. It is important to know your rights before signing any sort of contract. If you are in need of a lawyer, please visit our website and contact one of our commercial law lawyers today. If you are in need of any other services or have any questions, you may also contact our Toronto office directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Corporate LawMay 10, 2017June 22, 2020
Upcoming Liberal Changes to Mandatory Minimum Sentences It’s not often that political party leaders will keep the promises they have made to the public. However, in the case of mandatory minimum sentences, Prime Minister Trudeau and the Liberal party seem to have kept their promise for reform. Although some legal experts argue that the delivery of the promise is long overdue, it’s important to remember that slow progress is better than no progress. It is indisputable that changes to the criminal justice system and sentencing reforms are necessary. When the Conservatives were in power, they imposed and increased mandatory minimum penalties for dozens of criminal offences, thus taking away the discretionary powers of Canadian judges and thereby contradicting section 718.1 of the Criminal Code (section 718.1 instructs the court to take the degree of responsibility of the offender into account when handing down a sentence). In addition to a clear. 718.1 violation, mandatory minimum sentences are also constitutionally deficient, as they do not allow for an individualized response to sentencing and are therefore disproportionate when applied to intellectually disabled persons for instance. It is a fundamental principle that sentences remain proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender. Yvon Dandurand, a criminologist at the University of the Fraser Valley, hypothesizes that the new legislation introduced by the Liberals will again provide flexibility to judges by creating special exceptions to some mandatory minimum penalties, while abolishing others. Of course, the Conservatives will oppose any changes to mandatory minimums, as it is contrary to their agenda to “get tough on crime.” According to one MP, “If some [mandatory minimum sentences] are going to be getting a break in the next couple of weeks here, … obviously we’ll oppose that.” Though any opposition is likely to be baseless, as the Supreme Court has already struck down two of the Conservative sentencing reforms last year. Ultimately, the changes brought in by the previous Conservative government—in an effort to “get tough” on crime—are unjust, socially harmful, unconstitutional in some cases, and are overall bad public policy. Furthermore, they fail to achieve their stated purpose of reducing crime. Change to the system is therefore necessary, and will likely be accepted by Judges across Canada, including those at the Supreme Court. Change to the system is also necessary in order to address the worsening problem of backlogs in the courts. This is a problem Canadians are very aware of following the Supreme Court’s ruling that imposed limits on the length of time an accused person can wait to stand trial. For more information on court delays, check out our previous blog posts by personal injury & criminal lawyer David Schell: Delays in our Ontario Civil Courts Solving Ontario Court Delays: Is Limiting Preliminary Hearings The Answer? As mentioned above, slow progress is better than no progress, and the changes to be introduced by the Liberal government this spring are both highly anticipated and essential. Though there are some concerns as to how cautious an approach the Liberals will take regarding mandatory minimum reform (note the cautious approach being taken in medically-assisted dying for instance), in the long run, it is hoped that Canada will once again return to being a system that emphasizes discretion, rather than one that emphasizes rules. If you are in need of a lawyer, please visit our website and contact one of our many lawyers today. If you have any questions you may also contact us directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Criminal LawMay 9, 2017June 22, 2020
How to Change Existing Child Support Payments and Visitation Agreements Family lawyer John Schuman was recently asked the following question: I want to change my child support amount and the visitation agreement. How do I go about doing that and what forms do I need? Answer By John Schuman: There are three ways to change child support: 1. If you and the other parent agree on the change – either because your income has changed or the children’s living arrangements have changed, you can do one of the following: Draft up an “amending agreement” to your separation agreement File a motion to change support on consent at the court, if you have a court order It can be dangerous to reduce your child support, even if your ex agrees. Without a formal agreement or court order, the other parent can go back and enforce the last formal agreement or court order, and you could end up owing a lot of money. 2. If the other parent does not object and you do not fall into one of the exclusions, you can use Ontario’s Online Child Support Calculation Service to adjust support. You cannot use the service if: You have shared custody Do not earn most of your income from a salary, or earn more than $150,000.00 per year. If a child is 17.5 years old or older and is still entitled to support. In these situations, child support may be more than a simple calculation. But, if your child support will be a simple calculation, for an $80 fee, the Ministry of Finance will get both parents’ tax returns and do the support adjustment for you. 3. If neither of the above options works for you, then you will have to bring a Motion to Change Support in Family Court. The procedure to change support is usually simpler than an initial divorce of Family Court Application. It may involve 2 appearances or less. Either parent can also use this process to change the support paid under a separation agreement if the other parent does not agree. To learn more about how to do this, listen to this podcast and watch this video. If you are not sure whether you should ask to change child support, listen to this podcast or watch this video on how to calculate your child support obligation. In any case, it is best to speak to a family lawyer about your situation and figure out which option works best for you. You may be able to save on legal fees by using unbundled services. Changing “visitation” or the “parenting schedule” may not be as straightforward. If you cannot agree on changes to visitation or the parenting schedule, then you should consider using a parenting mediator, or one of the other lower-conflict ways of resolving parenting issues. Finding non-confrontational ways to resolve parenting issues, including the parenting schedule, is much better for the kids. If you find that the other parent is being unreasonable or not acting in the children’s best interests, then you may have to go to Family Court. If the children might be harmed, or if you are not seeing them at all, you may be able to get an Emergency Custody Order. Otherwise, you would use the same “Motion to Change” procedure that applies for support. In making any decision about children, judges only do what is in the child’s best interest and have factors to consider in making that determination. Since those factors are what a judge will use, you should take them into consideration when deciding what kind of visitation or parenting plan to seek. There are many different types of parenting arrangements after separation and what works best depends on the child. If you are not sure or have concerns, then it is important to talk about your specific situation with a family law lawyer. In doing so, you will ensure the best result for your children. You can get a lot more information about Ontario Family Law issues, including a further explanation of child support, family court, child custody, and parenting legal issues by downloading this $9.99 e-book for Kindle, Kobo, or iPad/iPhone/Mac or ordering the paperback version. However, it is always best to seek experienced legal support by meeting with a good family law lawyer. John Schuman is a Certified Specialist in Family Law. He is the partner managing the Family Law Group at Devry Smith Frank LLP, a full-service law firm located near Eglinton and the Don Valley Parkway in Toronto. Learn more about John! Call him at 416-446-5080 or 416-446-5847 or email john.schuman@devrylaw.ca Listen to the Ontario Family Law Podcast! Please note that this is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice to you. Legal advice pertaining to your particular situation can only be provided by a lawyer who has met with you to obtain all pertinent background information necessary to give you a formal legal opinion. For formal legal advice, hire a lawyer (many give a free first consultation). Contact John P. Schuman, C.S., or search the Lawyer Directory. By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Family LawApril 24, 2017September 9, 2022
Update: 16 Measures To Cool Down Toronto’s Red-Hot Housing Market Recently, we published a blog post informing the public that on Thursday, today, the Finance Minister would be releasing the measures that all levels of the government will take to help cool a hot housing market. Premier Kathleen Wynne joined Charles Sousa, Finance Minister for this announcement which actually included 16 measures, among them, were the 15 per-cent foreign buyers tax, expanding rent control, the ability to impose a tax on vacant homes, and use surplus lands for affordable housing. Here are the 16 measures: A 15-per-cent non-resident speculation tax to be imposed on buyers in the Greater Golden Horseshoe area who are not citizens, permanent residents or Canadian corporations. Expanded rent control that will apply to all private rental units in Ontario, including those built after 1991, which are currently excluded. Updates to the Residential Tenancies Act to include a standard lease agreement, tighter provisions for “landlord’s own use” evictions, and technical changes to the Landlord-Tenant Board meant to make the process fairer, as well as other changes. A program to leverage the value of surplus provincial land assets across the province to develop a mix of market-price housing and affordable housing. Legislation that would allow Toronto and possibly other municipalities to introduce a vacant homes property tax in an effort to encourage property owners to sell unoccupied units or rent them out. A plan to ensure property tax for new apartment buildings is charged at a similar rate as other residential properties. A five-year, $125-million program aimed at encouraging the construction of new rental apartment buildings by rebating a portion of development charges. More flexibility for municipalities when it comes to using property tax tools to encourage development. The creation of a new Housing Supply Team with dedicated provincial employees to identify barriers to specific housing development projects and work with developers and municipalities to find solutions. An effort to understand and tackle practices that may be contributing to tax avoidance and excessive speculation in the housing market. A review of the rules real estate agents are required to follow to ensure that consumers are fairly represented in real estate transactions. The launch of a housing advisory group which will meet quarterly to provide the government with ongoing advice about the state of the housing market and discuss the impact of the measures and any additional steps that are needed. Education for consumers on their rights, particularly on the issue of one real estate professional representing more than one party in a real estate transaction. A partnership with the Canada Revenue Agency to explore more comprehensive reporting requirements so that correct federal and provincial taxes, including income and sales taxes, are paid on purchases and sales of real estate in Ontario. Set timelines for elevator repairs to be established in consultation with the sector and the Technical Standards & Safety Authority. Provisions that would require municipalities to consider the appropriate range of unit sizes in higher density residential buildings to accommodate a diverse range of household sizes and incomes, among other things. For the full CTV News article, click here. If you are in need of a real estate lawyer, please visit our website and contact one of our real estate lawyers today. If you are in need of any other services or have any questions, you may also contact our Toronto office directly at 416-449-1400. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Real EstateApril 20, 2017June 19, 2020
Ten Measures To Be Announced To Help Fix Toronto’s Housing Market On Tuesday, April 18th, 2017 Finance Minister Charles Sousa announced that he is set to unveil 10 measures to help with Toronto’s out of control housing market, which will be released as early as Thursday. These measures will range from rent controls to a new tax on real estate speculators. The release of Charles Sousa’s plan will be about a week ahead of the release of the first balanced budget since 2008. Tuesday for the announcement, Sousa met with Federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau and Toronto Mayor John Tory. They met for an hour to discuss housing issues which included a discussion on current market trends, and what the intentions are with the plan with a focus on rent controls and addressing the current policy that excludes buildings built after 1991 from rent controls. Expectation on Rent Increases From an article released by the Toronto Star, the expectation on rent increases, when the 10 measures are implemented is that the annual increase will be 3.5% which is significantly better than what some condo owners have been subject to, such as having their rental cost double. Housing Speculator Crackdown Part of Charles Sousa’s plan is to place a levy on housing speculators and foreign buyers. This could include a vacancy tax to discourage investors from leaving their properties empty, to either rent them out or move in themselves if possible. All Government Levels Serious With all levels of the government working together to control Toronto’s housing market, they want to make it clear that they are taking the current state of the market seriously and have decided to have quarterly meetings focusing on housing. All of this seems like a step in the right direction, as the Bank of Canada governor recently said the 33% yearly increase that we have seen is deemed as unsustainable. Once the plan is released, the public will have a better idea of what these 10 measures are going to address. The most important thing about this plan is that its goal is to protect buyers and sellers while stabilizing the housing market. Tim Hudak, CEO of the Ontario Real Estate Association, stated that he believes the best solution is to get new homes and the supply of homes up, the amount of supply available in the issue. With higher supply, the hope is to limit the number of bidding wars that occur, in turn, lower the prices that homes go for. His final note was that he likes that all levels of the government are getting involved, it is a good thing they all want to work together to solve the problem. Until the plan is put into action, which is expected to be announced on Thursday we’ll have to put our trust in all levels of the government that they will be able to successfully manage Toronto’s hot housing market. If you are in need of a real estate lawyer for a purchase or sale of a home, please contact one of our real estate lawyers today, or call us directly at 416-449-1400. For more information please visit our website. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Real EstateApril 18, 2017June 19, 2020
Millennial Homebuyers and Toronto Real Estate It comes as no surprise that the crazy state of Toronto’s housing market, with the increased value of homes and condos sitting at 30% or so from this time last year, is causing many first time home buyers and young homeowners to have buyer’s remorse. The Huffington Post recently published an article that featured a survey conducted by CIBC, which only included millennials (aged 18-34) respondents. The findings were: 52 percent of millennials who don’t own a home believe they will never own one, or doubt they will ever be able to afford one 81 percent who owned a home plan to sell it; four in 10 plan to upgrade. 63 percent say it is due to the mortgage and housing costs. 57 percent worry about rising interests rates giving them trouble with their mortgage payments 36 percent believe renting is “the better option” Additionally, CIBC’s research reveals that 38% of the Canadian millennial generation already owns a property, forty-two percent rent and 19 percent live with family. For millennials who do not own a home yet: 23 percent say they’ll never own one 29 percent doubt they’ll be able to afford one Millennials & The Housing Bubble When questioned about the housing bubble, the opinion was almost split down the middle: 54 percent believe prices won’t drop 40 percent believe prices will fall within 5 years 4 percent believe they’ll drop within the next year For those who own a house and were questioned about selling, this was their response: 62 percent are reluctant to sell because they fear what they’ll be able to afford in this high-priced market The ongoing, seemingly never-ending struggle that millennials are currently faced with, is essentially due to the overwhelming number of baby boomers in Toronto. They are looking to not only make some money in this hot Toronto real estate market, but also are reaching the point to which they want to downsize – looking to condos, smaller homes, or retirement homes. Seeing as the homes that baby boomers possess are untouchable to most first time home-buyers, people looking to get into their first home, generally look to houses outside of the GTA or condos. Most news outlets have been focusing on homes in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) going for hundreds of thousands of dollars over their asking price, however, condos have been seeing much of the same. This is due to the interest of all parties: baby boomers, millennials, foreign investors, and other individuals looking to purchase real estate. With the amount of competition for real estate in Toronto, many people with little capital (millennials) are unable to outbid those who possess it (baby boomers or foreign investors). Situations such as this (as well as interest rates, banks, etc.) are what have made millennials become discouraged when even thinking about homeownership, as seen from the study results earlier in this post. For now, however, we all will have to see what will happen to the market, whether the bubble will burst, or prices continue to climb. If you are in need of a real estate lawyer, please visit our Real Estate Page and contact one of our Real Estate Lawyers today. For any other legal services or inquiries, please contact Devry Smith Frank LLP directly at 416-449-1400 or visit our website for more information. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Real EstateApril 13, 2017June 19, 2020
New Condo Development To Be A Game Changer For Vaughan Given the current landscape of the Toronto real estate market, it is not surprising that people are beginning to look further out of the city for a property. The market in 2016 and now 2017 has caused first-time homebuyers and downsizers to be stuck with two options: Purchase a small condo to stay in Toronto Look to the outskirts of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) for an affordable home Even so, if you choose one of those options over the other, it will still cost you. In March alone, detached homes in the 416 sat at an average price of $1.56 million with condos at $550,000 and the 905 at $1.1 million average for a detached home and condos at $440,000. If option two is where you see yourself leaning, you may be in luck. There are many condo developments popping up all over the GTA, but in a recent article by the Toronto Star, Vaughan may be the next best place to settle outside of the concrete jungle. An urban vibe has been set to land in Vaughan with what they are calling, Transit City. It is a 55-storey residential tower, the first residential tower to be developed in SmartREIT’s 100-acre Vaughan Metropolitan Centre. There will be a mixture of commercial and residential projects and will be located adjacent to the Viva bus terminal which will connect to the TTC’s new subway stop. To further develop the Vaughan Metropolitan Centre, and provide it with some downtown credibility, Bar Buca, part of the Buca brand and King Street Food Company, will be opening their first 905 location on the main floor of the building. Mitchell Goldhar of SmartREIT has said, “the Buca name is a “huge signal” that Vaughan Metropolitan Centre has downtown credibility.” The goal of this development is to create an incredible city centre, as it is very much a blank slate. Construction is set to begin later in the year, or early 2018 with occupancy around 2020. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Real EstateApril 12, 2017June 19, 2020
Toronto City Council approves New Apartment Bylaw to Further Protect Tenants The City of Toronto recently passed a new bylaw aimed at cracking down on “bad” landlords and providing tenants with more protections. The bylaw, which was passed by the city council with a 41-1 vote, imposes a series of new regulations on landlords that will come into effect on July 1, 2017. The new rules will address tenant service requests, pest management, building repairs, and cleaning. The bylaw also imposes fines for violating these new rules. Councillor Josh Matlow, who has been a major supporter of the bylaw, describes the new rules as “a landmark tenant protection bylaw that is not only being celebrated by tenants across the city … but is even being talked about (in other cities) as a signal of how to do things right.” The new bylaw will cover about 3,500 buildings in the city, which is roughly 350,000 apartments. It does not, however, apply to all landlords in the city—it is mainly aimed at landlords that oversee large residential properties. The bylaw is only applicable to owners and building operators of a residential property with three or more storeys, and ten or more dwelling units available for rent. The protections will apply to Toronto Community Housing buildings, but long-term residences, such as retirement homes, will not be covered by the bylaw. Under the new rules, building owners must register with the city within three to four months of the bylaw coming into effect, and must re-register every year. The annual registration fee will cost $10.60 per unit. However, the fees will only apply to private buildings—co-op and social housing providers, like Toronto Community Housing buildings, will be exempt from paying the fee (but not registration itself). The program will cost about $5 million a year to implement and will be funded through a combination of registration fees (53%), enforcement action (12%), and property taxes (35%). Prior to the launch of the program, city staff will conduct inspections of the buildings and order repairs. These inspections will serve as a baseline assessment for future inspections. Tenant Service Requests The new bylaws implement strict requirements on landlords in responding to service requests. Urgent service requests must be responded to within 24 hours and non-urgent requests within 7 days. A request is considered urgent if it is related to the following vital services: fuel, electricity, gas, heat, or hot or cold water. Landlords must also implement a system for handling and tracking service requests, and demonstrate compliance with their own system. The system must provide tenants with a copy of their service request submissions upon receipt by the landlord. Infestations and Pest Management Landlords are required to take certain steps to prevent and deal with infestations. As a preventative measure, landlords must inspect indoor and outdoor common areas for pests every 30 days. If notified about the presence of pests in any part of a building, a landlord must inspect the area where the pests were discovered within 72 hours. The landlord is then required to eliminate or exterminate the pests and take adequate measures to prevent the pests from spreading to other parts of the property. Pest treatment operations must be performed by licensed exterminators. The new rules also require landlords to notify tenants of the presence of pests and pest treatment information. The information must include the date of treatment, the name of the licensed pest management company, and the nature of the treatment. The information must be available for display on a central communication board in the building. While the specific location of the treatment won’t be made available, treatment records relating to common areas must be made available to tenants and prospective tenants upon their request. Landlords are also prohibited under the bylaws from renting units with pest problems. Repairs and Service Disruptions Tenants will have to be notified of planned or unplanned service disruptions—including those involving heat, water, electricity, elevators, and security. Notification of the disruption will have to be placed on a central notification board and include information regarding the nature of the disruption, duration of the disruption, and the units affected by the disruption. Landlords will also have to create a capital repair plan that lists building elements and when they are scheduled to be replaced or upgraded. The following capital elements are required to be included in the plan: roof, elevators, facade, windows, mechanical systems, underground garage, interior flooring, interior wall finish, balcony guards, and handrails. When performing major capital projects, landlords must provide tenants with information regarding the nature and duration of the project and the affected units. Cleaning Under the new bylaws, landlords will have to inspect common areas for cleanliness at least once a day. Landlords will also have to create a cleaning plan that contains a list of common areas and how often these areas will be cleaned. The list must include the following (if present): garbage storage area; walls; floors; laundry room and equipment. Enforcement and Violation The Municipal Licensing and Standards division will be responsible for implementing and enforcing the new bylaws. Landlords that do not register under the program will not be permitted to rent units to new tenants until registration is complete. If landlords fail to comply with the new rules, they may be responsible for paying the costs of inspection ($108 an hour) or audit ($1,800). Landlords and building operators found guilty of violating the new regulations could be fined up to $100,000. Charges would be laid through the provincial offences court. The Municipal Licensing and Standards Committee is also considering extended fines for repeat offenders and special fines for those in contempt of the bylaws for the sake of economic gain. Enforcement of the bylaw is expected to begin in July 2018. Concern Among City Councillors Despite a near-unanimous vote, a few city councillors took issue with the new bylaw as being overly oppressive to landlords. Apartment buildings already face municipal property tax rates that are almost three times as high as what home and condominium owners are charged. Councillor John Campbell is concerned that good landlords will lose money just because of the actions of a few “bad apples.” Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti doesn’t think the city should be involved in monitoring landlords. Mammoliti is also concerned that the new regulations will scare off developers hoping to build more rental units. This could be problematic since Toronto is already facing a shortage of available rental units. These councillors also expressed concern that fees associated with the new bylaw could be passed on to tenants. However, this may be limited to smaller fees (such as the registration fee) as landlords will not be able to pass along the cost of capital repairs ordered by the city. The Residential Tenancies Act has clear language that landlords must absorb those expenses associated with compliance orders. “This article is intended to inform and entertain. Its content does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon by readers as such. If you require legal assistance, please see a lawyer. Each case is unique and a lawyer with good training and sound judgment can provide you with advice tailored to your specific situation and needs.” By Fauzan SiddiquiBlog, Real EstateMarch 31, 2017June 19, 2020