Connect with us

Real eState

Real estate sales activity 'increased heavily' compared to 2019 – BradfordToday

Published

 on


NEWS RELEASE
BARRIE & DISTRICT ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS
*************************
Quarter Three (Q3) Residential Real Estate Activity

Sept. 30, 2020 marked the end of Quarter Three (Q3) of 2020, and residential sales information is in with residential property sales recorded through the Matrix System for the Barrie and District Association of Realtors (BDAR). 

Q3 2020 (July 1, 2020 – Sept. 30, 2020) sales activity increased heavily compared to Q3 2019.

The average price of units sold also saw a modest growth in Q3 2020 as compared to Q3 2019. Sales activity in Q3 2020 was much stronger than the same time last year. This was likely due to a rebound in the market as the economy reopens from the pandemic.

Both Barrie and Simcoe Country Excluding Barrie contributed to this growth.  Average price during Q3 2020 was up 22.4 per cent as compared to Q3 2019. This was driven by a growth in average price inside and outside of Barrie.

Simcoe County
There was an 55.3 per cent increase in units sold when compared to Q3 2019 (Q3 2020 with 3344 units sold vs Q3 2019 with 2153 units sold). Average price of homes in Simcoe county during Q3 2020 was $616,115. This was a 22.4 per cent growth from the same timeframe last year.

Barrie
The number of sales increased 54.9 per cent in Q3 2020 (1021 units sold) when compared to Q3 2019 (659 units sold). Home prices within Barrie increased to $574,023, which was a 16.8 per cent increase from Q3 of last year.

Simcoe County Excluding Barrie
The number of sales increased 55.5 per cent in Q3 2020 (2323 units sold) when compared to Q3 2019 (1494 units sold). Simcoe County Excluding Barrie had an average price of $634,586. This was a 24.7 per cent increase form Q3 of 2019.

Innisfil
The number of units sold in Innisfil during Q3 2020 was 241, 56.5 per cent more than the number of units sold in Q3 2019 (154 units sold). The average price of units sold in Innisfil during Q3 2020 was $629,606. This was 32.3 per cent greater than the average price of Innisfil units sold during Q3 2019.

Orillia
The number of units sold in Orillia during Q3 2020 was 251. This was 56.9 per cent more than the number of units sold in Q3 2019 (160 units sold).The average price of units sold in Orillia during Q3 2020 was $478,894. This was 12.0 per cent greater than the average price of Orillia units sold during Q3 2019.

Month-Over-Month (September 2020 vs August 2020) All Residential Homes

The September 2020 sales information is in, and residential property sales recorded through the Matrix System for the BDAR region showed a month-over-month decline in the number of units sold outside of Barrie, while the month-over-month change in average price remained the same.

Year-to-date change in number of units sold and average price showed strong growth. The Housing Price Index (HPI) showed a month-over-month increase of 2.5 per cent from August 2020.

Simcoe County
1031 residential units were sold in Simcoe County last month—a 6.7 per cent decrease from August 2020. During the same time a year ago (August 2019 to September 2019), there was a 6.9 per cent decrease in the number of units sold.
The average price of residential units sold last month was $628,403—a 0 per cent change from August 2020. This decline was around the same as the month-over-month change in average price a year ago which increased 0.1 per centt from August to September.
City of Barrie
329 units were sold last month within the City of Barrie, which was 3.8 per cent more than the number of units sold the month prior. A year ago, the number of units sold between September and August decreased 5.4 per cent.
The average price of units sold within Barrie during September 2020 was $567,916. This was 0.9 per cent less than the average price during August 2020. In contrast, the average price of units sold between September 2019 and August 2019 increased by 2.1 per cent.
City of Barrie – Apartments & Condos
52 apartment and condo units were sold in Barrie this month — 1.9 per cent more than the number of units sold in August 2020. The average price of apartment and condo units sold in the City of Barrie this month was $410,601 — 1.6 per cent less than the average price in August 2020.
Simcoe County Excluding Barrie
In Simcoe County Excluding Barrie last month, 702 units were sold. This was 10.9 per cent less than the number of units sold during August 2020. At the same time a year ago, there was a 7.6 per cent decrease in the number of units sold outside of Barrie.
The average price of units sold in the areas outside of Barrie last month was $656,752. This was 1.0 per cent more than the month before. Between September 2019 and August 2019, the average price of units sold outside of Barrie decreased 0.8 per cent. 
62 residential units were sold in Innisfil last month—a 30.3 per cent decrease from August 2020. During the same period a year ago (August 2019 to September 2019), there was a 29.5 per cent increase in the number of units sold. The average price of residential units sold in Innisfil last month was approximately $605,571—a 9.4 per cent decrease from August 2020. This was a larger decline than last year, when the average price decreased by 3.3 per cent from August to September.
78 residential units were sold in Orillia last month—a 1.3 per cent increase from August 2020. During the same period a year ago (August 2019 to September 2019), there was a 14.8 per cent decrease in the number of units sold. The average price of residential units sold for Orillia last month was approximately $503,535 —a 5.0 per cent increase from August 2020. In comparison, the average price a year ago decreased by 0.3 per cent from August to September.
Year-To-Date (YTD) (September 2020 YTD vs September 2019 YTD) All Residential Homes
Simcoe County
7,001 residential units were sold in Simcoe County during September 2020 Year-To-Date (YTD) (January 1st, 2020 – September 30th, 2020). This was 23.3% more than what was sold during the same timeframe last year (January 1st, 2019 – September 30th, 2019). The average price of residential units sold during September 2020 YTD was $578,634. This was 14.7% greater than the average price during the same timeframe last year.
City of Barrie
2,260 units were sold in the City of Barrie during September 2020 YTD. This was a 28.2% growth from the same timeframe last year. This growth was greater than the increase in total Simcoe County (+23.3%).
The average price of units sold within the City of Barrie during September 2020 YTD was $550,832. This was 12.1% more than the same timeframe last year, and this growth was lesser than what was seen in the total Simcoe region (+14.7%). During September 2020 YTD, Barrie accounted for 32.3% of residential properties sold. This was 1.2 share points more than the same timeframe during 2019.
City of Barrie – Apartments & Condos
312 apartment and condo units were sold in Barrie during 2020 YTD — 22.8% more than the number of units sold in September 2019 YTD. The average price of apartment and condo units in the City of Barrie this year so far was $400,350. This was 7.7% more than the average price during the same timeframe last year.
Simcoe County Excluding Barrie
4,741 residential units were sold in the areas outside of Barrie during September 2020 YTD. This was 21.1% more than the number of units sold during September 2019 YTD. This growth in number of units sold was less than the growth seen in the total Simcoe region (+23.3%).
The average price of units sold during this time was $591,881. This was 16.0% greater than what was seen during September 2019 YTD. This growth was slightly greater than that of total Simcoe (+14.7%). During September 2020 YTD, Simcoe County Excluding Barrie accounted for 67.7% of residential properties sold. This was 1.2 share points less than the same timeframe during 2019.
520 residential units were sold in Innisfil during September YTD. This was 18.2% more than what was sold during the same timeframe last year (Jan. 1, 2019 – Sept. 30, 2019). The average price of residential units sold in 2020 YTD was $584,354. This was 16.5% greater than the average price during the same timeframe last year. During this time, Innisfil accounted for 7.4% of sales in Simcoe County — down 0.3 share points from the same timeframe last year.
529 residential units were sold in Orillia from the beginning of 2020 to September 30th, 2020. This was 23.3% more than what was sold during the same timeframe last year (Jan. 1, 2019 – Sept. 30, 2019). The average price of residential units sold during September YTD was $463,847. This was 9.9% greater than the average price during the same timeframe last year. During September 2020 YTD, Orillia accounted for 7.6% of sales in Simcoe County, equal to that of September 2019 YTD.
Year-Over-Year (September 2020 vs September 2019) All Residential Homes
Simcoe County
1,031 residential units were sold in Simcoe County last month—53.2% greater than the same time last year. As well, the average price of residential units sold was $628,403, which was 26.0% greater than that of September 2019.
City of Barrie
329 residential units were sold during September 2020 within Barrie. This was 55.2% more than the number of units sold during September 2019. This growth was greater than that of total Simcoe County (+53.2%).
The average price of residential Barrie units sold during September 2020 was $567,916—13.5% greater than the average price of units sold during September 2019. This growth was less than the average-price growth of total Simcoe County (+26.0%).
Sales in Barrie accounted for 31.9% of residential sales in Simcoe County last month. This was 0.4 share points more than the same time last year.
City of Barrie – Apartments & Condos
52 apartment and condo units were sold in Barrie during September 2020 — 67.7% more than the number of units sold in September 2019. The average price of apartment and condo units in the City of Barrie in September 2020 was $410,602. This was 9.1% more than the average price during the same time last year.
Simcoe County Excluding Barrie
702 residential units were sold outside of Barrie during September 2020, and this was 52.3% more than the number of units sold during September 2019. This growth was slightly less than the 53.2% growth seen in the total Simcoe region.
The average price of units sold in Simcoe County Excluding Barrie last month was $656,752. This was a 31.9% increase in the average price, year-over-year. This growth was greater than what was found in total Simcoe County (+26.0%).
Residential property sales outside of Barrie accounted for 68.1% of sales in Simcoe County last month. This was 0.4 share points less than the same time last year.
62 residential units were sold in Innisfil during September 2020, and this was 8.8% more than the number of units sold during September 2019. This growth was significantly less than the 53.2% growth seen in the total Simcoe region.
The average price of units sold in Innisfil last month was approximately $605,571. This was a 32.0% increase in the average price, year-over-year. This growth was greater than what was found in total Simcoe County (+26.0%).
Sales in Innisfil accounted for 6.0% of sales in Simcoe County during September 2020. This was 2.5 share points less than Innisfil’s share of sales during the same time last year.
78 residential units were sold in Orillia during September 2020, and this was 69.6% more than the number of units sold during September 2019. This growth was greater than the 53.2% growth seen in the total Simcoe region.
The average price of units sold in Orillia last month was approximately $503,535. This was a 22.1% increase in the average price, year-over-year. This growth was less than what was found in total Simcoe County (+26.0%).
Orillia’s sales made up 7.6% of sales in Simcoe County. This was 0.7 share points more than the same time last year.

*************************

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Real eState

RioCan CEO says real estate industry's norms have turned upside-down – OrilliaMatters

Published

 on


TORONTO — Demand for space in prime office towers and shopping malls has plunged because the pandemic suddenly turned them into places that customers and tenants “don’t even want to go to,” RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust’s veteran chief executive said Tuesday.

“Unfortunately … everything that was accepted wisdom in the real estate business only eight months ago has been turned on its head, even in the face of record low interest rates and massive government spending,” Edward Sonshine told analysts on a conference call.

Another formerly “bulletproof” segment of the industry — multi-unit residential rental properties — is also being questioned due to government freezes on rents and evictions, Sonshine said.

An exception to the gloom, Sonshine said, has been strong demand for new condo developments and single-family residences.

Sonshine said RioCan fared better during the third quarter than he expected it would and credited the work of RioCan management, led by Jonathan Gitlin, who becomes chief executive April 1. Sonshine, who announced on Oct. 21 that he’ll retire as CEO in March after nearly three decades, will become chairman of the board.

Gitlin told analysts on RioCan’s third-quarter conference call that rent collected from tenants, plus government subsidies, represented 93.4 per cent of billed rent for July, August and September and 91.9 per cent for October.

That compared with just 73 per cent in the months of April, May and June, as reported in July with RioCan’s second-quarter results.

“While we’d clearly prefer to report 100 per cent collection, as we’ve been able to do during the first 26 years of our operation, we’re pleased with the steady upward collection trajectory since April,” Gitlin said.

RioCan had estimated early in the pandemic that its overall property occupancy rate could fall to as low as 94 per cent by the end of 2020, but it had improved to 96 per cent as of Sept. 30 and it’s expected to be stable through to the end of the year.

“Happily, we’re leasing space up almost as fast as the tenants disappear,” Sonshine said.

But he said forecasts about coming trends are difficult to make without knowing how long new COVID shutdowns will be in effect. especially in the Greater Toronto Area and the Ottawa region — the biggest markets for RioCan.

“You know, there’s only so long that tenants can go without revenue before they start wanting to talk to their landlord,” Sonshine said.

RioCan said that as of the end of the quarter on Sept. 30, essentially all of its tenants were open and operating — compared with only 85 per cent as of July 28.

The real estate trust said it had $117.6 million of net income or 37 cents per unit for the three months ended Sept. 30, down from $177.6 million or 58 cents in the 2019 third quarter.

It said $14.4 million of the $60-million decline was due to pandemic-related provisions related to rent abatement and bad debts, while $48 million was due to higher net fair value losses.

Funds from operations, a key metric in real estate, declined to $128.8 million or 41 cents per unit from $142.8 million or 47 cents per unit.

All the key financial measures were an improvement from RioCan’s second quarter ended June 30, when it posted a net loss of $350.8 million or $1.10 per unit and FFO dropped to 35 cents per unit.

In July, RioCan said it would divest from brick-and-mortar apparel retailers in favour of grocery stores, pharmacies and e-commerce.

But Sonshine said Thursday that RioCan has decided to hold onto its traditional retail properties, which include shopping malls and plazas, and look for better opportunities.

“It’s a really slow market, in any event, because (I think) there’s so much uncertainty about the future of retail,” he said.

Revenue fell to $302.3 million from $353.9 million a year earlier.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Oct. 29, 2020.

Companies in this story: (TSX:REI.UN)

David Paddon, The Canadian Press

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Real eState

Mall real estate company collected 5 million images of shoppers, say privacy watchdogs – CBC.ca

Published

 on


The real estate company behind some of Canada’s most popular shopping centres embedded cameras inside its digital information kiosks at 12 shopping malls across Canada to collect millions of images — and used facial recognition technology without customers’ knowledge or consent — according to a new investigation by the federal, Alberta and B.C. privacy commissioners.

“Shoppers had no reason to expect their image was being collected by an inconspicuous camera, or that it would be used, with facial recognition technology, for analysis,” said federal Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien in a statement.

“The lack of meaningful consent was particularly concerning given the sensitivity of biometric data, which is a unique and permanent characteristic of our body and a key to our identity.”

According to the report, the technology Cadillac Fairview used — known as “anonymous video analytics” or AVA— took temporary digital images of the faces of individuals within the field of view of the camera in the directory.

It then used facial recognition software to convert those images into biometric numerical representations of individual faces  about five million images in total.

That sensitive personal information could be used to identify individuals based on their unique facial features, said the commissioners.

The report said the company also kept about 16 hours of video recordings, including some audio, which it had captured during a testing phase at two malls.

Cadillac Fairview said it used AVA technology to assess foot traffic and track shoppers’ ages and genders — but not to identify individuals. The company also argued shoppers were made aware of the activity through decals it had placed on shopping mall entry doors that referred to Cadillac Fairview’s privacy policy.

But the commissioners said that wasn’t good enough and did not meet the standard for meaningful consent. 

“An individual would not, while using a mall directory, reasonably expect their image to be captured and used to create a biometric representation of their face, which is sensitive personal information, or for that biometric information to be used to guess their approximate age and gender,” they wrote.

The privacy watchdogs also took issue with the way the five million images were stored.

Cadillac Fairview said the images taken by camera were briefly analyzed then deleted — but investigators found that the sensitive biometric information generated from the images was being stored in a centralized database by a third party.

“Our investigation revealed that [Cadillac Fairview Corporation Limited’s] AVA service provider had collected and stored approximately five million numerical representations of faces on CFCL’s behalf, on a decommissioned server, for no apparent purpose and with no justification,” notes the investigation.

“Cadillac Fairview stated that it was unaware that the database of biometric information existed, which compounded the risk of potential use by unauthorized parties or, in the case of a data breach, by malicious actors.”

Company says technology couldn’t identify people

The company said the technology was used to detect the presence of a human face and assign it “within milliseconds” to an approximate age and gender category and maintains it did not store any images during the pilot program and was not capable of recognizing anyone. 

This directory in Chinook Centre mall in south Calgary uses facial recognition technology. (Sarah Rieger/CBC)

“The five million representations referenced in the [Office of the Privacy Commissioner] report are not faces.These are sequences of numbers the software uses to anonymously categorize the age range and gender of shoppers in the camera’s view,” Cadillac Fairview spokesperson Jess Savage said in a statement to CBC News.

“The OPC report concludes there is no evidence that CF was using any technology for the purpose of identifying individuals.”

CF suspended its use of cameras back in 2018 when provincial and federal privacy commissioners launched their probe following a CBC investigation.

In a statement to CBC News on Thursday, the company said it has no plans to reinstall the cameras.

“We subsequently deactivated directory cameras and the numerical representations and associated data have since been deleted,” said Savage.

“We take the concerns of our visitors seriously and wanted to ensure they were acknowledged and addressed.”

However, the three commissioners said they have concerns about the company’s plans going forward.

“The commissioners remain concerned that Cadillac Fairview refused their request that it commit to ensuring express, meaningful consent is obtained from shoppers should it choose to redeploy the technology in the future,” said the commissioners’ statement.

Savage said Cadillac Fairview accepted and implemented all the recommendations “with the exception of those that speculate about hypothetical future uses of similar technology.”

The investigation found the technology was used in five provinces at the following malls:

  • CF Market Mall (Calgary)
  • CF Chinook Centre (Calgary)
  • CF Richmond Centre (Richmond, B.C.)
  • CF Pacific Centre (Vancouver)
  • CF Polo Park (Winnipeg)
  • CF Toronto Eaton Centre (Toronto)
  • CF Sherway Gardens (Toronto)
  • CF Fairview Mall (Toronto)
  • CF Lime Ridge (Hamilton, Ont.)
  • CF Markville Mall (Markham, Ont.)
  • CF Galeries d’Anjou (Montreal)
  • CF Carrefour Laval (Laval, Que.)

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Real eState

Damages For Lost Opportunity Cannot Be Awarded In A Failed Real Estate Transaction – Real Estate and Construction – Canada – Mondaq News Alerts

Published

 on


Canada:

Damages For Lost Opportunity Cannot Be Awarded In A Failed Real Estate Transaction

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

A recent decision from the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has
confirmed that damages for lost opportunity will not be awarded
when a real estate deal goes wrong.

In Akelius Canada Inc. v. 2436196 Ontario Inc., 2020
ONSC 6182, Justice Morgan held that when a real estate deal falls
apart due to a seller’s default, damages are to be determined
at the closing date and a claim for the future appreciation of the
property is therefore not available.

In Akelius, two sophisticated real estate investors
entered into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale
(“APS“) in 2015 for seven residential
apartment buildings in Toronto. The plaintiff buyer was a Canadian
subsidiary of a large international investment corporation with
holdings across Europe, the United States, and Canada. Over the
course of the transaction, the purchase price was negotiated to a
final price of $225,400,000.

After the APS was executed and prior to closing, the buyer
discovered that there were several mortgages encumbering the title
of some of the properties with total outstanding amounts of over
$48 million. The existence of the mortgages constituted a breach of
the APS and the buyer therefore objected after discovering
them.

The defendant sellers failed to remove the mortgages. However,
in an attempt to salvage the transaction, the sellers proposed to
revise the APS to exclude the encumbered properties from the sale
or alternatively, they proposed that the buyer could assume the
mortgages with a price abatement.

The buyer refused the sellers propositions, sued for breach of
contract, and brought a motion for summary judgment. The sellers
eventually sold the properties in 2018 for about $50 million more
than the purchase price in the APS. In its damages claim, the buyer
sought $50 million, reflecting the appreciation reaped by the
sellers, as well as about $770,000 in sunk costs that it incurred
as a result of the failed transaction.

Justice Morgan had little difficulty finding that the sellers
breached the APS. The buyer was ready, willing, and able to close
the transaction and the sellers were unable to convey good title on
the closing date as a result of the mortgages.

As such, the primary issue for determination was the appropriate
measure of damages. Justice Morgan noted that the basic principle
is that damages should put the injured party back in the position
it would have been in if the contract had not been breached. There
is some flexibility to this approach; courts have stated that the
date of assessment should be determined by what is fair on the
facts of the case.

However, it has also been well established that damages for lost
speculation profits is not an available remedy in a real estate
transaction. The damages must make up what the purchaser lost in
value on the closing date, not what a property speculator standing
in the purchaser’s shoes would have lost.

It was also noted that it did not matter in this case that the
buyer was an “income investor” rather than a true
property speculator. Damages were therefore measured at the date of
closing, which precluded any claims for lost appreciation
profits.

While the case law provided a complete answer to the lost profit
claim, the court in Akelius went on to discuss mitigation,
because the parties had spent much of their time fighting over that
issue. The court held that the buyer had either failed to mitigate
its damages or, more likely, fully mitigated its damages. The buyer
refused to produce records of its transactions after January 2016,
and Justice Morgan accordingly drew an adverse inference that the
funds saved on this transaction were spent on other comparable
investments.

As a result, it was held that the buyer was only entitled to
damages for the amount of sunk costs thrown away on the
transaction. Damages for lost opportunity were not awarded. Because
both parties had mixed success, no costs were awarded to either
side.

This decision affirms the courts’ reluctance to consider
claims for lost profits from capital appreciation, even where a
buyer is unfairly deprived of a lucrative opportunity. Real estate
investors should be mindful of this before they opt to sue for
damages.


The authors would like to thank Allan Tung, Articling Student,
for his assistance with this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Real Estate and Construction from Canada

Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy Update

Blaney McMurtry LLP

Below is a summary of the Government of Canada’s announcement regarding the introduction of the Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy, which will provide rent support to organizations that are…

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending