Charles L. Hanes

FIRING YOUR PROPERTY MANAGER - BEST FIRST STEP FOR A NEWLY REGISTERED CONDO

2008-01-18T11:16:00.000-08:00

I’ve been writing about the distasteful disparity in quality developers amidst this present swath of “also-rans” in this city for a long time now. Fortunately, thanks to the thousands of emails that I receive from buyers all over the world, some of you are apparently getting the message.

If you are buying directly from any sellers agent (either presale or resale) you are at a decided disadvantage! Having represented well over a hundred condo buyers each year for the past five to seven years now apparently my point is being listened to.

Tragically, my somewhat impressive (for a single Realtor) volume of clients represents only a “rimple on a dimple on a sand fleas behind” compared to the flood of novice condo investors who still flood to sales sites with and/or without their own Realtor (not all Realtors know anything about condos). When you realize that this rather staggering volume of clients does not even make a blip on the radar screen of overall Toronto condo sales, you can see why my frustration levels frequently leave me wanting to either just walk away from this stupid business or go back a join the other side! Oh well, I’m too old to do that and I find the work distasteful.

So, if I can’t make any positive impact on the overall buyer market out there, I’m going to give you all one very valuable tip here in this article. First, make the promise to yourself to attend the board meetings, specially the first meeting (“hand over meeting”) where the developer literally hands ownership of the building over to the owners. Up to this point the/she/they (collectively “the developer”) have been the Board of Directors of the condo that has just formed. At this meeting, they resign the Board and the new owners form their own board (a group of volunteer owners willing to put in time and their personal resources to make the condo what it is supposed to be and/or all it can be) and management and operations, for the first time since everyone moved in (“occupancy”) come into control of the owners. Up until this point owners have been in suspended animation, not really owners as they had not title but allegedly somewhere above renters (although I haven’t really be able to differentiate where this line is drawn).

So before this meeting you really should look at the election package that is sent around to all owners just ahead of this meeting. This package will carry to biographies of anyone/everyone interested in service on the Board of Directors for the condo. If you have something to offer it is quite smart for you to sit on the board yourself but if time and/or situation does not permit, at least be sure to attend all of the meeting and make sure all these board meeting are monthly and open to everyone who wants to attend.

I’ve got tons of documented proof to support the following statement: “No matter what the price point, developers are absolutely committed to meeting ONLY the MINIMAL STANDARD of construction quality”. We’ve got settled disputes where the developer’s litigator insists on “minimal standard” even when it comes to settling legal deficiency disputes. The best that you can expect is “MINIMUM STANDARD” unless the documents specifically say otherwise.

You will not find this in any of the glitzy sales and marketing materials that they spend tons of money on to get you to buy the condo from them. Now, all these “minimum standards” come in two forms, visible sub-standard workmanship and mechanical substandard workmanship.

Now remember, the property management company has been brought in by the developer thus the property manager’s loyalty will rest with the developer who gives them the contract (and who want to job on their future buildings as well) thus their loyalty is undivided. This works the same with the security guard company. Oh, you don’t realize this term? Well, when you were buying it was called the “Executive Concierge Service” (that would stand the building apart) but the developer never had any intention of fulfilling that representation (promise). During the construction period they need security guard companies to watch the site and try to minimize theft of construction materials. When the building occupies the developers never hire a concierge company (most are going broke because they can’t find work in this town) but simply leaves the security guard company in place.

It is said that many developers receive kick backs from property management companies for these contracts but that’s fodder for another article. The point is that you never get your concierge and you get to live with a security guard in your lobby (no training as a concierge or people skills or subtle understanding of the expectations of a concierge job). Oh well, condos are the science of compromise all right!

The same applies with the superintendent usually as well. Now, I don’t have anything against any of these supposed roll fillers but my 30 years of experience has shown me the best first step for a newly formed condo board is to replace all three roll fillers immediately at the turn over meeting (or at least give them notice at that meeting as their contracts usually have a 60 day notice clause).

I am continually bombarded with complaints by developers unable to find “a good property management company”. I know of a few decent ones but they are few and far between. I know a couple of terrible property management companies and right up at the top of my list of nightmare property management companies is indisputably Brookfield Residential Services Ltd.

I have had first hand experience with Brookfield and they have proven themselves absolutely untrustworthy and incompetent. They worked with the board of a condo that I resided in and in the first year of operations the condos budgets literally doubled under their management or should I call a spade a spade “mismanagement”. We finally had a new board elected the second year and they fired Brookfield (we were not the only condo board getting rid of them) but significantly, when we told Brookfield that we were auditing the budgets, they immediately and mysteriously found a $12,000 discrepancy (to the board’s favour) in their books! Imagine that someone so conscientious that they would do their own audit before handing things back over to us and fortunately finding the $12,000 overpay to them before we did which might have led us to form the conclusion that they were taking money from us that was not authorized.

This is all why it is so important that your condo corporation get it right the first time out of the box! Brookfield and the “shill board” (board manipulated by the developer at the turn over meeting). It took two more years to work things out at that condo so the owners suffered for three years under highly questionable management tactics at the hands of Brookfield and the corrupt board before getting costs under total control. Maintenance fell by 50%.

The shill board and the developer’s loyal property manager (“Brookfield”) allowed the mechanical audit (a very important aspect of a condo turnover) to be deferred almost a full year. It should have been undertaken no later than six but preferably three months into registration to allow sufficient time to remedy deficiencies found in the audit. Of course, Brookfield and the corrupt developer manipulated things together that insured that the Mechanical audit wound up after the full year under which time the developer is held accountable. They simply refused to settle the deficiencies requests submitted by the new board and passed the blame onto the old board.

All of this could have been avoided had the owners taken control of their and their condo’s lives by doing it right the first time! The refreshing things is that doing it right the first time is easy! You replace absolutely every contract (property manager, security, maintenance) immediately upon bringing on the original board of directors.

It is also critically important to realize that if you don’t terminate all those contracts, immediately they become permanent and things like the security guards become very difficult and costly to terminate after the fact. You absolutely need your property management company, security company and superintendent accountable and loyal to the owners without equivocation!

I absolutely guarantee you that if you swear by this one simple rule (fire them all) your condo and life experience will benefit immeasurably. If you don’t, then your condo is destined to flail around in the disappointing mediocrity that consumes a decided majority of condos in Toronto.

The quality of your condo experience really is tied directly to what you are prepared to do to make it a better place. Your condo is a reflection of you!

I’m Charles Hanes

COLLEGE & BAY CITY’S NEWEST HOT RESIDENTIAL CONDO COMMUNITY

2008-01-18T10:46:00.000-08:00

They are calling it Yorkville South, which in itself carries a potential dichotomy. I’m not really an ideal candidate as a Yorkvillian, although I do agree that historically Yorkville has offered some of the best condo addresses.
If you like the glitz and glamour that the city has to offer, Yorkville offers some impressive alternatives with new Five Star presales such as Museum House (conceivably “the best the city has to offer and certainly one of the best“), 1 St. Thomas, (one of the most impressive residential condo buildings architecturally in the city) 135 Cumberland, The Four Seasons,
The Regency, Minto’s St. Thomas, 77 Charles, The Yorkville area does have a lot to offer. You will find all of the city’s most trendy restaurants and designer shops located in what is “Toronto’s Rodeo Drive”. None of the presale condos listed above run below $1,000 per square foot (there may be a few smaller no view suites in the $800 range). Most of them have residences remaining so if you are fortunate enough to be in this price point, please let me know and I’ll send you an up to date availability of units available.

There is a string of older established top end residences, many of which having been upgraded and renovated over the years like Windsor Arms, Renaissance Plaza, Prince Arthur, Renaissance Court, 4 Lawther, where you can buy upscale residences in the $800 - $1,000 per square foot range.

For me there just too much glitz and glamour. I’m not a very public person and all of the Lambourgini’s roaring around and serving as food candy for all of the tourist and celebrity stalkers cramming into the local dining and wining establishments. Oh, you will see all of the stars that come to the city in Yorkville and if designer wear is what turns your crank then you will love Yorkville. It’s an exciting and vibrant part of the city but for me, it does not offer the rather reclusive lifestyle that I seek.

One would think that a reclusive lifestyle would conflict with the downtown core condo lifestyle that I demand but fortunately, a very unique opportunity presented itself to me a couple of years back when I saw the College Park area starting to be rejuvenated.

The area, anchored by the original Eaton store, a landmark in the city had long been envisioned as a residential infill area but the plans had become cold cases when the market collapsed in the late 1980’s. In the past six years the area has come alive with a number of high density developments. Nothing revitalizes an area like high density condos as they bring higher numbers of people thus business enjoy financial benefits and new ones pop up.

I had the opportunity to work with the developer on a very unique collection of upscale townhouses proposed by them to be built into a beautiful private park (it’s actually a public park that is maintained by the city but it’s private from the hustle and bustle of the city).

In the short while that I shared my expertise with this developer on what would be needed to qualify these townhouses as superior, I observed a virtually explosion in condo choices in the area. The Met, a two tower plus stacked townhouse development immediately across the street from College Park at Yonge and Carlton (College changes at Yonge St. to Carlton) introduced hundreds of new residences to the area. College Park brought two 50+ storey towers. Lumiere sold out virtually over night, as did the Met and College Park. Just north along Bay Street came a two tower middle market development called Murano and now it’s sister development across the street on Bay “Burrano” rounds out a serious influx of new residents to the area, all within a single city block!

The strengths of this area is that it’s “not Yorkville” from my perspective. No Lamborghini’s (so far) cruising in circles and/or celebrity gawkers, yet all of the shops, restaurants
(Elm Street also has many of the city’s top dining alternatives).

The gold mine in the city proved to be the twelve luxury townhouses that have just or are just being completed IN THE PARK at College Park. When I say the developer had me help design them I don’t suggest having any architectural training or skill but I do know what sells and what doesn’t sell and they respected that. I’m an in-the-street guy and you can always find out more in this business from what people are saying in the street over all of the academic prowess that can be brought to bear.

I simply know what buyers are looking for because I have a database full of thousands of buyers all over the world many of whom are global real estate investors. It wasn’t difficult for me to come up with what worked as I was buyer number one having looked for a townhouse for years.

Townhouses in Toronto are not inexpensive. With condos running from around $600 per square foot (Festival Tower) to $800 per square foot at (Pier 27) for upper middle market condos and up to $1,500 per square foot (Four Seasons) to be able to buy a quality three bedroom plus den townhouse, right in the downtown core of the city of approximately 2,200 square feet around the starting price for middle market condos seems like a deal to me.

The magic about these condo town homes is that they do NOT SIT ON A STREET! What, no street noise, you know those incessant sirens in the night? That’s right! These 2,200 square foot condo townhomes are on the park, and are buffeted from street noise with two residential towers (College Park). The views are trees and a lovely operating fountain (summer) that converts to a skating rink in winter. The country in the city you might say!

The elements that I added were, I felt critical. Number one, they had to be built of poured concrete. Hollow wall construction simply allows noise transfer that is unacceptable when someone is spending over a million dollars. The ceiling height on the main floor (living room, dining room, kitchen) had to be ten feet high with oversized doors with formal trim. There had to be outside space (how’s three decks) and private parking downstairs (not accessed through the massive parking of the high rises).

Quite simply stated, thanks to Canderal Stoneridge’s willingness to meet the criteria that I set out for them, buyers will be moving in at the end of February 2008! If you are looking for a quality 2,200 square foot townhouse (condo townhouse thus giving you full maintenance and extensive recreational facilities) priced in the $1,250,000 range I’m sure that a couple of these units will be for sale so contact me today and you’ll be first to have a look.

That’s it for now. I’ve gotta run. I’m Charles Hanes

CITYPLACE BUYERS FACING EXTENDED “OCCUPANCY FEE PERIOD” DUE TO MISSING BRIDGE

2008-01-18T09:40:00.000-08:00

Somewhere around 2,500 condo buyers at Cityplace have seen their “Occupancy Fees” extended for an indefinite time period due to repeating delays in building a bridge across the old railway lands making them renters (with the mortgage portion or “Phantom Mortgage” of their “Occupancy Fees” not accruing to their mortgage).

Listening to the various players it is said that these delays have “raised the hackles of developers and city officials“ although, bridges are not built overnight and I am hard pressed to see why, once again, the burden of this type of screw up is simply passed on to the poor buyer!

The completion of this bridge is a requirement imposed by the city of Toronto for CityPlace to register its N1, N2, West One and Galleria condo towers, which sit in a block west of Spadina Ave. and south of Fort York Blvd.

The Toronto Star recently quoted Alan Vihant, a vice-president at Concord Adex (developer) as saying: "We've got people moved in on one of our blocks, and they want to financially close and become owners and not tenants". Concord Adex, has agreed to finance the building of the bridge.

Adam Vaughan, local city councilor (Ward 20, Trinity-Spadina), is quoted in the same article say that “it is GO Transit who is slowing up the program as they must approve the bridge design and GO Transit has rejected every version of the bridge's support system submitted to them. Go is doing everything in their power to be obstructionist," Vaughan says. "Yes, their responsibility is to deliver transit services, but they have a role to play in helping us build the city. It's not fair. They don't care whether 2,200 people can live in their building."

The bridge is to be located at Portland St., west of Spadina and east of Bathurst St. It was designed to link neighbourhoods north of Front St. to CityPlace and the waterfront, providing access to one of the most impressive natural path systems for pedestrians, joggers, cyclists, and tourists in the world (runs from deep Whitby to Burlington along Lake Ontario).

Frequently the city requires developers to finance community
improvements and/or assisted housing when they apply for permits to develop these glass residential piggy banks. The bridge is one of these imposed community improvements Concord Adex is required to make in order to develop the area south of the rail tracks.

The developer must finance and build the bridge, with the city taking ownership on completion. Vaughan says the bridge is an important project in his ward and will play an essential role in renewing the waterfront "in a way that's built on a pedestrian scale."

GO Transit's manager of transportation planning and development, is reported in the Toronto Star as saying that while “talks are progressing, it is up to the city to either agree to a design that works for GO or scrap the bridge idea entirely. The existing plan, which calls for a supporting column near the rails, could interfere with the sightlines for train signals“, GO is reported saying.

GO has proposed a clear-span (no supporting columns) design, but that idea does not seem to work for Concord Adex or the city. "That's ridiculous," Vaughan is quoted in the newspaper saying. "They know the only way to build a clear-span bridge is to shut down service for three to four months. They won't let that happen."

My question is: “how is it that consumers end up paying for GO and the City Council interfering with the delivery of this critical component of a residential condo development“?

Our Mayor and Council have been spouting off a great deal of late about how savvy they are in running this city. Well, here’s a glaring contradiction to those allegations! How is it that the only party being negatively impacted in this is the consumer? The consumer is the one party with absolutely no control over anything to do with this. Who is responsible for allowing this failure to negotiate a settlement on the construction of this bridge within the confines of the Agreements that everyone knew to be in place?

People have a lot of money riding on these small spaces and these prolonged occupancy fees materially affect their purchase price and resulting return for having invested here! The City is getting all of it’s “hidden fees” (levies, etc.) but through it’s inability to fulfill it’s obligations under the Agreements the consumers are getting fleeced. The question is, “is this right”?!?

More political infighting it seems but this time it is directly and negatively affecting innocent third parties, you know, those buyers who now are facing paying extended “Occupancy Fees” that are the equivalent to rent! Tack these monthly add-ons onto your purchase price and you will see that the developer is not overly upset about this development however the developer continues to face the construction fees so time becomes the issue for them as well.

All eyes have to turn to the City, you know our municipal government who just introduced an additional new Land Transfer Tax. This bridge issue reflects directly onto their ability to play the roll that they will have to play to earn their new found cash flow (new Land Transfer Tax) yet in over five years since the site plan was submitted, no-one got around to addressing this bridge issue.

The solution is not rocket science but the occurrence suggests a very serious deficiency in the overall game plan of condo development in this city where Joe Average Consumer (who trusts in the system to protect him/her) is left holding the bag every time!

Simply register these condos now and get the consumer off the hook and resolve the bridge issue involving future development of the buildings west of or including Parade. It’s not that Concord Adex is opposing paying for the bridge. They put in excellent parks, art and living space around their condos for years now and have not shied away from paying for civic upgrades.

“The obligation to get approval to build that bridge is the city of Toronto's," according to Cityplace. "GO is saying, we want more time“. The consumer is left sucking their thumb and paying the bill while GO and the city stumble on.

It’s not like this issue crept up over night! It takes time to build a bridge! People are already living in N1 and N2 which occupied well after West One. N1 and N2 occupied as recently as last month so it is abundantly clear that Concord Adex was fully aware of this issue while it required buyers to occupy thereby shifting the financial burden of carrying the construction financing over onto the purchasers. Oh, don’t worry the Agreement of Purchase and Sale allowed for such occurrences. It just strikes me as strange that under an alleged Condo Act to protect buyers, this would or could work out this way.

My clients are asking me about Luna, the next development west of Montage just before Parade as I have investors and end user purchasers in each of these developments. My instincts are that the bridge issue should not interfere with these other buildings as they have a ways to go before completion and the bridge issue will work itself out one way or another in a very short while. Unfortunately, as I said above, it takes time to build a bridge over a multi span of railroad tracks and if the design has not as of yet been agreed upon then you can expect those occupancy fees to continue for quite a while.

CAN SOMEONE “HIGHJACK” YOUR CONDO CORPORATION . . . part 4

2006-07-21T09:30:00.000-07:00

Well folks, the saga unfortunately continues. Mind you nothing monumental has gone on but the small group of owners that stepped up and taken on the challenging of righting this wrong have not be deterred from their objective of turning what appears to be a sow's ear into a silk purse.

The two board members refuse to resign still but they did concede to the will of the owners in a vote over concierge hours. At the insistence of the two rouge board members and in concert with Brookfield, (the property management company that led them down this disappointing path and basically orchestrated this entire scenario), absolutely refused to step aside and allow this conscientious group of owners fix the mess that they have made.

I ran into Jonathan (or J.B. as referred to earlier in my articles) passing by the building one afternoon and he was quick to update that he had read my blog. He was quite adamant about "not agreeing with some content" and seems perturbed that I would publish my editorials setting out his conduct and that of his fellow board member.

I was quick to invite him to publish his reply or rebuttal assuring him that any inaccuracies or untruths would be remedied immediately him setting them out to me in writing. I assured him that his responses would all be published unedited by me on my web site absolutely free of an cost to him.

He refused my offer and continued to insist that I just take it down, much like the dozens of litigators I get sent after me by unscrupulous developers that I expose here on my blog and on simplycondos.com. They all come crying and threatening law suits falsely alleging defamation, slander and/or libel. These unethical parasites (civil litigators - certainly not all but pretty well every one that I've had the displeasure to interact with since launching my site and blog.

Well, the vote went better than 90% for the change (actually it wasn't a legitimate change as the condo documents "disclosure statement" specified only one 8 hour shift concierge) back to what the condo documents stipulated. So, for anyone unsure, this type of thing is NOT supposed to be able to happen although Brookfield and these two university trained lawyers seem convinced of their undivided right to do pretty well whatever they want in spite of the greater majority of their fellow owners request of them (as their board of directors)!

They managed to postpone the Annual General Meeting by three months under "The Condo Act" (or so represented by Mr. Suliani, vice president of Brookfield - although I must confess that during the last informal meeting he did misrepresent three specific issues that he interpreted under the Act).

It's no secret that something stinks behind the scenes here. The new Annual Meeting is coming up this week and the desperados who thought that they could in fact "Highjack" this condo corporation will bear the fruits of their endeavours on the owner's behalf.

Both allegedly have stated intentions to run for the board again (I told you - it's "bazzaro world"!) however, with a greater than 90% dissatisfaction rate and a petition signed by a large percentage of owners to have the remaining members of the Board resign (the other resigned quietly just before they tried to push through the budget), I see it as highly unlikely that they will attempt to follow through on their promises. You've got to ask yourself "what's in it for these two" as they are facing outright hostile interaction amongst the neighbours of their home community!

The significance of all of this, and the fundamental answer to my question: "Can Someone Highjack your Condo Corporation" is that "YES THEY CAN BUT ONLY IF THE REST OF THE OWNERS ARE OUT OF TOUCH WITH WHAT'S GOING ON". Unfortunately, most owners in condos are not at all in touch with what's going on in their condo corporation, and with apathy always come abuse.

The Hero's on the day and I do emphasize "HEROS" are not the big time litigator that lives in the building, nor the big time condo people that live there, all of whom know or at least have a working knowledge of what is supposed to be going on and basically allowed this mess to happen (I do put forth that this is an extreme situation brought on by a developer who set up the entire launch and delivery of this development and it's documents in a manner to execute this type of mess. Many times what's a mess for one person is a good cover up for another (but that's the substance of an upcoming article of unethical Toronto Developers - you'll want to read this one as litigation is sure to follow).

That's about it for now, I've got to go earn my living.

I'm Charles Hanes

CAN SOMEONE “HIGHJACK” YOUR CONDO CORPORATION . . . part 3

2006-06-24T06:48:00.000-07:00

Well round one of the take-back went off without a hitch. In the earlier articles I’ve documented the rather disappointing conduct of Jonathan Berstein and Janice Chung, the two remaining board members who refuse to resign after the third board member chose to “cut and run”.

I’ve taken a short sabbatical away from watching this fiasco and not published any updates to enable hostilities to settle and for this first step of the salvaging of a democracy could unfold without disruption.

A brief recap for new readers with limited time that restricts their ability to read Part 1 and Part 2 of this continuing saga.

The recap goes like this:

1. The board of this new condo corporation went a full year without communicating with the owners in spite of repeated requests for open forum board meetings (supposedly required under the Condo Act;

2. The disappointing conduct of the Board of Director (still, today unexplained) during the first year since Registration is a topic of future discovery that will appear here once evidence is gathered) has been allow, or more accurately, “facilitated” (if not orchestrated) by Brookfield Residential Services, the property manager retained by the condo corporation prior to having it handed over to the owners of the units in the building. This would qualify as the “Developer’s Choice Property Manager”. Brookfield Residential Services has proven wholly inept and certainly counter productive to the well-being of this condo corporation.

3. When the Board finally communicated with the owners (the people who had elected them to protect their best interests) it was announce to them that the Annual Budget of the Condo Corporation was out of whack! The monthly maintenance fees were being increased by 49.5% and the “Board had already approved the budget” (categorically contradictory to the law – Condo Act)!

4. When the owners reacted (negatively of course) the two remaining Board members dug in their heals preferring to ignore a document carrying signatures of in excess of 50% of the owners (the Code requires only 15% of Owners to sign this instruction to arrange an Emergency Meeting) requesting that they resign immediately. Being two trained lawyers (I understand neither practices law as Ms. Chung allegedly teaches law and Bernstein just graduated, got his first job and was terminated, according to the third director who resigned) they continually have hidden behind “Procedural” arguments to avoid explaining themselves.

5. These two individuals have belittled, brow-beaten and been downright rude to a number of owners and have repeatedly misrepresented the Condo Act to support their (Bernstein, Chung & Brookfield) feeble arguments to justify their disappointing conduct. The question is “why would anyone intentionally take a condo to the toilet in the manner in which these two in joined initiatives by Brookfield Residential Services” (yes, I send copies of all correspondence appearing here on simplycondos.com to anyone that I mention here and invite them to rebut or challenge anything appearing).

6. When furnished with the request for resignation, Berstein and Chung simply stated after the meeting (during which they said nothing) “not having seen it and not having agreed to arrange an Emergency Meeting”. Another number of weeks elapsed until the owners served the instruction for the Emergency Meeting as set out in the Code even though, these two elected directors could have voluntarily called the meeting the very next day, weeks and weeks before!

7. I’ve requested an actual time line on these events from the owners to publish here, as it will surely set out the answer to the question that forms the title of these ongoing articles: “Can Someone Highjack Your Condo”? So far, it seems, they CAN! That is! If not for a committed group of owners who simply would not take the abuse any longer!

8. Berstein and Chung finally agreed to hold two events, one to address their wrongdoing of expanding the concierge hours without going to the owners for a vote. Condos are supposed to be very simple and straight forward, if you understand democracy you should follow the structure and operating dynamics of a condo corporation. It is here that Berstein and Chung defy logic and have refused to put forward any rational explanation other than the Condo Act (interpreted selectively) allows for their conduct. Both the egregious conduct and ongoing misrepresentation of the intent and integrity of the Condominium Act has been fully supported, if not led by Brookfield Residential Services.

9. When served with in excess of 50% of the signatures of owners in the building, Berstein and Chung had to finally face up to the reality that was surrounding them and grant the Emergency Meeting to overthrow them but I’ve got to express my exasperation and bewilderment as to why, after reading a document calling for their resignation signed by in excess of 50% of the owners in the Condo Corporation, THEY SIMPLY WILL NOT RESIGN!

10. Getting to vote (supposedly owners rights) on the one small issue was seen as a victory as the deficit continues to grow each day, a deficit that the owners were refused the right to vote on in the first place which is, in itself contrary to the Condo Act (although it is loosely interpreted by Brookfield and Berstein and Chung or more accurately stated misinterpreted by them).

11. Last evening I received an email from the group who have so valiantly persevered (none of these people are trained lawyers, familiar with the condo act, or experienced at all in this arena) the integrity of this condo corporation against the intentional initiatives of Brookfield, Berstein and Chung. The message speaks for itself:
Hope you're doing well. We just wanted to send a shout out to those of you who weren't there last night to let you know the outcome of the vote. We will soon have 56 hours of concierge at the Park Avenue.
We also wanted to thank those of you who made the time to attend the meeting and those of you who went through the rigmarole of filling out the proxy sheets. The results were as follows:

-- 74.5% of owners voted either in person or by proxy, which meant we had much more than was needed for quorum
-- 98% voted to reduce the hours from the current 98 hours

Our maintenance fees should go down very soon just from this small and simple step. The next hurdle is the Annual General Meeting (tentatively scheduled for July 24th) at which an election will be held for all 3 positions on our Board. We urge you all to vote, either in person or by proxy, so that our building can continue to recover from past fiscal follies.

We hope you all have wonderful weekends and take good care.

Warm regards,

Lily & Far

12. So, to sum up, let me say that democracy is finally beginning to raise it’s head against tirades coming from Mr. Berstein who is quoted as saying: “The owners did vote us in to be DICTATORS”. Obviously Mr. Berstein’s intellectual development has failed to inform him of basic civil respect for his neighbours whether or not they have entrusted what usually proves to be a minimal amount of authority and discretion to oversee their neighbours investments (that’s really what sitting on a condo board means – overseeing the wellbeing of the condo corporation and the building).

98% of the owners of the corporation that had elected Berstein & Chung to represent their interests voted after fighting for months with these two "Highjackers" seems pretty clear to me! How is it that these two just could not believe the voices of the masses. I spoke before using the word "dilusional" and that seems like one of the only rational explanations for such conduct. Unless they benefit us all by explaining their conduct, we may never know.

Well done Owners! Without the dedication, hard work (they literally studied the Condo Act in the evenings and on weekends around their own valued personal time to challenge the bazaar and unacceptable conduct of Bernstein, Chung and Brookfield.

Stay tuned! This condo corporation has just taken the first baby step!

CAN SOMEONE “HIGHJACK” YOUR CONDO CORPORATION . . . part 2

2006-06-12T10:02:00.000-07:00

I probably should have tied in my earlier article regarding Group 4 Falck as it is directly connected to the chaos erupting what has the appearance of being an attempt to “Highjack” this condo corporation.

The amuzing thing is that many of the owners in the building are quite astute, worldly and articulate, yet a lack of knowledge of the Condo Act visibly left them disadvantaged, especially when being dealt the jibberish being handed out by Brookfield and the Board members. I personally was born at night . . . but not last night! I’ve got to give these owners a lot of credit for their tenacity amidst a pretty well oiled mechanism, obviously experienced at creating sufficient cloud cover (supplied by Brookfield) to facilitate these two remaining Board members in their pursuits (whatever the hell they are).

It is obvious that 100% of the trouble with the birth of this condo corporation since it's registration rests solely on the shoulders of Brookfield. Listening to reports from many of the owners, this situation could best be compared or paralleled with a Seinfeld episode where Elaine meets the “Bazzaro World Guys” where up is down, in is out and black is apparently white.

I spoke with a lawyer who, coincidentally owns a unit in this (currently unidentified) condo, who told me that Brookfield Residential Services Ltd., is involved in so many conflicts and disputes with condos throughout the city, that it’s like a popcorn machine going off (with each kernel representing a new conflict). I can say from my first hand experience that Brookfield Residential Services Inc., is a wholly unprofessional outfit. I have observed their property manager (actually Brookfield has had four different people fill the post since occupancy), through either inexperience, indifference or downright disregard, disrespect the owners, participate in unacceptable behaviour and generally breach their legal fiduciary on a consistent basis. I just learned that he has also been abusive to a number of the owners. It always amazes me that people tolerate little people like this, but they do, which inevitably leads this type of person to further exploit respectful people like them.

None, and I will restate, NONE of the mess that these owners are experiencing today would have or could have ever evolved, had it not been for the express actions and lack of actions of Brookfield Residential Services Ltd.

I attended the “turn over meeting” for this condo corporation and at that meeting I had discussions with the vice president who told me that he was also one of three owners, who was unfortunately childish enough to conclude (and propose) to end my questioning of him by inviting me “to step outside to settle it”. This is hardly acceptable conduct for a company granted such a pivotal role in the overall health of your condo building.

Again this year at a “Town Hall Meeting”, (a tactic employed by this out of control condo board in full collaboration with Brookfield Residential Services Ltd., to avoid their fiduciary obligations to owners, to hold open meetings at which minutes are taken and transcribed), I was invited to attend what was represented as a “meeting to update owners on the already passed annual budget”.

Apparently, these two highly trained individuals cannot read or understand the Condo Act, as even though it is not very beneficial for the consumer, it at minimum has certain requirements, certainly the least of which would be the Board’s obligation to set out the annual budget at an open meeting of owners and giving the owners adequate time to analyze the submitted budget and be granted the respect and ethical obligation of full disclosure to enable the owners to make recommendations, request adjustments or flat out turn down the Board’s budget.

In this case this was by-passed all together through some rather childish and ethically questionable manipulation implemented by Brookfield Residential Services Ltd., in concert with the two remaining board members.

I’m sending this blog to all parties involved in this mess and inviting them, with the assurance that their reply will be published here to insure that all parties have both sides of the story.

I was shocked at this year’s meeting to listen to the owner of Brookfield Residential Services Ltd., misquote the Condo Act on three specific occasions. If you didn’t know the Act, his presentation was quite impressive despite it being totally wrong!

I probably should mention here that this condo experienced a 49% INCREASE in monthly maintenance fees. The logical questions are:

1. Why would Board Directors of a Condo Corporation conduct themselves in this manner?

2. Why would a Property Management Company, hired by the condo corporation (the owners of the units), take such an adversarial position toward the owners who employ them?

3. Why would a Security Company hired to protect the owners interests behave so badly?

These are serious questions that ultimately must be answered by each party. The remedy, under the Condo Act is quite straight forward. Terminate the Board and form a new one. You will want to tune in tomorrow to find out where the owners efforts to do this went wrong.

Talk tomorrow.

GROUP 4 FALCK - ABSOLUTELY THE WORST SECURITY COMPANY THAT I’VE COME ACROSS IN MY THREE DECADES IN THE BUSINESS

2006-06-12T06:05:00.000-07:00

I have got to deviate a little this morning from my series “Can Someone Highjack Your Condo” to address what is probably the most significant disruption amidst the plethora of disruptions in getting this new condo corporation operating at a respectable level.

They say that “like attracts like” and the misguided efforts and initiative of the dysfunctional Board of Directors in this (yet unnamed) condo development has remarkably proven consistent with just one thing since taking control of the condo. The dysfunctional condo board attracted what has proven to be a dysfunctional security guard company.

Once again, we’ve got to take a step back and see how all of this transgression has taken place. Nothing happens over night. Immediately following the turn over meeting and election of the Board of Directors the owners in the building were told that the security guard company retained by the developer and whom had given owners nothing but grief, was being replaced.

Condo Boards are supposed to always seek out three bids and select the most attractive on the merits of the bid. As the board has gone to considerable lengths to not communicate with the body of owners we can only assume that proper protocol was followed.

However you slice it, the building ended up with Group 4 Falck, a company that over my years in the business I haven’t come across. The most significant issue here is that the Disclosure Statement specified “Executive Concierge” and not “Security Guard”. This company might very well be qualified to sit at construction sites and warehouses on off hours but certainly the job description of an Executive Concierge is catastrophically different that that of a Security Guard.

I happened to be walking by the building on the day that this new security guard company started. They swooped into the building like a swat team with five or six trench coated, sunglass wearing authority figures and a bunch of guards in their uniforms. It struck me strange to have such a show of force (or attempt at one) would correspond with a condo where their duties are really to meet and greet the owners, open the door for them and purportedly do what an Executive Concierge does.

Upon talking with the Board members it became immediately clear that they had no intention of hiring an Executive Concierge as set out in the Disclosure Statement. Now remember, to change the contents of the Disclosure Statement (under the Condo Act) the Board must call a vote and garner in excess of 50% of the owners who agree that such a material change (a concierge is a very far cry from a security guard) should be enacted. No such vote was even sought and for over two years (15 months of “Occupancy” thanks to a rather disreputable developer and now over a year of Occupancy) the owners have been living with a security guard in their lobby. This is not a monumental issue however, it is important that we note that with condominiums, what is set out in the Disclosure Statement is what is supposed to go on. That doesn’t seem overly complicated to grasp yet this illustrious board could not seem to grasp it.

But wait! It gets worse, much, much worse. The developer had installed a security guard for two shifts per day during construction (which goes on even today due to abuse by the developer who apparently structured his whole deal specifically to “fleece” the buyers).

In spite of it being made abundantly clear to these Board members, they decided to contradict the will of the owners and the substance, content and integrity of the Disclosure Statement (the developer did an excellent job at manipulating their obligation under the Disclosure Statement and their unethical conduct apparently permeated the intellect of the security guard company who has simply perpetuated the disastrous and questionable delivery of the developer. If there are protections for owners/buyers under the Condo Act, someone will have to show me them in this instance.

Group 4 Falck, has failed on absolutely every point of merit relating to their services. There personnel show up consistently late and leave early (I’m told). They have proven antagonistic, arrogant and downright unfriendly toward owners (who pay their salaries along with their bosses take on top).

They have brought in one competent fellow but it is doubtful that he’ll last long because he is Good! His name is "Jose" (I think,) and he apparently has a background in hospitality (not a lot of security guards have a background in the hospitality industry) and he, obviously knows what a concierge is supposed to do and, refreshingly, he does his job very well. I have learned that the company has been harassing him for doing such a great job (you’d almost think their mandate is to make life miserable for the owners). I know it sounds crazy but I’ve tune in closely at the request of the owners and personally observed Jose getting blasted by his superiors for being good to the owners. It’s time to fire these people and hope that we can find someone of this individuals integrity. The rest of the guards and the company flagrantly flaunt that they are there only to collect their pay and not to actively do anything!

Here’s a first hand example: A couple owners recently contacted me complaining about the stench of the lobby each time this one guard was on duty. Apparently he is a junk food-aholic, continually dining on Burger King delicacies. The problem is that the food stinks up the building. A number of owners had approached him and asked him to not each junk food in the lobby only to be met with very intimidating stares.

From that time on, he refuses to even open doors for owners (it’s a power door where he simply has to click the mouse on the condos computer in front of him). One owner reported to me that she was trying to get into the building with her dog on a leash and her arms full of groceries only to have him stare at her with the most intimidating cold glare that she became physically intimidated. Now, I should have to tell you that you should not have to fee intimidated by your security guard. A surprising number of owners have come forward complaining of the very same thing!
One morning recently while visiting an owner, I personally had a similar experience with the weekend morning shift guy (remember there is supposed to be only one guard as set out in the Disclosure Statement – starting to see some of the frustration these owners are experiencing?).

Very early one Saturday morning I observed people moving into the building and noticed that they were using the stainless steel and mirror clad elevator without the protective move in pads. I turned to the guard and asked him to put up the padding to which he abruptly snapped back “not my job”!

I asked him if he interpreted his job as being to sit there and observe damage being done to our building and he AGREED! He specifically informed me that he was there “for surveillance only”. And his answer to my question was a resounding “YES”! Are you catching the drift of the owners dissatisfaction with this inept company? Don’t worry, I’m not planning to talk behind their back, rather, I’m sending a link to Group 4 Falck’s Business Development Manager, Mr. Ernie Kositsky. My blog is read my tens of thousands of people each day around the world and my web site sees 30,000+ “Hits” Per Day. How’s that for advertising for your company Mr. Kositsky?

I don’t mean to pick on this guy but he was one of the trench coat posse on the day that Group 4 Falck took over the security contract on the building and he gave me his card and said he welcomed comment. Well, here it is.

The ineffectiveness and distraction that this company has introduced to this condo should not be ignored. It can only sustain with disreputable board members supporting them and for some reason or another, they have the full support of Jonathan and Janice, the elustrious board members who obviously feel that they are above everyone else that makes up their “community”. Possibly it’s a lack of ability to understand the work “Community”.

Talk soon.

CAN SOMEONE “HIGHJACK” YOUR CONDO CORPORATION . . . part 1

2006-06-11T17:18:00.000-07:00

For what obviously looks like such a stupid question, the answer might absolutely floor you! In this Series of Articles, I’m going to publish a real life Case Study of a one year new condo development in Toronto. For the benefit of the owners in this recently formed condo development, I will not publish it’s name, address or identity. As many readers of my longstanding web site know, I’ve historically published names and identities, feeling that if someone is confident enough to do something egregious, the best thing to do is give them a public platform to explain and/or stand behind said conduct. To be honest I was fighting with this decision as I wrote this article and have decided to be totally honest and give everyone their due recognition (you will want to read my article later this week about the property management company "Brookfield") and the security company "Group 4 Falck" who have proven totally unprofessional and obtrusive to many owners.

The history of this condo corporation and the sad sagga of it's board of directors is proving one of the most egregious abuses of power that I’ve seen in a very long while if not my entire 30 year career in this business! When I cannot logically tie both ends of an intellectual challenge, it usually means that there is something drastically wrong.

Having run the number one website for Toronto condos for five years now (I was actually blogging long before blogs came into being, as was I Interneting before there was Windows and a World Wide Web – that’s another long story that I’ll be sharing here on simplycondos.com the blog)and having specialized in condos since the early 1980's, I really had thought that I'd seen it all. If you are interested in articles that I’ve been publishing simply go to my web site www.simplycondos.com. You will also find my FREE Buyer’s Guide, which has been referred to frequently as the “Bible for condo buyers” setting out all of the terminology, definitions, practices and procedures involved in the condo industry as well as useful forms to assist you in searching for that ideal Toronto condo for either residence or investment.

I was passing through this (undisclosed) condo recently following some complaints from ownrs, only to find the one rebel director "J.B." (we'll call him for now although I'm rapidly shifting my position to using names - oh, what the hell "Jonathan Bernstein"), the very same young man who, when running for the board was at least honest enough to announce that he had “no experience” either with condo boards or condos, in business or, apparently life, based on his dissappointing conduct that I have observed and heard about to date.

On this particular evening, after having tried to avoid getting involved with the entire issue after being out-manipulated at the "turn over meeting" a year earlier and now, listening to his dissappointing rhetoric I had to feel sorry for him until it hit me that this arrogance of his was hurting those sitting there listening to him. The kid is obviously delusional but logic has got to ask you why anyone would run for a board of directors of a condo corporation and run the condo into the ground in it's first year, while boasting that “everyone loves me” (I'd call that delusional, wouldn't you?). This guy actually feels that, in spite of the visible hostility of the owners toward him due to his ineffectual management and repeated egregious conduct, that he was going to "run again for the Board and", (in his estimate), "win in the next election". His arrogance while visibly talking down to this group of owners, drew me in and, as his audience was visibly unable to challenge his arrogant narration, he left me no alternative but to get involved in a verbal exchange with him.

Later that evening I returned to the lobby to catch both Mr. Berstein and his fellow sole remaining director Ms. Janice Chang, (this condo board has already had one duly elected director string the owners along for a year with false promises and then bail out on them without disclosing his resignation to the owners who elected him). I had spoken with him over the year leading up to his resignation and was surprised by the frequent disparaging comments regarding the conduct of his fellow two board members, who were now preaching to the owners in the lobby, in a very disappointingly authoritative manner.

To put some kind of relevance around this, I’ve got to go back to the formation of this condo corporation approximately a year and a half ago. For those of you not familiar with condos in general, I’ll give you a thumbnail overview.

The term condominium refers to a type of property ownership as opposed to any distinct style of building or construction. Residential condos now represent one out of every three new homes in Ontario and they come in many sorts of packages (high rise, mid rise, low rise, condo townhouse, loft, etc.). There are non-residential condominiums as well (industrial, commercial, retail, recreational, etc.). What makes this residential lifestyle alternative “condominium” has nothing to do with their physical structure and everything to do with the way in which owners agree to share the ownership of the common elements of the property, while enjoying individual ownership of the portions of the property that makes up their own “unit”. (we’re going to come back to this frequently throughout this Series titled: “Can Someone Highjack Your Condo”).

A condominium is made up of to two key components, the privately owned units and the common elements (hallways, lobby, recreational amenities, etc.). Any part of the property that is not designated as a private unit is designated as common elements or exclusive use area. Condominium ownership is really a an exercise in duality: on one hand a private condominium unit that the owner has freehold title to and a shared ownership interest proportionate to the size of his/her unit in the common elements. Unit owners share the costs of operating the property through payment of their proportionate share of the common expenses.

A condo corporation is created solely to manage the affairs of the building. Condominium’s affairs are supposed to be regulated by the Condominium Act but you are going to find, by reading this blog regularly that the Condo Act protects Developers and Property Managers BUT NOT CONSUMERS!

You will find a comprehensive Glossary of Condo Terminology on my web site www.simplycondos.com but for the sake of this article I want to emphasize a couple of important documents. Firstly, the Declaration, the equivalent to the constitution of a corporation. It outlines the division of ownership within the corporation by identifying all of the units in the building, setting out the common elements and the exclusive use common element area, when there is such a thing. The declaration also sets out the percentage of ownership each private unit has in the property and the percentage that each unit must contribute to the common expenses. It shows things like whether the building has a security guard or a concierge, for example and sets out whether these services are full time, part time or infrequent and setting out in the budget the costs covered by owners maintenance.

This corporation is run just like any corporation, by a Board of Directors elected by the owners (“shareholders”) at an open meeting (usually the “turn over” meeting). Now, it’s only logical that, at the time of registration (with a credible developer this should take approximately 3 - 4 months however, this condo took 15 months), no-one in the building knows each other. During the "Occupancy" Period few owners meet and talk (it takes time to build a community) other than casual meetings during “Occupancy” (again, the time period during which owners occupy the building even though it is not completed and they are not considered owners until such time as it becomes “Registered”). This is another quagmire area that I’ll be addressing here on simplycondos.com the blog and on my web site. For now let’s keep on the track of this true life Case Study being furnished to us.

Consistently a popularity contest ensues. You know, much like high school days where the worst in people seem to come out to win at all cost. The election held at the "turn over" meeting proved a farce, with the developer, who had done a miserable job at finishing off a potentially magnificent building making sure that Proxies (legal voting mechanism for non-resident owners to vote) were discarded to ensure that a favourable board to it was formed. A surprising percentage of owners do NOT even participate at all in the voting process thus the outcome of the election is easily manipulated and the consequences are seldom ever even considered.

In this article I’m setting out a very real life situation within which we can see the impact of the conduct of a very few can bring to the owners, the building and the condominium corporation itself. This is a great example of politics gone astray and unfortunately it is not unique to this building or developer. The Board members of this condo were power seekers clear and simple and will show us all, as the mess they have created rolls on out, the damage that irrational and unenlightened board members can bring to your door step.

This article will show you why it is absolutely critical when you live in a condo, that you must take an active roll in the management of the corporation or at least attend meetings to keep up with the financial and intellectual well-being of your building. Your building and your individual unit itself are your asset, usually the single most significant investment in your life, and that investment is also your home and sanctuary where you look forward to quiet enjoyment. All of this can be lost with the whimsical initiative of the individual that you entrust the operations of your condo corporation to.

The condo corporation at issue here was Registered in April of 2005 and a Board of Directors was formed that night but through some sort of manipulation by these board members and a very disappointing property management company “Brookfield” did not go into effect until July (for reasons unknown other than today, some year later, they interpret their mandate as running to July 2006 even though the majority of owners have already submitted to them a "Notice" carrying sufficient votes (as required under the Condo Act) and accompanying a formal request for them to remove themselves from the board and requesting an “Emergency Meeting”.

The outcome of the election had the appearance of being orchestrated as a large number of proxies had been dismissed under questionable conduct. Even the instruction to the voters contained on the Brookfield orchestrated Proxies was contradictory and misleading. No-one was overly concerned, as very few owners even attended let alone forward proxies. Long story made short, you get what you paid for (or in the instance stood up for) and a Board of Directors was formed. With such a manipulated and shakey start could any outcome be different than what we've been watching over the past few weeks within this condo?

Now as I said earlier, every condominium comes with a “Disclosure Statement”, a lengthy document prepared by the developer and give to each purchaser at the time of Purchase (the 10 Day Rescission Period is activated with the signing of a Schedule that Acknowledges receipt of this legal document). When you buy a condo in Toronto you allegedly have certain protections under law. We have the Condominium Act which somewhat or at least was designed to appear as somewhat protecting consumers however, examples such as this clearly show that consumers really have very few protections. I have a case study that will curl your hair when it comes to so-called protections under the Act but that’s a whole other article.

Suffice to say that this “Disclosure Statement” is the “Bible” of the Condo Corporation (or at least it’s supposed to be). It is supposed to "disclose" all pertinent information about the condo to enable buyers to be fully informed about their purchase decision which is totally based on representations made by the developer in which the developer clearly discloses that absolutely everything is left to their "discretion". It sets out all of the Rules and Regulations, Budget and basically full disclosure of all pertinent issues relating to the developers selling people a non existent building that would be self operating at completion. Toronto has a disturbing array of developers with most of the disturbance resulting from the low end of the industry. Anyone can become a developer and believe me pretty well anyone has!

Now after a full year without a single owners meeting and just two “Town Hall Meetings” (a name given them by the Board who were working at avoiding any record of their dissappointing conduct)that the Owners later learned meant that the meetings were not considered official meeting thus no “Minutes” were required to be kept. The scattered minutes of what meetings were alleged to have been held were summed up with “discussion ensued”. For this Brookfield charged the condo $2,000 for "transcribing minutes".

The condo has what I would professional refer to as an inept and professionally disjointed property management company in Brookfield Property Management. The initial perception and the one that is heavily sold by this property management firm is they are the huge multinational property company Brookfield when, in reality it is a small outfit owned by three local individuals, one of whom I am personally familiar with and could not be less impressed with.

I frequently get called into condo disputes and the first thing that I always make abundantly clear is that I’m NOT a lawyer and therefore I cannot even propose to share legal perspectives on what is being experienced. In this case, the two remaining directors of this board were both graduates of law school although I understand one is a freshman clerk and the other a civil servent working as a consultant to the Government (you know the age old saying that "those who can’t do teach and those who can’t teach, teach teachers and those who can’t teach teachers, consult") well I understand that these two are birds of a totally different (and much scarier) colour!

Mr. Bernstein's father, I'm told, bought him the condo that he lives in. He has never had a job prior to sitting on this board (after a long and very hard fought campaign misrepresented as a popularity contest). I understand that his election speech included that he “had no experience” and I understand that that is precisely what he brought to this board. Now I’ve long not been a fan of lawyers and I can rime off bad lawyer jokes with the best of them but I’ve got to say that these two exemplify everything that offends me about lawyers.

They are educated to argue even without merit. Granted someone has to graduate at the bottom of the class and these two qualify as top contenders for being able to talk and say nothing. Unfortunately, in this instance their callous disregard for their neighbours is the center of their debate. They appear to have convinced themselves that they are above everyone else in the building and have perpetuated a program of self-gratification at the expense of those who bestowed to position on them.

Here’s the deal. The owners of the units in the condo corporation have been shocked and offended by their board's proposed (presented to them as already passed and accepted - contrary to the Condo Act) Budget for 2006 carrying a huge deficit and 50% monthly maintenance increase, specifically as a result of “pork” (they want 24 hour concierge contrary to the Disclosure Statement which clearly set out 8 hour concierge) introduced to the budget specifically by these two Board members. The Disclosure Statement specified “ONE SHIFT EXECUTIVE CONCIERGE” but these directors insisted on having only a security guard company fill this role. The building has been in shambles over the loss of the concierge and the introduction of a Security Guard Company that has proven itself not only useless but a negative factor impacting the overall running of the building. Tune into my overview on these imcompetants "Group 4 Falck", a company that has proven not only incompetent but also rude and offensive.

After a year of disappointment and degeneration of the single most significant investment in most owners lives to be given this budget without an open meeting of owners caused an outrage. Not quite as severe an outrage as accompanied the disclosure that the monthly maintenance fees were being increased by 50% (49.7% actually)! Despite having been given specific instruction by the owners a year ago that the two shift concierge/security guard required a vote of the owners, these directors shuffled around in the shadows for a full year without holding meetings, disclosing their conduct and/or initiatives (or lack thereof) to the owners and NEVER fulfilled the will and wishes of those whom they had been elected to represent to return the security guard shift to one shift a day to take away the DEFICIT OPERATING BUDGET ITEM.

Tune in each day as I continue to skin this onion. We want to look at motivations of these people and clearly set out the incompetance of Brookfield and Group 4 Falck to hopefully assist other condo corporations to avoid hiring either of them. Both have proven themselves untrustworthy, incompetent and unreliable if not down right distrustful.

See you tomorrow. I'm Charles Hanes

I'M TIRED OF HAVING MY NEIGHBOURHOOD DEFACED BY FREELOADER CONDO DEVELOPERS' CLAP BOARD ADVERTISING

2006-06-10T12:34:00.000-07:00

I went for a short walk recently, frustrated after finding out that my daily morning walk to Sobey’s Grocery Store was, once again, a waste of time, as it resulted of them being out of distilled water (there’s a who article underlying my dissatisfaction with this Grocery Store, starting with this consistent shortage of products even though they publish an entire brochure stating in big letters that they “Guarantee that if they are out of a product – it’s FREE”). Now, you and I both know that nothing’s FREE so I look closer and in minute letters I find “if the product is listed in that week’s advertising brochure” (which we all know it is NOT included in the ad flyer).

I’m not fond of, nor do I ultimately trust tap water, (although some research recently has suggested to me that I really should rethink my position on this, especially as I have to walk a distance each day to lug it home – that is when it’s in stock). A few years back I converted to distilled bottled water. Each morning I arise at 4:00 a.m., do my work-out at the small gym in my condo building and then walk to "fetch water". Well, I’m confident you have already got the gist of things. The only consistent thing about Sobey’s is there consistently out of stock, their fruit is consistently bad (I used to buy my fruit at Sobey’s but I’d end up returning half of it as it was already moldy).

I’ll take up on my issues (from rude and offensive staff) with Sobey’s at a later date, as today we have bigger fish to fry!

This morning on my walk back from Sobey’s . . . empty handed, my frequent shock from seeing illegal billboards overwhelming my neighbourhood carried particular impact. I returned home and grabbed my digital camera and took a short stroll through my neighbourhood along St. Clair Avenue, walking from Yonge Street to Avenue Road (really about just one block) and counted no less than a dozen (12) of these intrusive advertising billboards, recklessly positioned on public space (sidewalks mostly).

How is it that the city allows these Freeloaders (advertising by sticking clutter into tax payers public space can hardly be justified as socially responsible) to clutter our neighbourhoods to advertise and promote their condo projects? Surely these guys enjoy sufficient profit margins to face up to their advertising demands in an honourable way as opposed to seeking to avoid paying for it.

What’s the difference between these billboard signs and graffiti that today’s youth (“taggers” they are called) deface our public and private property with. I recently received a telephone call from the Toronto Police (as many of you are aware I’m handling the St. Clair On The Avenue) informing me that “taggers” had applied their trade to the side of our building site. The officer instructed me that I was to “cover it immediately” at my expense.

My logical question is why am I not seeing them contact the developers of these sites (not hard to find these “taggers” as they put their location and phone number right on their graffiti) to have them remove the "graffiti/advertising" that they are degarding the area with.

Are there laws on the books to address this issue? The easy answer is absolutely "yes"! Are these laws respected? The easy answer is NO! A few years back the city infrequently took initiatives against these developers of questionable integrity by scooping their signs but only cost tax payers more money and the developers simply replaced the clap boards in a couple weeks. They are no less defacing our city than are the “taggers”, spray painting their graffiti and signatures all over our public spaces.

My neighbourhood is becoming and eye-sore specifically because of these FREELOADERS. The developer that I work with is sensitive to matters of this nature. He plays by the rules and respects the right of tax paying citizens to enjoy their city without all this clutter, not to mention that we tax payers also should have the right to walk on our side walks without having to navigate our way through their freeloading efforts to advertise FREE.

This is not to suggest that I’m radical or that I’m opposed to legitimate advertising. When I was young, there simply were no billboards, period! Canadians used to look down on Americans for plastering their highways with billboards but today, they literally line the Gardner Expressway and other major highways in Toronto. Shop owners, like this medical clinic on St. Clair should be allowed (I guess – I just think that they are an eye sore) to put them up on their own property (as should developers) however, cluttering our public spaces with advertising signs should be stopped immediately. The public should not be required to support developer advertising when there is such an abundance of other legitimate options available to them. This is not to suggest that this conduct is limited to the developers photographed in this article as the entire city has become a patch quilt of competing developer clap boards!

The newspapers and the over abundance of Free magazines that also clutter up our public side walk space (boxes), offer these developers advertising opportunities but, yes they would have to pay for the space. One would think that they include sufficient profit margins in their pricing to cover advertising and with condos selling anywhere up to - $1,100 per square foot (in these very developments) it is inexcusable to see them rely on FREELOADING to meet their sales goals. One has to consider how many other corners they intend to cut to optimize their profits.

I’m sending a link to this article to each of the developers behind the developments using this unethical form of advertising asking them to respond and guaranteeing them that I’ll include their response here on simplycondos.com unedited and unaltered. It would be unfair if they were not given the opportunity to explain their conduct. I am also sending a link to this article to the Mayor of our City to hopefully re-instill some sense of dignity into our neighbourhoods by getting these FREELOADERS TO STOP DEFACING OUR CITY BY FREELOADING AT THE EXPENSE OF US LAW BIDING, TAX PAYING CITIZENS! We don’t want to see these eye sores cluttering the streets of our neighbourhood. Possibly these developers should understand that by showing such flagrant disrespect to our neighbourhoods and then going to great lengths to convince us that they intend to be good neighbours is a paradox.

The easy solution is for these developers to voluntarily STOP BREAKING THE LAW. The city did crack down on a couple occasions over the years but the effect lingers for only a few days and the plethora of clap boards and signage reappeared immediately each time. It seems that the city has a policy of going to lengths to convince everyone that they’ve taken the effort to stop vandalism (isn’t that what this is – a type of vandalism defacing our neighbourhood streets and side walks). I’m going to continue to expose their conduct here.

Let me know if my feelings are shared about this or any topics that you find here. If you have something to say or a condo related issue that you would like to share, send it to me and you can count on me to publishing it here (please no profanity or slanderous/libelous material).

Tune in for updates. For now, I’m C. L. Hanes

simplycondos.com

IT IS CRITICAL THAT YOU USE A BUYER'S AGENT WHEN BUYING A NEW OR RESALE CONDO

2006-06-10T08:41:00.000-07:00

My initial introduction to luxury condos coincided pretty well with the invention of condos. In the early 1980’s I was retained by the then infamous Reichmann Family to turn around their marketing company’s failed efforts to sell the "true" luxury residences: "Residences at the Queen’s Quay Terminal".

At the time, I was conducting sales training seminars to Realtor’s, life insurance salesmen, car salesmen, etc., pontificating the virtues of "High Pressure Selling". It’s kind of a scary thing to think back about all the uneducated straight commission sales representatives sitting there staring up starry eyed at me taking this crash course in psychology, or more aptly an understanding of psychological interaction between two specific types of people: Buyers and Sellers. Basically, I was there to train them on how to make unsuspecting Buyers of their products buy from them, that day and on the terms offered . . . . EVEN IF THEY DIDN’T WANT TO!

Fortunately for me at the Residences of the Queen’s Quay Terminal I had the absolute best product on the market to sell so, from a salesman’s point of view, the strong-arm tactics and strategies that we employed were valid "tools in assisting purchaser’s in making the decisions that they many times just can’t make on their own".

The consumer market was not educated about these high priced new residential alternatives and the buying public just was not ready to plunk down the cash required to own one. As a "closer" it was understood that if I couldn’t sell them they would not sell and after the substantial investment these world class developers had made they were willing to pay me my retainer to come in and prove the viability of the project.

A professional site salesperson today is a highly trained sales pro who can literally influence the outcome of your visit to the sales site through the deployment of specific, identifiable tactics that have proven themselves successful over the thirty plus years since the legislators changed the real estate act to include "space above the ground" which opened the door for single unit owners within a multi-unit residential building and, voila, condominiums.

Once you realize that these sales reps (who, by the way owe a LEGAL obligation to represent and protect ONLY the interests of the seller) are using high powers but subtle tactics to get you to buy right then and there, the situation starts to become much more clear. These professionals are simply doing the job that they are hired to do at the best of their ability and many of them that I talk with today share my amazement that the public continues to walk around like "sheep to slaughter" into one sales site after the other just waiting for the right chemistry for one of these sales guns to hit their mark.

The solution is quite simple . . . register with simplycondos.com. A couple years back I broke my addiction to the psychological warfare. I now work only for Buyers having gotten my real estate license in 2001. My client’s don’t get caught up in the hype and frenzy built into the sales site mentality. The burden that I remove is considerable however the physical dynamics is simply the tip of the proverbial iceberg!

HERE’S THE LOW DOWN - EXCLUSIVE FROM SIMPLYCONDOS.COM

I am confident that I’m not bursting anyone’s bubble when I say that every condo development has good suites and not-so-good suites (in the business we call them "dog suites"). The ratio in most cases in 80/20 which means 20% of the suites are prime suites and 80% are less than prime suites with about half of these being "dog suites".

Let’s follow the logic built onto the foundation (above) that the staff at the sites are highly trained sales pros trained to get you to "sign on the line today" (or it will be sold out or other great lines).

The ability to read a floor plan amidst a floor plate or foot print of a building that does not exist is a challenge to say the absolute least. To be able to understand this foreign language and then juxtapose the picture out into the real world to the site where you can analyze visual obstructions and outside elements (garbage pick up zones, garage access, etc.) is somewhat an art if not a science even for industry insiders. Most purchaser’s cannot even tell you where the garbage chute is located on the floor of the development that they just bought! After the fact they quickly agree that having it right out side their door was not a good choice - duh! Just picture the "flap bang" of the garbage chute every time one of the twenty owners on your floor throw out their trash each day.

The punch line to all this is: WHO DO YOU THINK THAT THE DOG SUITES ARE SOLD TO ? ? ?

Quality developers insure you the right to have your own professional representation and best yet, they allow you to have this professional advise FREE as they will compensate me for representing you. It really is the best of both worlds (you get the king cobra of negotiation and closing on your team with the other side paying him).

Last week I sat in my car outside a number of sales sites and watched the constant flow of prospective purchasers increasing the developers odds of getting rid of the dog suites absolutely amazed that they are not all taking advantage of my FREE services.

Please folks, whether you are investing $200,000 or $20,000,000 be sure to take advantage of this FREE resource that the developers are extending to you.

THE DO's AND DON'T's OF CONDO BUYING

2006-06-10T08:18:00.000-07:00

As with everything in life, there are nuances and subtle things that dramatically influence the outcome of your initiatives and efforts when considering buying a condo. When you consider the amount of money that we are talking about when it comes to condos in Toronto (approaching CDN$400 per square foot on average) a thorough understanding on these elements will better equip you for the road ahead.

STEP # 1

Before you even get started, DO make a plan. Within the foundation of this plan DO include retaining a skilled condo professional. Any Realtor can sell you a condo and any Realtor can represent you in purchasing one however, condos are communities in and of themselves and knowledge on the history of the building, builder, amenities, Rules and Regulations, etc. are required.

The condo market in Toronto (and any city) is a highly specialized field and unless your Realtor is thoroughly knowledgeable about the history of the local condo market, trends and developments within that market "niche", reputations and track records of developers, etc., the benefits that you receive from their involvement may be restricted.

Do research the market to select your Buyer’s Agency Realtor. Ask them to show you their purchases (on their "client’s" behalf) of condos over an extended (2 years) period (I post mine on my website).

Don’t start reading the FREE Condo Magazines to "start your own research" and Don’t start visiting condominium sales sites and/or open houses.

STEP # 2

Once you have selected your Buyer’s Agent share your goals, lifestyle, work, play, etc., and develop a tangible plan.

Do meet with your bank and get "Pre-Approval". This removes the threat of finding exactly what you think you are looking for but finding out that you can’t afford it. The one thing you want to avoid when purchasing a condo is "uncertainty".

STEP # 3

Once you know your budget and have professional representation (don’t retain a chauffeur - make sure that you are working with someone who knows the market intimately and can steer you away from less than desirable buildings, developers, areas of the city, etc., and someone who is first and foremost a negotiator).

Buying is easy and it can be accomplished without a skilled Realtor but the best buys are those negotiated with and through a Realtor that you know has "negotiating power". You may want to read an article written by one of my clients regarding his purchase at Elev’n 21 (an upscale new development at Charles St. and Bay). With approximately 10,000 to 15,000 "Hits" Per DAY, developers understand that this website attracts genuine buyers thus many developers (not all) respect that flexibility in selling to our purchasers is worthy of their consideration.

From here, the process has only a limited number of areas where do’s and don’ts play their role:
ADVERTISEMENTS (Magazines, Television or Newspapers):

DO write down as much information as possible or save the ad

DO email me the information so that I can get full details for you

DON’T call the Listing Agent or Developers' sales site directly,

DON’T call the owner directly (FSBO) even if the phone number is listed

OPEN HOUSES

DO - open house are rare with condos but upon entering the residence, disclose immediately that you are working with a Realtor (Buyer’s Broker).

DO immediately give my card to the agent or owner holding the open house. If they require you to be accompanied by your agent, DO NOT view the residence. Call me as soon as possible so that we can set up an viewing appointment.

DON’T disclose ANY information about yourself or your buying situation or motivation

discuss your likes and dislikes with the owner or agent (disclosing information can affect our negotiating leverage).

NEW CONDO CONSTRUCTION

(I am compensated for my professional fees to represent you by the Developer at no expense to you PROVIDED you follow the proper procedures)

DO upon entering the sales office, disclose immediately that you are working with me

DO immediately give my card to the sales representative. If they require you to be accompanied by your agent, DO NOT view the residence. Call me as soon as possible so that we can set up an viewing appointment.

DON’T enter into a sales office if there is a sign out front that requires you to have your agent present or tells you that they don’t co-operate (industry term for compensating your agent).

DRIVING BY PROPERTY

Site signs, clap boards, and "hoarding" (billboards around a site) are key advertising "tools" for developers and their sales agents to get you to walk in without a professional Buyer’s Agent
(NOTE: the minute you register with them you waive Buyer’s Agency compensation)

DO write down as much information as possible (i.e. sign info, address, location)

DO call me with the information so that I can get the details for you

DON’T call the Seller’s Agent or posted phone # "to register"

DON’T call or approach the owner of the property

Crystal Blue launching June 14 "INSIDER EVENT"

2006-06-10T06:49:00.000-07:00

Toronto's latest highrise condominium, "Crystal Blue", a 35 storey glass tower located immediately west of the Manu Life Centre at Bloor just west of Yonge Street. Not a Yorkville address, Crystal Blue is just a stone's throw south of Bloor just steps away from Toronto's upscale shopping districts accesses easily through Holt Renfrew. Actually, owners can simply cross the street and enter the Manu Life Center and continue through the underground clean over into Yorkville.

The building has a six storey podium, a double storey lobby with concierge, a fitness center with swimming pool and an entertainment center. The residences all have 10 foot ceilings in all principal rooms with floor to ceiling windows, and are detailed impressively with granites, marbles, plank flooring. Overall the presentation was impressive but you've always got to remember that buying involves a whole lot more than the sales office presentation center.

The good news is that the lower floors (under 21) have only five residences per floor and above this each floor recedes to only four residences. The site offers some view challenges. For example, to enjoy a good south view buyers must buy their way up to the upper one third of the building and then the immediate foreground is not overly impressive. Immediately to it's north (30 meters away) is another new condo development of similar height. West offers some potential over the deck of the Manu Life building (north west corners will be shadowed by the massive cement structure of 44 Charles West).

Most residences are corner suites and that's a plus (two sided glass delivers optimum light). As for pricing, they start with small one 536 square foot one bedroom suites on the 6th through 15th floor starting at $261,900, no one plus den designs, two bedroom units start at 760 square feet (rather small) at starting at $359,000 ($472/sq.ft.). Parking is $32,500 and locers $3,500.

On average the units (starting prices - note: there is a price increase per floor $1k - $2k) are running around $470 per square foot. Recent developments in the immediate area were in the $500 per square foot delivering 8 and 9 foot ceiling heights so from this perspective the prices are in line with the market.

The real question rests somewhere between is the true market $500 per square foot or is demand, or more accurately perceived demand for the product portrayed in a way that influences "hysteria buying" based more on speculation than on end-user needs.

At simplycondos.com we are not paid by advertisers/developers to help draw buyers into their doors. Conventional media cannot publish negative factual commentary on people who are buying $50,000 a day advertisments from them. We earn our living representing the best interests of Buyers and only buyers. As a Realtor I do no represent Sellers to insure that I do not try to influence the decisions of my clients. If I listed properties for Sale, I'd be entitled to both ends of the commission thus even the most best intentioned Realtor would, over time give into the temptation.

I publish all of the facts, all of the time. This blog is new but I'm not. I've been blogging on my own web site for five years now teaching people the tricks of the trade and helping them make those critical buying decisions amidst all the hype and hoopla created by the slick developers and their slick ad agencies.

The first rule to consider when you are buying a condo is who's working for you. The quick answer is "Never the Seller's agent" because the seller's agent is legally bound to represent ONLY the best interests of their client . . . the seller. When you are getting into this game (the condo game) you're going up against the very best the business has to offer so why not put a comparable warrior on your team. With simplycondos.com, our services are absolutely FREE to you.

Have a look at what we've been doing and please tune in regularly. I look forward to your feedback. Until next time, I'm Charles Hanes.