(08-13-2024, 09:39 PM)jeffster Wrote: You would think that there could be a way to make owners pay for all of their own utilities.

(08-13-2024, 09:53 PM)tomh009 Wrote:

(08-13-2024, 09:39 PM)jeffster Wrote: It seems that with condo-apartments you pay a lot more on condo fees than you would with a condo-townhome. I figured the one issue is water usage. There are folks out there that will have their 40 minute shower and baths filled to the brim because they get the water 'for free'. It is not. My friend was saying that water was the biggest expense (he was on the board) and was over $200/unit.

You would think that there could be a way to make owners pay for all of their own utilities.

That said, it doesn't seem worth it to buy a condo-apartment if your expenses will still exceed $800-$1,000/month based on taxes, condo fees and electric.

The condo fees really depend on (1) the cost of operating the building (maintenance, cleaning, insurance, snow removal, landscaping and utilities) and (2) reserve fund contributions. The first group you pay for even in a SFH, although some of it you might pay with your own personal labour. The second group is for future building repairs and maintenance; in a SFH you will still have those costs (new roof, new windows, new driveway etc) but you don't save for them in advance.

But take a look at what a roof costs and divide by 15; the cost of new windows divided by maybe 30; new air conditioner divided by maybe 20, and so on, a house is not maintenance-free, either.

We did the math before we moved into a condo (apartment) and have no regrets about it. And that's not even including the cost savings from going from two cars to one ...

(08-14-2024, 08:56 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: There is a simple solution to this, but it requires co-operation of the utilities: meter all the water going in from the street, and also meter the water going to each unit. Bill each unit for its consumption, and bill the condo for the water going in from the street minus the total of water going to all the units. Then the condo is on the hook for any leakage or other problems within the building and upstream of the individual unit meters.

(08-14-2024, 01:02 PM)tomh009 Wrote:

(08-14-2024, 08:56 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: There is a simple solution to this, but it requires co-operation of the utilities: meter all the water going in from the street, and also meter the water going to each unit. Bill each unit for its consumption, and bill the condo for the water going in from the street minus the total of water going to all the units. Then the condo is on the hook for any leakage or other problems within the building and upstream of the individual unit meters.

That's hundreds of individual water pipes throughout the building. Some construction cost, some space (a few elevator shafts' worth at the minimum)--and a lot more pipe connections that can potentially leak.

(08-14-2024, 01:28 PM)KevinL Wrote:

(08-14-2024, 01:02 PM)tomh009 Wrote: That's hundreds of individual water pipes throughout the building. Some construction cost, some space (a few elevator shafts' worth at the minimum)--and a lot more pipe connections that can potentially leak.

Surely each meter can be placed where the water enters each unit?

(08-14-2024, 04:35 PM)creative Wrote: The city owns and is responsible for the water pipes up to where they enter your building including the water meter. Beyond the meter is the buildings responsibility.

(08-11-2024, 02:49 AM)baseballkid123 Wrote:

(07-31-2024, 09:30 PM)GarmentGate Wrote: The following is part of a court filing:

On October 30, 2022 I submit a Tarion Delayed Closing/Occupancy Form. A copy is sent to Victoria Street.

On November 23, 2022 I receive a response from Slonee Malhotra of Sorbara Law. Included are the assertions:

“As per the Act, the Tentative Closing Date Agreement of Purchase and Sale and its Addendum, the Vendor has provided you with the required notice for any and all delays”

“Each instance of an extension was carried forward through providing the Purchaser with a copy of the appropriate Notice within the requisite time period. As long as the Outside Occupancy Date is not exceeded, your builder can extend your Occupancy Date without paying you delayed occupancy compensation”

“All notices ending unavoidable delays were provided no later than 20 days after the Vendor knew or ought to know that the unavoidable delays had concluded and setting new critical dates”

“We hope that this information satisfies you that there is no further action warranted on this claim.”

On June 16, 2023 I submit a Tarion Request for Warranty Assessment.

On or about January 9, 2024 I receive the Tarion Claim Resolution Schedule. Conclusion:

The August 15, 2022 notices ending the Strike, Flood, and Covid-19 UD Events (as well as the April 8, 2022 Covid-19 UD notice) did not meet the requirements of section 5 of the Addendum and therefore were ineƯective. The Critical Dates which existed at the time the first notice of the First Unavoidable Delay Event was sent, specifically the Firm Occupancy Date of May 12, 2022, remained unchanged.

The Purchaser is entitled to Delayed Closing Compensation for the time period between the Firm Closing Date of May 12, 2022 to September 6, 2022; 117 days. Therefore, the Purchaser is entitled to the maximum compensation in the amount of $7,500.00.

That is welcomed news! By the sounds of it you are well on your way to collect $7,500 (117 x 150 daily amount up to max of 7,500?). Congrats!

Unfortunately at this point I believe most people never filled out/claimed delayed compensation through Tarion, which from my understanding has to be filled out within 1 year of occupancy. Guessing everyone else is SOL.

(08-05-2024, 12:23 AM)GarmentGate Wrote:

(08-03-2024, 04:59 PM)Momo26 Wrote: Oh am I glad I came back to this forum to see this. Thanks for sharing this information. 

Am I to understand you have the 'maximum' of $7500 coming your way due to the flooding delay specifically and since firm occupancy was set in writing for May 2022 but then pushed to Sept 2022?


With the bloody condo fees up 81% we need this compensation.

Can you give me guidance on going about my own claim?

1.     Contact Momentum directly. Tell them you’ve been aware the notices they sent out didn’t meet legal requirements and demand compensation.
 
2.     File a complaint with the Home Construction Regulatory Authority.  The builder sent out invalid notices which likely meant they avoided paying out million(s) of dollars in compensation. 
https://www.hcraontario.ca/licensing-compliance/licensed-builder-complaint/
“If you have concerns that a licensed builder or vendor may have breached the Code of Ethics, please complete the form below.” 
https://hcraontario.ca/blog/the-code-of-ethics/
honesty, integrity, competent service, financial responsibility, unprofessional conduct, duty to comply with law, misrepresentation, forms and documents
 
3.     File an ethics, honesty, misleading statements complaint with the Law Society of Ontario against Seth Jutzi (& any other lawyer who gave you misinformation).  He’s a partner at momentum & lawyer at Sorbara Law.  He signed the notices that didn’t meet legal requirements. You can’t have lawyers putting out false statements/misinformation that benefits their development company to the tune of millions of dollars. This is a multi-million-dollar scandal, something that acts as an aggravating factor. Regulatory fines need to be imposed to deter that type of behavior. What is the integrity of a lawyer’s word worth? The Law Society of Ontario should order the lawyer(s) involved to retract/correct their statements to all affected purchasers (and make them whole).
https://lso.ca/protecting-the-public/complaints/complaints-process#types-of-complaints-we-can-help-you-with-5
 
4.     Investigate legal remedies (such as small claims court) that may be available to you on this issue.  Highlights from a legal firm’s article regarding new home warranties https://mccagueborlack.com/emails/articles/home_warranties.html
"Court of Appeal confirms that home buyers are not barred by the provisions of the Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act from pursuing remedies in the courts”
“There is nothing in the Act to suggest that the statutory scheme is exclusive, or that resort to court proceeding is barred. Indeed, the statute provides additional rights to those which a home buyer might otherwise have had. Had it been the intention of the legislature to set up an exclusive scheme, it would have been simple to say so, but the legislature did not.”
“To ensure that you are not caught by the arbitration provisions of the Act, be sure to include allegations of negligence against the builder in the Statement of Claim."