Brian Madigan ~ Candidate Profile (RECO 2012 Election)

Brian Madigan LL.B. ~ Candidate Profile

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

The Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO), the governing body of real estate brokers, sales representatives and brokerages is electing three new directors to take office in June 2012.

I have decided to submit my candidacy for election as a Director to represent Region 1, which includes Toronto and other central Ontario areas.

RECO will circulate the following information in its election package:

Real estate broker, commercial and residential, real estate litigation advisor, venture capitalist and educator, Approved RECO Education Provider (Disclosure Laws), Continuing Education Course Developer and Instructor (Agreement, Chattels and Fixtures, Surveys, Boundaries and Adverse Possession, Competition Law, Family Law, Estate Planning, Risk Management, Liability under Law of Torts), published over 2,300 articles on real estate for the consumer emphasizing ethical practice by real estate practitioners, developed independent comparative performance index for real estate; served as mediator and arbitrator in real estate matters; accepted as expert witness by Superior Court of Justice in Ontario related to professional standards; graduated Osgoode Hall Law School 1974, practiced law in Toronto for 25 years, commercial and negligence litigation, professional discipline experience as advocate, prosecutor and chair, professional liability experience; over 1,000 court appearances including Superior Court of Justice and Ontario Court of Appeal; closed over 5,000 real estate transactions; served on Boards of Public Hospitals, Foundations, and Chairman of Investment Committees for publicly funded pension plans, advisor to Insurers underwriting corporate governance policies; previously Speaker, Canadian Bar Association, Lecturer, Law Society of Upper Canada, Instructor Bar Admission Course; Director, numerous non-profit organizations.

As a member of the RECO Board, I would encourage professionalism, foster education, permit accredited specialization, allow personal incorporation of real estate practices. Please confirm your commitment by exercising your right to vote!

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

RECO’s Role in Fostering Professionalism (Election 2012)

Professionalism in Real Estate

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

Professionalism in the real estate industry underlies the integrity of the system.

This issue becomes topical due to the elections for board members to serve RECO  in 2012.  Infact, due to its importance, it should always be an issue.

It is the role of the regulator, the Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO) to ensure that the consumer is protected. That must be the primary objective.

RECO requires a strategy in order to achieve its objective. It must utilize various means at its disposal to ensure the integrity of the system.

Among the tools which RECO can use are:

  • Legislation
  • Code of Ethics
  • Education requirements
  • Continuing Education requirements
  • Registration requirements
  • Provisional and Permanent registration
  • Specialization certification
  • Limitation on activities
  • Mandatory supervision
  • Insurance assessments
  • Audits
  • Compliance enforcement
  • Prosecutions

While all of the above are possible, they are not all utilized by RECO at the present time.

What do you think? Should RECO increase its involvement in the regulation of the industry? Would this increase professionalism? Would this result in greater consumer protection?

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

Brian Madigan LL.B. for RECO Board of Directors (2012)

Brian Madigan for Board of Directors ~ RECO Election 2012

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

The election for directors to the RECO Board will commence on 9 April 2012and run until 17 May 2012.

Under the circumstances, I will release the majority of my platform before 9 April 2012, so that electors may make an informed decision.

I will be dealing with the following:

  • Professionalism
  • Specialization
  • Incorporation
  • Education
  • Discipline
  • Insurance

Let me know if there are issues and topics which you are concerned about?

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

Authorization to Submit Unconditional Offer – FORM

Unconditional Offers ~ Informed Consent Acknowledgment

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

We know that there are risks associated with the unconditional Offer. The question from the perspective of the real estate agent is how to minimize them.

First, the issue needs to be identified, discussed and recorded or noted by the agent in some way. That information needs to be placed in a file.

Second, an e-mail summary of the issue should follow. A response is not necessary, but it demonstrates that the client was aware of the issue, well in advance and at a time when they were not under pressure.

Third, there should be some sort of form or document that will confirm the final decision.

That document could look something like the following:

Buyers’ Informed Consent Acknowledgement

Authorization to Submit Unconditional Offer

 

To:   ABC Realty, Inc., Brokerage

Property: ________________________________________

The Undersigned acknowledge that they have been advised by _____________________________ of the substantial and material risks associated with the submission of an unconditional Offer, which upon acceptance by the sellers will result in a firm and binding Agreement of Purchase and Sale.

Failure to complete the Agreement in accordance with its terms will expose us to the loss of our deposit and a claim for any damages sustained by the sellers in addition to the deposit.

The Undersigned acknowledge that they have had the opportunity to obtain legal and financial advice and they are nevertheless prepared to proceed.

The Undersigned hereby authorize ABC Realty Inc., Brokerage and ________________________ to submit an unconditional Offer on the above property, without the following suggested conditions:

Financing – Mortgage Approval                                                          _____

Financing – Satisfactory Appraisal                                                      _____

Home Inspection                                                                                          _____

Compliance – Zoning and Building By-laws                                      _____

Other  __________________________                                           _____

The Undersigned with full knowledge and consent, elect to proceed with the submission of an unconditional Offer,  accept the risks associated with such, and agree not to make any claim as against the sales representative, broker or ABC Realty Inc. arising as a result of such decision.

Dated at Toronto  at ______(am/pm) this ______ day of ________ 2012.

___________________                          ____________________

witness                                                             Buyer

___________________                         ____________________

witness                                                             Buyer

Comment

The Form is far from perfect, but it does show that the matter was discussed in advance. And, that’s the fundamental purpose. It also reinforces that the deal is firm and there is an exposure to the loss of the deposit plus damages.

In situations where disputes arise, clients and customers will often indicate that they never understood those risks, and further may often claim that the risks were never, ever explained.

The document is “time sensitive”, so the actual time should be inserted. Each of the suggested conditions which are omitted should be initialled.

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

Risk Management Practice: Use the Informed Consent E-mail

Informed Consent E-Mail

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

From time to time, the issue of informed consent arises. That means that the client must truly understand and appreciate the consequences resulting from a decision. What better way to provide that information than through the “Informed Consent E-mail”.

Here is one which deals with no conditions in a multiple offer bidding war:

Bill,

I just wanted to clarify a few matters before we submit our first Offer once we find a suitable property.

The Toronto real estate market is very “hot” at the market for the type of property you describe in the price range which you can afford.

Consequently, many properties will be listed and sold within a few days of their coming on the market following the receipt of multiple offers. This is fine for the vendors, but is fraught with risk for the purchasers.

When multiple offers are submitted, purchasers are tempted to omit may of the usual conditions which we would recommend. It makes their Offers “clean” by being “unconditional”. This makes their Offers more attractive and appealing to the vendors.

Participating in the multiple offer submission process can be frustrating, and you may be tempted to submit such an Offer without conditions.

I want to advise you of some of the risks, particularly concerning the failure to include a home inspection condition and mortgage condition.

Home Inspection Condition

The purpose of this condition is to provide you with an opportunity to have a qualified inspector examine the premises on your behalf. The inspector should be able to identify structural problems, issues with the building’s plumbing, heating (cooling) and electrical systems, as well as the presence of mould and other forms of deterioration that you might not be aware of, yourself.

Usually, there is a short period of time to permit you to retain an inspector and conduct this inspection. The purpose of the report is to advise you of the facts related to the condition of the building and its equipment.

Mortgage Condition

The purpose of the mortgage condition is to ensure that you qualify for and will be able to secure the necessary financing to permit you to purchase the property.

A letter from your bank or mortgage broker holding a rate for you is not sufficient. The lending institution must approve the particular property transaction.

The specific approval will likely take a few days once the legal documentation has been submitted. In addition, there is the matter of valuation. The appraisal may not support the price you have offered in a “bidding war”. The lending institution may either decline to proceed or propose a reduced mortgage amount which may leave you without sufficient funds to close the transaction.

Non-Completion of the Agreement

If you have entered into an agreement conditional upon inspection and mortgage approval you are under an obligation to use your best efforts to satisfy these conditions, failing which you may withdraw from the transaction with legal consequences. Your deposit will be returned to you in full.

However, if you have submitted an unconditional Offer, then upon acceptance you have a firm and binding agreement of purchase and sale.

If for any reason, you fail to complete the transaction, you will lose your deposit, and you will also be responsible for any damages sustained by the vendor which exceeds your deposit. These damages would include the costs of carrying charges from the date of your closing to the date the property is actually sold, and any loss in purchase price. In addition, there may be moving expenses, short term financing and other expenses incurred by the vendor for which you would be responsible.

Recommendation

We always recommend that these two conditions be included in every Offer.

Alternate Accommodation

I appreciate that you may nevertheless wish to accept these risks. There are some ways to minimize the impact by having an inspection conducted before the Offer, and by ensuring that additional financing is available, if required.

These are serious matters, involving substantial risks that we should discuss each time an Offer is to be submitted. I need to ensure that I have your informed consent to each and every proposed transaction.

In that regard, I am attaching a copy of a Form of Informed Consent that we use at our offices.

Sincerely,

Robert Realtor, Sales Representative

ABC Realty Inc., Brokerage

 

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

Offers without Conditions: Who’s at Risk?

 

Informed Consent Authorization

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

In a “hot” real estate market buyers are anxious to submit a winning Offer.

That is perfectly understandable, but something goes wrong, then the tables could turn on an unsuspecting agent.

It is important to “document the file”. So, inform the buyer, have the buyer agree, have the authorization reduced to writing. Actually, it’s that simple!

But, most of the time, the Offer is submitted and the discussion about the risks is never truly documented.

Some savvy agents will put the conditions in the Offer and then have the conditions deleted by hand prior to submission. That is bad practice. The agreement of purchase and sale is hardly the spot to start negotiating over terms with your own client. You would not expect your lawyer to place inappropriate clauses in your Will, and then say “well, you can always take them out….”.

The preferred practice procedure would be to:

1)     communicate the issue by email,

2)     record and document any meeting discussing the issue, by taking proper notes,

3)     having a Form signed authorizing the Offer submission.

At least, this way, the real estate professional will have a fighting chance when it comes to “he said…she said…”.

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

Deaths and Disclosure: Natural, Suicide and Murder

Deaths and Disclosure : Natural, Suicide and Murder

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

Question:

Do you have to disclose if there was a suicide in the house? A death? A murder? A grow op? What is the line for disclosure?

I assume there is some principle to be interpreted and not a clear line. Is it a question of interpretation as to what would negatively impact the price or resale?

Answer:

The law of disclosure may be divided in terms of responsibility.

There is one law for vendors based upon the common law and another for real estate professionals arising out of the Code of Ethics.

A vendor’s liability is restricted to:

1)     patent defects, if they are concealed,

2)     known latent defects provided they render the property unfit for human habitation.

Failing those two categories, the vendor has the right to remain silent.

This is not the case with real estate professionals. There is a positive duty to disclose material facts.

In the case of a client, there is an obligation to take reasonable steps to determine the material facts and disclose them.

In the case of a customer, there is an obligation to disclose known material facts, including those which ought to be known.

This is set out in the Code of Ethics, s. 21. I have not been able to come up with any practical example which would result in an actual difference between the client and customer obligations.

Material facts are defined to be those that would affect a reasonable person’s decision to buy or sell.

So, in the case of deaths in a house, natural, suicide and murder, the answer inOntariois far from clear. So far, it’s opinion. Some people say they want to know, others don’t really care.

Many apparent deaths can be ruled out because the death actually took place at the hospital or enroute to the hospital.

In a number of US jurisdictions, there is specific legislation obligating the disclosure in the case of murders and suicides. Usually, there is a time limit, commonly ranging from2to 6 years.

Several commentators have encouraged real estate professionals to make this type of disclosure, including OREA. Others have expressed caution, in the interests of privacy.

In a number of such cases, there is a measurable short term discount. The neighbours know. Sometimes the neighbours are the best purchasers. If they are not in the buying pool, then the property is worth less. Even someone who doesn’t care at all about the death, will still want the “death discount”.

The “death discount” really only arises in the case of murders and suicides, and perhaps violent altercations within the premises. There is really no discount for an estate sale, although if the property is on the market for some considerable period of time, they may generate more low bidders. If they are marketed at an appropriate listing price, they should be just as able to generate a bidding war as any other property.

The Superior Court case in June which concluded that the presence of a sexual offender in the neighbourhood might constitute a latent defect requiring disclosure has yet to reach trial, but the case opened up the issue beyond something that was physical in nature and directly related to the property.

Grow houses would in my opinion constitute material facts. Proper remediation followed by evidence of such remediation is the appropriate approach. Full disclosure here would seem to be the only way to avoid possible liability.

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

Interest in Matrimonial Home is Possessory (Ontario FLA)

Matrimonial Home Interest is Possessory

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

Question

Mr. and Mrs. Robbins live at123 Front St.where Mr. Robbins is the sole owner of the family home. Is the following statement correct? Why?

“Mrs. Robbins has a 50% ownership interest in this home, because it is a matrimonial home.”

Answer

The short answer is no.

Mrs. Robbins has a possessory interest because it is a matrimonial home.

Mrs. Robbins does not acquire a property interest in the matrimonial home under the Family Law Act.

But, if there were no marriage contract, it is possible that she might acquire a split in the equalization payment equal to half the value of the property.

So, the longer answer is “maybe”.

However, when confronted with this on a multiple choice examination, don’t assume any addition facts, just answer the question as posed, which would be “no”.

 

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

A Safer Deposit Clause for Vendors

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

Sometimes the deposit is just not paid. I know that it’s supposed to be paid.

What happens if the purchaser doesn’t pay the deposit? Can the vendor get out of the deal? Can the vendor simply sell the property to someone else?

The law on this subject somewhat favours the defaulting purchaser.

The Courts look at the failure to provide the deposit as required as a simple breach of contract, and the remedies afforded to the vendor are the same as any other breach.

The common deposit requirements are (one or more of the following):

1) herewith,
2) upon acceptance, or
3) upon the happening of a certain event.

The choice is up to the purchaser, at least at the time of submission of the Offer. The vendor can, of course, propose an acceptable alternative.

In many cases, the vendor will negotiate an increased deposit and also specify that the deposit cheque must be certified. These are all common provisions.

So, you might have a purchaser offer a $5,000 deposit upon acceptance. The vendor signs back the Offer as a $15,000 deposit, certified cheques, $5,000 upon acceptance and a further $10,000 upon waiver of the “financing condition”.

What happens if the purchaser never pays either deposit? Actually, nothing! Yes, indeed the purchaser is in default, but this is treated as a simple breach of contract. It does not permit the vendor to sell the property immediately to a third party with impunity.

Many real estate agents will talk about “24 hours” to get the deposit cheque. That was a reference in the Real Estate and Business Brokers Act prior to the recent amendments. The similar provisions now provide for “five days”. This is the period of time that the brokerage firm has to deposit the cheque in its trust account after it has been received. Neither the old provision nor the new provisions deal with the contractual obligations between the two parties to the contract. They simply deal with the regulation of the procedural obligations of real estate brokerages. So, all of this talk about 24 hours or 5 days etc. is just a “red herring”.

Now, back to the parties. Let’s assume that the purchaser is somewhat devious right from the outset. The purchaser might initially suggest that he personally attend at the offices of the listing brokerage and deliver his cheque. Remember that the banks were closed the night that the deal was struck. However, he never bothers. Both agents inquire as to the whereabouts of the certified deposit cheque and he simply claims that he delivered it. He claims to have a receipt issued by the receptionist evidencing its delivery. Easily a week passes. The financing condition is waived. He is now obligated to provide a further $10,000 deposit. Same routine, this cheque fails to appear, but again he claims to have a receipt. Two further weeks pass as the purchaser looks for his receipt. Another week can easily pass while the purchaser claims to have his bank trace its records to determine whether the deposit funds have left his account. As you can appreciate this long, tall story could go on for a month or two before anyone could properly prove with utmost certainty that the purchaser’s claim that he paid the deposit was untrue.

What are the rights of the parties in the interim period? Actually, they are just the same as if the deposit was paid. The purchaser is entitled to specific performance of the contract, and the same is true of the vendor. Just because the deposit was not paid does not mean that the deal is off or the contract never arose or is unenforceable.

Since most real estate closings take place within 90 days of the negotiated agreement, this is fairly short period of time, and far too soon to make an application to Court to obtain a declaration that the contract is terminated. So, even once this fact is evident, the vendor is left without a reasonable remedy. He is stuck and just has to wait until closing date, hoping that the purchaser will complete the transaction. Obviously, the purchaser must pay the entire purchase price on closing. There’s no credit for unpaid deposits.

Due to the fact that this is a relatively rare occurrence, neither the legal profession nor the real estate profession have addressed this matter in their precedents for real estate sales, agreements and conveyancing.

If you were particularly concerned about a particular purchaser not paying, why not consider including the following paragraph in the agreement:

The purchaser shall provide the deposit by cash or certified cheque or banker’s draft within 24 hours of the obligation arising under the terms of this agreement. The term “upon acceptance” shall be construed to mean “immediately, but no later than 24 hours following acceptance”, and should a further deposit be required upon the happening of a certain event, then such further deposit must be made immediately, but no later than 24 hours after the happening of such event.

The vendor shall have the right to terminate this agreement in the event that:

1) the purchaser fails to provide the deposit or the further deposit,
2) the purchaser’s deposit cheque(s) cannot be certified, or
3) the purchaser’s deposit cheque(s) is dishonoured by the bank

by giving 24 hours notice in writing to the purchaser, the purchaser’s agent or the purchaser’s solicitor, and upon such termination, this agreement shall become null and void and any deposit moneys so paid shall be returned in full to the purchaser without interest and without deduction.

The above clause would solve the problem of the cavalier purchaser and the rogue deposit.

The agreement would clearly specify that the purchaser has 24 hours to come up with the deposit. If it’s not paid, then the vendor can simply unilaterally terminate the agreement upon 24 hours notice using a condition subsequent clause in the agreement.

It might be wise if such a clause were included in the standard form precedents for agreements of purchase and sale as this would eliminate the problem and provide the right remedy to the vendor.

Just about everyone agrees that the vendor should be able to sell to a third party without a Court Order in such circumstances.

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

Condominium Liability: Piercing the Corporate Veil

Condominium Liability: Piercing the Corporate Veil

Ontario Real Estate Source

By Brian Madigan LL.B.

Question:

What section of the Condominium Act pierces the corporate veil?

Answer:

“Piercing the Corporate Veil” is an expression used to describe those situations where the limited liability provisions that commonly protect directors and officers and shareholders from personal liability will not apply.The provisions are intended to override the general and statutory laws for a noble purpose. In such situations, liability may be imposed directly upon officers and directors by reason of something they did or failed to do. In some cases, this may be extended to shareholders.

Traditionally, however, in the case of merely an insufficiency of funds, shareholders are protected from personal liability or responsibility.

When it comes to condominium liability, judgments pass through the condominium corporation and are imposed directly upon the shareholders or owners.

 Have a look at the following section of the Condominium Act:

 Corporation may be sued

 23 (5)  The corporation may, as representative of the owners of the units, be sued in respect of any matter relating to the common elements or assets of the corporation.

Judgment against corporation

 23 (6) A judgment for the payment of money against the corporation is also a judgment against each owner at the time of judgment for a portion of the judgment determined by the proportions specified in the declaration for sharing the common interests.

So, that means that the condominium corporation can be sued directly, and if it loses in Court, the Judgment not only affects the corporation but also the percentage share of the individual owners.

Naturally, that is like owning a share in Bell Canada, and having a Judgment affect Bob directly just because he owns one share. In that case, Bell could go bankrupt should there be insufficient funds to satisfy the judgment, but Bob will always be protected.

When we come to Bob’s condo, Bob owes his percentage share, no matter what. In that sense, the corporate veil of the condo corporation has been pierced. In this case, the piercing was through the statute itself.

Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker is an author and commentator on real estate matters, if you are interested in residential or commercial properties in Mississauga, Toronto or the GTA, you may contact him through RE/MAX West Realty Inc., Brokerage 416-745-2300.
www.OntarioRealEstateSource.com

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.