64 replies to this topic

[VicHockeyFan]

Before BC passed the Strata act in 1969.   Before that condos had to create coporations with each owner having a stake, some form of leasehold, or cooperative.   None of them really met the needs of condo ownership which is why the Strata Act was passed.  It took time before strata titles became common.   False Creek was started before stratas were common.  

 

Orchard House was constructed before the strata act

 

Ah, OK.  

 

Now, the way I read it Bernard, people in Orchard do not own any piece of the building, nor the land, is that right?  They simply have a long-term lease to occupy the unit, and must return it at end-of-lease in condition they got it.  As opposed to say, Musquem, where the houses were owned by people leasing the land.

[Hugh Trenchard]

I am one of the leaseholders at Orchard House.  

 

Although a 2-page report from an engineering company from September 2013 stated that windows were not in immediate need of replacement but were nearing the end of their service life, Westsea did provide an updated engineering report, dated March 24, 2016. In the March 2016 report, the engineers estimated costs for the window replacement project of $3.65 million. On or about July 5, 2016, only three months later, Westsea informed leaseholders that the windows project will cost $5.5 million. 

 

Leaseholders cannot get any answers from Westsea to requested information relating to the increased costs (nearly $2 million more than the engineers estimate). Westsea is taking the tack it has no legal or contractual obligation to respond to any inquiries. To support this position, Westsea purports to rely on a settlement of a court application I made in which both myself and Westsea agreed that I would dismiss my court application for an interpretation of the lease, on the condition that Westsea would provide an engineering report about the windows project. There was no court order in relation to the substance of my application - just an agreement that Westsea would provide the engineering report.   And yet Westsea's lawyer is telling leaseholders the matter "was litigated in the Supreme Court of British Columbia", which may mislead leaseholders to believe that the court made an order that Westsea has no obligation to answer inquiries -- such an order clearly was not made by the court.  In turn, Westsea is exploiting a court settlement as yet another mechanism by which Westsea sustains their monopoly on the information exchange between itself and the leaseholders, who are required to pay all the bills that Westsea presents them.

 

The latest gaff by Westsea comes in their letter to leaseholders on July 21, 2016, in which Westsea has notified residents of the pending construction time-frames. The letter says:

 

"All residents are responsible for clearing their belongings.  If the contractor is required to move personal belongings, the resident will be back-charged at a rate of $56.55 / man-hour.  Farmer Construction and or Westsea Construction Ltd. et al will not be held liable for any items that require moving and get damaged."  

 

I would be interested to know how Westsea has arrived at this hourly rate, which seems exorbitant and arbitrary to me. Westsea feels it can simply tell leaseholders what we must pay if workers have to move household items. I have seen nothing in the lease that gives them authority to make such a demand, let alone charge the cost they are suggesting; and their unilateral declaration that Westsea cannot be held liable for damages simply flies in the face of their legal duty to take reasonable care.

 

These are just further examples how Westsea exploits the imbalance in power between itself and the leaseholders, who pay the bills. 

[Mike K.]

The window replacements are now underway. A contributor to VV's Facebook page wrote us the following message:

The residents of this leasehold building had no choice but to ante up $20k and up for these new windows.

 

Now, as the weather is getting chilly, they have windows removed and then boarded over, possibly while new windows are installed from inside? Clearly they can not stay home while this is going on.

My high rise condo [location removed] had engineers advise us to replace our single pane windows, but due to cost, disruption, and the lack of any window failure in [number removed] years, we chose not to do it.

The folks in Orchard House have undertaken legal action against the owner, and I wish them well.

 

[VicHockeyFan]

It's a fairly simple job for crews that know what they are doing.  And workers should not require more than 2 hours per window set.  "Boarded over" would be very, very rare.  

[VicHockeyFan]

The building's only (2016-1970/1) 45 years' old, it's a scary thought that highrise windows may not be pretty much good for the life of the building (~110 years).  Replacing them now, implies they may need to be replaced yet again before the building's reached it's economic endpoint.  Does anyone know of highrise window replacements that were needed (other than for renoviction purposes of course), in a similar climate?

 

 

It's not reasonable to expect windows to last 110 years if they are a style that opens in any way for ventilation.  I'd say that probably in this town, 90% of 60's houses have had most of their windows replaced.

[Nparker]

During the remediation of my condo complex back in 2004, all windows in my townhouse unit were removed and replaced and at no time were the openings ever "boarded over". I am not sure why this would be necessary at Orchard House if everything is planned well in advance.

[VicHockeyFan]

During the remediation of my condo complex back in 2004, all windows in my townhouse unit were removed and replaced and at no time were the openings ever "boarded over". I am not sure why this would be necessary at Orchard House if everything is planned well in advance.

 

That's right.  Only serious human error (in measurements or installation) would cause anything to be boarded up for even a night.

[Mike K.]

Except this situation has been muddied by the following (taken from post above the post with the photo):

 

Although a 2-page report from an engineering company from September 2013 stated that windows were not in immediate need of replacement but were nearing the end of their service life, Westsea did provide an updated engineering report, dated March 24, 2016. In the March 2016 report, the engineers estimated costs for the window replacement project of $3.65 million. On or about July 5, 2016, only three months later, Westsea informed leaseholders that the windows project will cost $5.5 million.

[Victoria Watcher]

story in today’s Tc about residents having to pay a $1 million legal bill.

[Rob Randall]

A resident records the ordeal:

 

orchardhouseleaseholder.ca

 

Because it's a leaseholder property it's not covered by the Strata Act or the Residential Tenancy Act. 

 

I've never grasped the benefits of leaseholder property. Seems like the worst of both worlds.

[mbjj]

My mum owned a condo in there which I lived in in the late 1970s, then she lived there until she went into a nursing home. Good location and the pool is nice, lol. Sure glad we didn't have these problems back then. When my daughter started trying to get a feel for the market, we went to look at a two-bedroom suite in there. It was really nicely redecorated and on the quiet side of the building. But she's still a renter as she continues to save.

[grantpalin]

I've never grasped the benefits of leaseholder property. Seems like the worst of both worlds.

I've wondered this too. I suppose this is also why units on the market in this building are surprisingly cheap.

[Victoria Watcher]

A resident records the ordeal:

orchardhouseleaseholder.ca

Because it's a leaseholder property it's not covered by the Strata Act or the Residential Tenancy Act.

I've never grasped the benefits of leaseholder property. Seems like the worst of both worlds.

the benefit is a cheap entry point. then you might experience less than stellar appreciation and you might also incur other costs. risk/reward though I guess. it’s all built in.

[Rob Randall]

What happens when the lease is up? Say if you buy one and your kid inherits it. Assuming the building is a little over half-way through a 99 year lease.

[Victoria Watcher]

I think it’s over. that’s also built into the resale price.

it seems like some of the risk is that the property manager/owner can charge dubious fees for repairs or maintenance and the leaseholders have no say.

you might hate your monthly strata fee at your standard condo but at least you can see almost every detail of where the money goes each month.

it’s the same reason careaminiums have low resale value. or hotel unit shares.

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 07 June 2020 - 10:10 AM.

[Rob Randall]

He has a rundown of the building here:

 

https://orchardhouse...the-building-2/

 

So because it's not a strata they have no reserve fund. No contingency fund. Purchaser's Realtors should have let them know that they will be 100% on the hook for any repairs. And carpet and roof are one thing but building envelope--exterior glass--that's a whopper. In a half-century old tower everyone should have known that was guaranteed to happen sooner rather than later. Come on, when's the last time you saw a functioning 60 year-old sliding glass patio door?

 

See, typically in a condo you deal with major repairs with a combination of direct assessment and contingency fund. That way the current owners cover the much of the cost of the work but previous owners have contributed over time as well. Otherwise an owner is tempted to vote "no" on major repairs until they sell.

Edited by Rob Randall, 07 June 2020 - 10:25 AM.

[Victoria Watcher]

i’m almost sure most sane realtors do try to talk clients out of it - if only in concern for their own low commissions.

[Rob Randall]

They shouldn't necessarily talk them out of it, just let them know, hey, this is no minor technicality.

 

The salesman at the used car lot is not obligated to explain what the white smoke billowing out of that Sunfire means but you would hope the BCAA mechanic you hired to evaluate the car would not hide it from you.

[Redd42]

i’m almost sure most sane realtors do try to talk clients out of it - if only in concern for their own low commissions.

 

The first time I shopped for a condo I luckily had real estate folks who explained the problems buying in to that building. From my memory, I think there are more of these in Victoria? Early in the buildings life these are a good deal but once they start needing repairs, not so much.

 

Another one that has a similar problem is the townhouses that are on Admirals, just west of Craigflower, behind the gas station. They are on the reserve. So you own the right to inhabit the space but not the land. You pay both a strata fee and a lease fee. The sell very cheap compared to regular strata units.

 

Any "mobile" home has the same problem.

 

Basically any time you buy when you are also not buying an interest in the land the housing sits on.

[Victoria Watcher]

the article says there are only like 20 in all of bc. so not really a major issue.

banks are also not keen to lend lots on these.