adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Real eState

Canadian Real Estate Investors Concentrated On Buying Newer, More Affordable Supply

Published

 on

Canada’s national statistics agency made investor-owned homes the subject of their latest data. Statistics Canada (Stat Can) took a dive through tax data to estimate the share of investor-owned homes in 2020. Confirming our observation last year, the data reveals investors scooped most of the new supply in the most affordable segment, at the expense of first-time buyers.

Canadian Real Estate Investors Are Concentrated In New Supply

Canadian real estate investment is overrepresented in the country’s new supply. In Ontario, investors own just under a quarter (24.0%) of all housing, but nearly a third (32.3%) of homes built after 2016. It’s similar in BC, where investors own a quarter of total supply (25.0%), but nearly 2 in 5 (37.8%) homes that were built after 2016.

Investor concentration is often dismissed as just an Ontario, and BC issue—but the data shows this isn’t the case. In Nova Scotia, investors owned 35% of total housing supply, but 39% of new supply. Manitoba investors showed a much steeper climb, owning just under a quarter (24.1%) of homes, but 42.1% of those built after 2016.

Canadian Real Estate Investors Are Scooping Up New Supply

The share of total homes owned by investors vs the share of new supply (2016 or later) owned by investors. 

300x250x1
Total2016 or Later051015202530354045NSNBBCMBONPercent

Province Total 2016 or Later
NS 35 39
NB 33.1 32
BC 25 37.8
MB 24.1 42.1
ON 24 32.3

Source: Statistics Canada; Better Dwelling.

Only one of the five provinces bucked the trend—and did so in a minor way. In New Brunswick, almost a third (33.1%) of homes are investor-owned. It fell to 32% when isolating new construction, meaning new supply was underrepresented. At least compared to the heavy investor ownership that is present elsewhere.

Canadian Real Estate Investors Are Concentrated In The Most “Affordable” Segment

Canadian real estate investors are also concentrated in the most “affordable” segment—apartments. Ontario investors own over 2 in 5 (41.9%) condo apartments, but 56.4% of condo units made after 2016. In other words, investors own most of the new, more “affordable” supply, in the province. We’re not even discussing the share of condo pre-sales that are flipped without being held for long.

BC showed a similar trend but with a minor tweak. Investors owned  36.8% of all condo apartments in the province, jumping to 48.9% of new supply. They’re overrepresented, but not the majority—though another 8.7% of homes are owner-occupied investment properties.

In other provinces looked at, the share is generally less than 1%. They might be owner-occupied, they might not—but the unique combination of  a vacancy and non-resident tax at reporting time is likely to have influenced behavior.

Canadian Real Estate Investors Focused On Buying The Most Affordable New Supply

The share of total condo apartments owned by investors vs the share of new supply (2016 or later) owned by investors. 

All Periods2016 Or Later0102030405060NSONNBMBBCPercent

Province All Periods 2016 Or Later
NS 36.6 59.6
ON 41.9 56.4
NB 22.6 50
MB 29.2 49.3
BC 36.2 48.9

Source: Statistics Canada; Better Dwelling.

Circling back to investor owned condos, the trend tracked for the other three provinces. Nova Scotia condo apartments are 36.6% investor-owned, but they captured most (59.6%) new supply. Ditto in Manitoba, where investors own over a quarter (29.2%) of condos, but nearly half (50.0%) of those built after 2016.

Even in New Brunswick, condos were too attractive of an investment to pass. Investors owned over 1 in 5 (22.6%) condo apartments, but half (50.0%) of the new supply. Despite bucking the trend for all types of housing, condos still proved attractive to investors.

Since this is 2020 data, the trend has likely accelerated. Investor activity has trended higher since 2015, but it really got out of control in 2021. The combination of low rates, soaring prices, and moral hazard created made it even more attractive for investors. Combined with the preview Ontario’s land registry data provided, it would be hard not to see this trend accelerating in next year’s update.

Investors increasing their share of the market drives competition, and thus prices higher. When concentrated in a specific segment like new condo apartments, the impact can be amplified. This doesn’t just send prices soaring, and out of reach for younger end users. It also drives rents higher, by introducing a profit layer between the investor and the end-user. More money spent on shelter means less money for the economy—meaning this isn’t just a problem between first-time buyers and their landlords. It’s going to be a country-wide issue.

For those still unsure, RBC made this trend crystal clear last year. The country’s largest bank revealed that first-time buyers are being replaced by investors in their books. At the time, they called it a “sad state of affairs.” Today’s data doesn’t look like they’re the only ones observing this trend.

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Real eState

Dr. Phil left speechless after real estate agent claims that squatting is justified by colonization – New York Post

Published

 on


Dr. Phil spoke with property owners about how squatters are using legal loopholes to occupy properties, but one real estate agent argued it can be justified because of a history of “colonization.”

Wednesday’s episode of “Dr. Phil Primetime” featured one guest named Kristine, a real estate agent who “doesn’t think adverse possession is immoral,” but believes that “people with no housing dying from the elements is immoral.” According to the Legal Information Institute, adverse possession is where a “person in possession of land owned by someone else may acquire valid title to it, so long as certain requirements are met, and the adverse possessor is in possession for a sufficient period of time.” The requirements and period of time vary by state and city.

In her introduction on the show, Kristine argued that there are “multi-million dollar projects, and they’re just abandoned.” She added that she believes the land of those abandoned projects can be reclaimed.

300x250x1

She also noted she is working with a client who is “trying to occupy a property” that’s around 300 or 500 acres.

“It’s something that’s so large that you wouldn’t even notice what 2 acres is compared to how many acres are on there,” she said. “Adverse possession is a law that’s left over from both Spanish and English colonization, it is how they took the land from the native people, and it’s a process we can use to take that land back.”


Dr. Phil
Dr. Phil’s guest explained that adverse possession is a law that’s left over from colonization. Youtube/Merit Street Media

“You said that if I’ve got 100 acres or 1,000 acres and somebody goes and gets in a corner of it and adversely possesses 5 acres of it, I’m not gonna miss it, I’ve got 1,000 acres anyway?” Dr. Phil asked Kristine.

“Well, yeah,” she responded. “Can you tell me, if you’re looking at 1,000 acres, could you tell me what 5 acres was?”

Dr. Phil’s jaw dropped, and he said, “Hell yes.”


Real estate agent Kristine
The real estate agent asked Dr. Phil he could pick 5 acres out of 1000. Youtube/Merit Street Media

A landlord named Tony argued with Kristine about how she believes the manner in which people inherit property should be taken into account when it comes to adverse possession.

“We’re not in 1776, we’re in 2024,” Tony said, sparking a wave of applause from the audience.

“Do you think that a corporation that makes over a billion dollars a year is injured by someone taking 5 acres of land?,” Kristine argued.

Another guest quickly interjected with “somebody is.”

Another guest named Patti confronted Kristine by arguing she does not use her car 24-hours-a-day.

“Playing out your scenario, then theoretically anyone on the street should be able to boost your car and drive it, because that car is just sitting around unused,” Patti said, sparking applause from the audience.

“I don’t have a billion-dollar net worth,” Kristine argued, which made Barry ask if having a billion dollars is where Kristine draws the line.

Dr. Phil concluded the episode by commending Kristine for her willingness to defend her beliefs, but said he “100%” disagreed with her.

“It is a lawful thing to do if you do it in the right way, I 100% disagree with your philosophy, but your facts are correct,” he said. “She’s not suggesting people go squat in someone’s home when they go on vacation, she’s talking about something completely different, at another level, and if you’re not a billionaire, she isn’t targeting you.”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Real eState

Botched home sale costs Winnipeg man his right to sell real estate in Manitoba – CBC.ca

Published

 on


A Winnipeg man’s registration as a real estate salesman has been cancelled after a family vacated their home on a tight deadline for a sale that never went through, then changed brokerages and, months later, got $60,000 less for their house than what they expected when they moved out.

A Manitoba Securities Commission panel found Reginald Wayne Kehler engaged in professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a registrant when he signed a document on behalf of sellers without their knowledge, reduced the listing price of a home without their approval, and didn’t tell them for nearly a month that a potential buyer hadn’t paid a promised $100,000 deposit.

The sellers, identified as D.R. and P.R. in the panel decision released Wednesday, were awarded $10,394 from the real estate reimbursement fund. Kehler was ordered to pay $12,075 to cover costs of the investigation and hearing.

300x250x1

The sellers were a military family who had to move in 2020 after the husband was posted to Ottawa.

They chose Kehler as their listing agent, because he had helped them find the home when they moved to Winnipeg in 2018, and they had a good relationship with him, the panel’s decision says.

They  listed their house in May and on June 15, 2020, accepted an offer of $570,000 with possession on July 15. A deposit of $100,000 was to be paid within 72 hours of acceptance of the offer.

Kehler was the salesperson for both the buyer and the sellers — but the sellers say he never told them that.

A form that indicated the sellers knew he was also representing the buyer, dated June 15, 2020, was filed.

While it appeared to be signed with the sellers’ names, they said they didn’t see it until March 2021. One of the two wasn’t even in Winnipeg on June 15.

“Kehler, in his interview with commission staff, acknowledges that the sellers never signed this document — we note that the purported signatures on the form look nothing like the actual signatures of the sellers on other documents,” the decision says.

Kehler told commission staff he’d been authorized to sign on the sellers’ behalf, which they denied. The panel found them more believable.

Once the deal was made, the sellers, believing they had just a month before the buyer would take possession of their home, quickly packed up and prepared to move with their two young children.

Buyer never made deposit

Meanwhile, the buyer hadn’t made the $100,000 deposit before the deadline — but Kehler didn’t tell the sellers.

Kehler told commission staff that was because he thought the deposit was still coming, and he didn’t want to cause more stress for the sellers.

On July 10, just five days before the buyer was to take possession and the day before the family was leaving Winnipeg, the sellers spoke to Kehler — but he still didn’t tell them the deposit hadn’t been paid.

Kehler “said everything was fine,” according to the decision.

It wasn’t until the evening of July 13, when the family arrived in Toronto on their way to Ottawa and just 36 hours before the scheduled closing, that Kehler told them he’d never received the deposit.

Eventually, they received $4,000 of the deposit, but the sale of the house never closed. The sellers scrambled to extend the insurance on their old home and make sure they continued to pay the utility bills, the decision says.

Home relisted

Kehler then recommended they relist the home, and it went back on the market at $574,900.

On Aug. 10, 2020, Kehler recommended the price be reduced to $569,900. Instead, the seller said he should reduce the price to $567,900.

But when the seller looked at the online listing on Aug. 22, it was listed at $564,900.

The sellers also asked Kehler about maintaining the property, since they were no longer in Winnipeg. He agreed he would, but friends ended up going and mowing the lawn, the decision says.

The sellers asked Kehler and his brokerage about what could be done to “make things right,” the decision says, but they never received any responses.

On Sept. 5, they hired a new brokerage to sell the home. Under the new real estate salesman, they accepted an offer on Dec. 13, and closed the deal Jan. 2, 2021, receiving $507,500 for the home.

Kehler’s actions were “contrary to the best interests of the public” and undermined “public confidence in the real estate industry,” the decision says.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Real eState

Banks Believe They Are Well-Prepared for Commercial Real Estate Fallout – The Wall Street Journal

Published

 on


[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Banks Believe They Are Well-Prepared for Commercial Real Estate Fallout  The Wall Street Journal

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending