- Joined
- Aug 30, 2007
- Messages
- 13,879
My wife and I have decided to buy a 2nd home in beautiful Vancouver, with a possibility to move there more full-time once the teenage kids are not at home anymore. We put a 10% deposit down in May 2007 for an anticipated fall 2008 possession.
The project is now delayed 2x, to May 2009 .. possibly later.
Having been able to stand on the actual veranda in summer 2008, we came to the conclusion that the view is not as advertised, as the condo we purchased is on a floor that has trees all around it. Our initial WOW factor has disappeared, as has our desire to buy it at the agreed upon price. Obviously, an ocean view condo is worth (25% ?) more than one with a view of trees. There are also some deficiencies and omissions in the prospectus that accompanies the offer to purchase.
Obviously, if you buy a new project off the catalogue, the show suite, the fancy pictures and beautiful slides you rely heavily on that material as in May 2007 there was just a hole in the ground. We feel mis-led.
A letter to the builder went unanswered until I phoned 2x and asked for a meeting a month later. This meeting happened last week.
After a polite discussion in the show suite, followed by a meeting on the veranda to see the "view" and a 3rd meeting the next day at their offices, we asked for
a) a cancellation of the contract, due to omissions and lack of views, or
b) a 20% discount on price, or
c) a 25% discount on the unit upstairs which is 33% more expensive (bigger, better view, but smaller veranda) but unsold (as it is overpriced at that price)
We have been offered 10% on option c .. but no acknowledgment whatsoever that the views are not as advertised. When we walked the unit again this weekend with the president of the development firm and the marketing director of the real estate promotion firm, the computer screens that showed the views were mysteriously "broken" and shut-off.
Any insights into BC condo laws, similar cases, options or BC legal firms that specialize in these types of mis-representations would be appreciated. Perhaps drop me a personal e-mail so I can discuss names of the guilty and more intimate specifics a bit more freely.
The project is now delayed 2x, to May 2009 .. possibly later.
Having been able to stand on the actual veranda in summer 2008, we came to the conclusion that the view is not as advertised, as the condo we purchased is on a floor that has trees all around it. Our initial WOW factor has disappeared, as has our desire to buy it at the agreed upon price. Obviously, an ocean view condo is worth (25% ?) more than one with a view of trees. There are also some deficiencies and omissions in the prospectus that accompanies the offer to purchase.
Obviously, if you buy a new project off the catalogue, the show suite, the fancy pictures and beautiful slides you rely heavily on that material as in May 2007 there was just a hole in the ground. We feel mis-led.
A letter to the builder went unanswered until I phoned 2x and asked for a meeting a month later. This meeting happened last week.
After a polite discussion in the show suite, followed by a meeting on the veranda to see the "view" and a 3rd meeting the next day at their offices, we asked for
a) a cancellation of the contract, due to omissions and lack of views, or
b) a 20% discount on price, or
c) a 25% discount on the unit upstairs which is 33% more expensive (bigger, better view, but smaller veranda) but unsold (as it is overpriced at that price)
We have been offered 10% on option c .. but no acknowledgment whatsoever that the views are not as advertised. When we walked the unit again this weekend with the president of the development firm and the marketing director of the real estate promotion firm, the computer screens that showed the views were mysteriously "broken" and shut-off.
Any insights into BC condo laws, similar cases, options or BC legal firms that specialize in these types of mis-representations would be appreciated. Perhaps drop me a personal e-mail so I can discuss names of the guilty and more intimate specifics a bit more freely.
