COVID and the housing market

Forum Sponsor
nobbie48 said:
Inflation will make you rich so buy the most expensive place you can, leveraging a huge mortgage.

If rates go up, prices go down and any equity gets sucked down the drain followed by foreclosure costs.
Click to expand...
That's sort of what we did. Although the mortgage is painful, it's not big enough to risk sinking. So far return on this house has been ~6%/yr which is pretty crap but that is tax-free (and not adjusted for the leverage used) so not quite as bad as it first appears. Property tax, mortgage interest, maintenance etc cost less than renting a similar house (which I would never do, if I was renting, it would be smaller to save money). For a long time we (and most other canadian homeowners) were grossly overweight on housing. I'm still overweight on housing but things are correcting as markets appreciate at a far higher rate.
 
Last edited:
Locally, some casual friends sold their bungalow for 98% of asking price in ~2 weeks. Good location and modernized. Fairly priced. They've already got a new one so good for them. I could have been tempted if it wasn't for the $300K to $400K hurdle.

Another listing nearby is a financial question mark. Huge lot with a 1 1/2 story house dating back to late 1940 or early 1950. Every other house of its age on the street has been flattened upon sale and made into a McMansion. This one has been done up to the 9's with granite, marble, hardwoods etc. All will likely end up in a dumpster. The huge (For Toronto) 57' X 167' lot is the drawing card.
 
The huge drop in outlying GTA prices has me shopping. I saw a waterfront place on a 1ac lakefront place on Big Bay point that was almost 1/3 rd less than the last purchasers paid in 2023.

Straight up swap for a place in Markham, just not crazy about the taxes in Barrie - $13.5k a year is about $7500 more than a similar priced house in Markham.
 
Mad Mike said:
The huge drop in outlying GTA prices has me shopping. I saw a waterfront place on a 1ac lakefront place on Big Bay point that was almost 1/3 rd less than the last purchasers paid in 2023.

Straight up swap for a place in Markham, just not crazy about the taxes in Barrie - $13.5k a year is about $7500 more than a similar priced house in Markham.
Click to expand...
Barrie waterfront taxes are insane. Friends with a nice house on the water are deep into five figures and I won't be shocked if that gets to six figures in the next decade or two.
 
GreyGhost said:
Yup. Waterfront house sells at something like a 30% premium to a similar house one row back but on water taxes are something like 4-5x. It's insane. Some of the waterfront houses were over $40K in property tax almost a decade ago.
Click to expand...
Being a baller ain't cheap...
***
As for housing prices we have been watching some around us (Kingsway). There have been a few flips that have sold for ~10% below original (first) ask after months on the market (list, drop price, relist..). Those are the quality jobs with major work, the half assed ones tend to linger for half a year and go lease... Homes that are not flips seem to be going for ask and even 1% or 2% above (and pretty close to the flip final sales), and still move pretty quick. In the end it does not look to me that there is lots of meet for flippers these days.

One we went to look at just for fun, first time on the market, then again after the flip. Bit of an odd duck that the previous long term owners made an addition look like a medieval castle inside... Post flip, all the bathrooms and the kitchen were done, nothing else was touched. Agent at the open house had some screwball story about them buying it for their kid (four bedroom home...) but then they decided to go to university somewhere else... rrrrriiiigggghhhtttt..... sure. After many months on the market, it is leased now.
 
Last edited:
backmarkerducati said:
Being a baller ain't cheap...
***
As for housing prices we have been watching some around us (Kingsway). There have been a few flips that have sold for ~10% below original (first) ask after months on the market (list, drop price, relist..). Those are the quality jobs with major work, the half assed ones tend to linger for half a year and go lease... Homes that are not flips seem to be going for ask and even 1% or 2% above (and pretty close to the flip final sales), and still move pretty quick. In the end it does not look to me that there is lots of meet for flippers these days.

One we went to look at just for fun, first time on the market, then again after the flip. Bit of an odd duck that the previous long term owners made an addition look like a medieval castle inside... Post flip, all the bathrooms and the kitchen were done, nothing else was touched. Agent at the open house had some screwball story about them buying it for their kid (four bedroom home...) but then they decided to go to university somewhere else... rrrrriiiigggghhhtttt..... sure. After many months on the market, it is leased now.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't touch a flipped and tarted up house.

I might not like their choice in colours of expensive stonework and workmanship is usually marginal.

Use cheap thinset and tiles come off like Post-it notes.

The house could look like new but there is no warrantee on anything.

Bondo gets used to repair rotted wood.
 
Mattamy / QuadReal have pulled the plug on their, "The Clove" project, starting the cancellation process.

They have sold less than 10% of the units. I'm assuming anyone that bought is smiling as they can get a better deal elsewhere.

The project looked like a remake of the Don Mills Centre concept where the existing Cloverdale Mall is demolished and reborn as a mall with condos above and around.

Cloverdale had some problems in that it had stagnated and to make things worse, Target bailed out leaving a huge empty space.

The project started with a lot of stores leaving due to the uncertainty of five or more years of construction. The place is half empty which is discouraging for the remaining shops.

Getting stores back will be difficult, especially if they know the project could be resurrected.
 
nobbie48 said:
Mattamy / QuadReal have pulled the plug on their, "The Clove" project, starting the cancellation process.

They have sold less than 10% of the units. I'm assuming anyone that bought is smiling as they can get a better deal elsewhere.

The project looked like a remake of the Don Mills Centre concept where the existing Cloverdale Mall is demolished and reborn as a mall with condos above and around.

Cloverdale had some problems in that it had stagnated and to make things worse, Target bailed out leaving a huge empty space.

The project started with a lot of stores leaving due to the uncertainty of five or more years of construction. The place is half empty which is discouraging for the remaining shops.

Getting stores back will be difficult, especially if they know the project could be resurrected.
Click to expand...
Don't feel too bad for them. Strategically they will wait for better times in invest. Giligan won't become poor.
 
The losers of the month group award goes to the people that used helocs on their primary dwellings to come up with down payments for second big houses. Some faked income levels to get mortgages they couldn't afford. They rented rooms out to foreign students at rates high enough to more than cover the new mortgages. "We're going to be rich!"

Then the government pulled the plug on foreign students. Interest rates went up as fast as the students went away. Equities went down.

Now these bottom feeders want the old foreign student policies re-instated so they can, with the colleges, return to jointly ripping off the students and just about anyone not already owning a home.

Tears not shed.
 
https://www.payprop.com/ca/demo

Aug 11, 2025
Canada

Ontario landlords could be liable for drug activity under new law​

by
PayProp Canada
Read time:
1
min

A new Ontario law is putting more pressure on landlords to prevent illegal drug activity in their units.
Bill 10, the Protect Ontario Through Safer Streets and Stronger Communities Act, 2025, has received royal assent and is set to become law. It introduces new rules that could hold landlords or property managers responsible if their properties are used for drug production or trafficking.

Social housing providers warn they will be disproportionately impacted, as many of their tenants live with substance addictions.

The bill says landlords and property managers can defend themselves by taking “reasonable measures” to prevent the drug activity, but doesn’t define what those measures are. Until there’s clarity, regular inspections, written reports, and thorough follow-ups on complaints or concerns from neighbours are all good practices for proving due diligence.

Housing providers would only be at risk of penalties if there is clear evidence they knew about illegal activity but failed to act, whether by investigating, issuing warnings, or starting the eviction process.

In reality, however, Bill 10 merely adds new layers of potential liability to existing regulations. Ontario’s Residential Tenancies Act already requires landlords to maintain a safe and comfortable rental environment.

Let's make it harder on landlords that just want fair treatment.

1) The LTB is a screw up of a bureaucracy

2) Police are too busy revenuing the traffic market to feed the political nanny state coffers

3) Landlords are penalized if the property sits vacant.

4) Civil rights activists prevent thorough check outs of renters

5) More conditions are being relabeled diseases and we can't punish people for being sick.
 
nobbie48 said:
Schedule a PayProp demo | Rental payment peace of mind

Aug 11, 2025
Canada

Ontario landlords could be liable for drug activity under new law​

by
PayProp Canada
Read time:
1
min

A new Ontario law is putting more pressure on landlords to prevent illegal drug activity in their units.
Bill 10, the Protect Ontario Through Safer Streets and Stronger Communities Act, 2025, has received royal assent and is set to become law. It introduces new rules that could hold landlords or property managers responsible if their properties are used for drug production or trafficking.

Social housing providers warn they will be disproportionately impacted, as many of their tenants live with substance addictions.

The bill says landlords and property managers can defend themselves by taking “reasonable measures” to prevent the drug activity, but doesn’t define what those measures are. Until there’s clarity, regular inspections, written reports, and thorough follow-ups on complaints or concerns from neighbours are all good practices for proving due diligence.

Housing providers would only be at risk of penalties if there is clear evidence they knew about illegal activity but failed to act, whether by investigating, issuing warnings, or starting the eviction process.

In reality, however, Bill 10 merely adds new layers of potential liability to existing regulations. Ontario’s Residential Tenancies Act already requires landlords to maintain a safe and comfortable rental environment.

Let's make it harder on landlords that just want fair treatment.

1) The LTB is a screw up of a bureaucracy

2) Police are too busy revenuing the traffic market to feed the political nanny state coffers

3) Landlords are penalized if the property sits vacant.

4) Civil rights activists prevent thorough check outs of renters

5) More conditions are being relabeled diseases and we can't punish people for being sick.
Click to expand...
Social housing providers agreeing that many of their tenants have addiction issues is rich. There are thousands of people without addiction issues on the waiting list. If your addiction is ruining your life, that's your problem, not your neighbours. Also, this bill seems to target production and trafficking, not use. Any housing provider should be overjoyed to remove production and trafficking from their dwellings. Having the law can be a good trigger for routine inspections (quick walk through every 3 months?).

LTB is a cluster, for the good of both sides, it needs to be fixed. That is squarely on douggies shoulders and he is ignoring the problem.
 
GreyGhost said:
Social housing providers agreeing that many of their tenants have addiction issues is rich. There are thousands of people without addiction issues on the waiting list. If your addiction is ruining your life, that's your problem, not your neighbours. Also, this bill seems to target production and trafficking, not use. Any housing provider should be overjoyed to remove production and trafficking from their dwellings. Having the law can be a good trigger for routine inspections (quick walk through every 3 months?).

LTB is a cluster, for the good of both sides, it needs to be fixed. That is squarely on douggies shoulders and he is ignoring the problem.
Click to expand...
Do the LTB abusers affect the big rental companies at the same ratio as the mom and pop one-offs?

Does money and political clout affect the numbers?
 
GreyGhost said:
Social housing providers agreeing that many of their tenants have addiction issues is rich. There are thousands of people without addiction issues on the waiting list. If your addiction is ruining your life, that's your problem, not your neighbours. Also, this bill seems to target production and trafficking, not use. Any housing provider should be overjoyed to remove production and trafficking from their dwellings. Having the law can be a good trigger for routine inspections (quick walk through every 3 months?).

LTB is a cluster, for the good of both sides, it needs to be fixed. That is squarely on douggies shoulders and he is ignoring the problem.
Click to expand...
Ok great now how do you do anything about it is the ltb going to issue an immediate order of removal. So now they can fine the landlord but won't help with the issue.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
 
Scuba Steve said:
Ok great now how do you do anything about it is the ltb going to issue an immediate order of removal. So now they can fine the landlord but won't help with the issue.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I agree. If they want to make more laws, they should also have the framework to enforce them effectively. Something like if you catch production on camera, they get you in front of a jp within 24 hours who has the power to review the video and issue the eviction. As it is a special circumstances eviction, grant the power to change locks as in commercial evictions. Screw this drawn out process, commit crimes, get tossed. They'll drop off your stuff where you want it.
 
Interesting article on the current shell game and regulators being wilfully blind to avoid upsetting the apple cart. It also makes the cmhc books look much less terrible when you reduce the liabilities they have on paper by at least 20%. If that bill came due, it would make the federal deficit look like a pimple

betterdwelling.com

Canadian Mortgages Backed By Inflated Home Values, Zero Equity - Better Dwelling

Canadian lenders are increasingly using inflated home values to boost mortgage leverage and close new homes. Who really benefits?
betterdwelling.com betterdwelling.com
 
GreyGhost said:
Interesting article on the current shell game and regulators being wilfully blind to avoid upsetting the apple cart. It also makes the cmhc books look much less terrible when you reduce the liabilities they have on paper by at least 20%. If that bill came due, it would make the federal deficit look like a pimple

betterdwelling.com

Canadian Mortgages Backed By Inflated Home Values, Zero Equity - Better Dwelling

Canadian lenders are increasingly using inflated home values to boost mortgage leverage and close new homes. Who really benefits?
betterdwelling.com betterdwelling.com
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I get the point of the article. In short, banks are allowing liberal appraisals on pre construction deals.

What they don’t say is banks only do that when the overall risk is reasonable, and for mortgages that are not insured. This means the risk is passed to the buyer, but not the lender as as the overall leverage, creditworthiness and ability to pay fall in line with normal lending practices.

Looks to me like a page of blabber. Publications churn this stuff out to get clicks and generate ad space.

Ho hum.
 
Mad Mike said:
I’m not sure I get the point of the article. In short, banks are allowing liberal appraisals on pre construction deals.

What they don’t say is banks only do that when the overall risk is reasonable, and for mortgages that are not insured. This means the risk is passed to the buyer, but not the lender as as the overall leverage, creditworthiness and ability to pay fall in line with normal lending practices.

Looks to me like a page of blabber. Publications churn this stuff out to get clicks and generate ad space.

Ho hum.
Click to expand...
You may be right about uninsured. Most of that was wrt to 20% down. As for the risk to the buyer, if the bank is approving the loan based on insane covid pricing and then only forcing you to have 20% down from that number, it is a defacto low-ratio mortgage as your 20% may be entirely wiped out the day you sign and the bank has 100% of the equity in the property (without insurance, unless they are forcing buyers to pick up insurance as part of the shell game).
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom