Is it a bad idea to buy on 99 year lease land?

[Advocate]

theres nothing wrong with lease land, if you are buying and plan on living in it for the rest of your life chances are, your gonna be dead by then, and the chances of the band cancelling the lease are slim to none.

Chances are not slim to none, chances are at their discretion completely.
IF you purchase a living space with the idea that you will be dead before you sell..........something wrong with that IMO.

Leases and subleases are legal agreements and all have cancellation terms contained within them. It's not just "at their discretion" to cancel them. If they were, no bank would ever agree to back a mortgage or finance business on the reserve. Think about it.


Once the original lease term expires, the Band may have an option to renew - which IS at their discretion. Unless the lease (or sublease) terms are violated by EITHER party, they are good for their term and binding on both sides.

Everyone in this situation has had a lawyer work on their deal so they should be aware of all the terms they are agreeing to in both a sublease agreement and in any headlease agreement that corresponds to it.

If not, blame the lawyers or blame yourself, but pretty unfair to blame the Band, isnt it?

Of course, the lawyers are the ones to make money when things go awry on native land leases. And of course, the natives always win their case, because they have the money to hire the best legal counsel, and the tenants are usually low income earners, not to mention that any arbitrations go through the WFN government office who choose their own arbitrators.

Nothing to blame 'the band' for, it is the individual landlords within the Band who hold the agreements with the tenants and make the rules and regulations for their rental properties.
Also to note is that many native land rental premises are not leased land, they are purchased manufactured homes on month to month pad rentals.

[blueberry]

We were talking about land leases/house purchases here, not manufactured homes.

But since you brought it in, I'm going to just throw it out here and say that manufactured home parks off reserve have similar issues. Well, except for having natives own them, that is.

[dirtrider]

theres nothing wrong with lease land, if you are buying and plan on living in it for the rest of your life chances are, your gonna be dead by then, and the chances of the band cancelling the lease are slim to none.

Chances are not slim to none, chances are at their discretion completely.
IF you purchase a living space with the idea that you will be dead before you sell..........something wrong with that IMO.

Leases and subleases are legal agreements and all have cancellation terms contained within them. It's not just "at their discretion" to cancel them. If they were, no bank would ever agree to back a mortgage or finance business on the reserve. Think about it.

Once the original lease term expires, the Band may have an option to renew - which IS at their discretion. Unless the lease (or sublease) terms are violated by EITHER party, they are good for their term and binding on both sides.

Everyone in this situation has had a lawyer work on their deal so they should be aware of all the terms they are agreeing to in both a sublease agreement and in any headlease agreement that corresponds to it.

If not, blame the lawyers or blame yourself, but pretty unfair to blame the Band, isnt it?

I think it's a little more complicated than that because the WFN is the " Law " unto themselves through their self governance agreement with the Federal government. As far as I know, only Federal laws superside WFN laws, Provincial laws have no effect on WFN land. So if the Band feels like breaking a lease, I can't see a reason why they can't come up with a reason to do that....aside from morality, that is.

I've drawn up tenant/owner leases before but I have never had anyone take it to a lawyer or heard of someone that has ....they are fairly straightforward contracts in BC. I'm not sure if WFN has anything like the BC Tenant Act in their Consitution but the way I interpret the self governance agreement, they can do pretty much anything they want short of breaking Federal Laws.

[Oneeye]

Hi!
just wondering if it is a bad idea to buy on native land and if that will make it harder to re sell a home, the place has a 99 year lease and small strata fee on top of that but is very nice and would cost alot more anywhere else, thanks!

My mom and dad 'owned' a house that sat on property with a 99 year lease. Within 6 years and as a result of rising land values they saw their strata fees rise by 500%. The leaseholders can change their minds at anytime. Google what happened to those on leased land on the lower mainland, particularly Richmond. People ended up walking away from their homes. Be v-e-r-y careful!

[Advocate]

We were talking about land leases/house purchases here, not manufactured homes.

But since you brought it in, I'm going to just throw it out here and say that manufactured home parks off reserve have similar issues. Well, except for having natives own them, that is.

True, but in Westbank, all manufactured home parks are owned by WFN band members TMK.
And these used to be leased purchases, until they turned to month to month for the benefit of the landlords.
They are still purchased homes on rented land that require the tenant to maintain and upkeep the landlord's property.

[Advocate]

I think it's a little more complicated than that because the WFN is the " Law " unto themselves through their self governance agreement with the Federal government. As far as I know, only Federal laws superside WFN laws, Provincial laws have no effect on WFN land. So if the Band feels like breaking a lease, I can't see a reason why they can't come up with a reason to do that....aside from morality, that is.

I've drawn up tenant/owner leases before but I have never had anyone take it to a lawyer or heard of someone that has ....they are fairly straightforward contracts in BC. I'm not sure if WFN has anything like the BC Tenant Act in their Consitution but the way I interpret the self governance agreement, they can do pretty much anything they want short of breaking Federal Laws.

IT is true regarding federal/provincial laws. IT is also true for WFN laws. A Native landowner can break a lease, and the purchaser has nowhere to go with regard to legal assistance. They can break leases, evict tenants, and make tenants responsible for reasonable wear and tear on the landlord's property. I know this as fact.

WFN has the WFN Residential Tenancy Law, which is almost ver-batim from the Provincial Act, however, the WFN government is in charge of arbitrations for disagreements between landlord and tenant.

True too that the WFN landlords can do what they want make any rules they want, change rules and make tenants sign in agreement with those new changed rules, or evict them if they do not comply.

[Advocate]

Hi!
just wondering if it is a bad idea to buy on native land and if that will make it harder to re sell a home, the place has a 99 year lease and small strata fee on top of that but is very nice and would cost alot more anywhere else, thanks!

My mom and dad 'owned' a house that sat on property with a 99 year lease. Within 6 years and as a result of rising land values they saw their strata fees rise by 500%. The leaseholders can change their minds at anytime. Google what happened to those on leased land on the lower mainland, particularly Richmond. People ended up walking away from their homes. Be v-e-r-y careful!

During your research, you may also like to read up on "Parker Cove" in Vernon, just off Westside Road, where lessees had to purchase their land lease twice.

[blueberry]

Hi!
just wondering if it is a bad idea to buy on native land and if that will make it harder to re sell a home, the place has a 99 year lease and small strata fee on top of that but is very nice and would cost alot more anywhere else, thanks!

My mom and dad 'owned' a house that sat on property with a 99 year lease. Within 6 years and as a result of rising land values they saw their strata fees rise by 500%. The leaseholders can change their minds at anytime. Google what happened to those on leased land on the lower mainland, particularly Richmond. People ended up walking away from their homes. Be v-e-r-y careful!

During your research, you may also like to read up on "Parker Cove" in Vernon, just off Westside Road, where lessees had to purchase their land lease twice.

Parker Cove issues originally started off because these "property owners" only had handshake deals/buckshee leases with the landowners which are not legal interests and are not enforceable. Is it a good idea to invest money in a property that you have no legal interest in? I wouldn't do it.

The best advice I could give anyone, on reserve or not, is to know what it is you are buying before you sign on the dotted line. Every lease/sublease on WFN's lands has to be registered or it's not a legal interest. Every non-native house purchaser on WFN's reserve has a sublease. Read it before you sign on the dotted line, and pay attention to the sections "Term", "Renewal of Term" and "Rent". They should be in every sublease and lease and are pretty straightforward.

Investing in a strata? Find out about how the fees are decided. WFN doesn't control strata fees, or set them and they vary from development to development. I assume that these are decided by the strata council of each development, by people who actually live in the development.

I am quite sure that no manufactured home owner has ever held a lease, or a sublease even, in any of the manufactured home parks on WFN's reserves, despite Advocate inferring otherwise.

[sassybee]

Wouldn't "buy" a house or mobile home on leased land. There is a REASON they are SLIGHTLY cheaper. Have you EVER heard of the Canadian gov't standing up against the natives for anything in this country? I know one lawyer who said the leases aren't worth the paper their written on. Wouldn't take one if you gave it to me....but that's just my opinion. Some people obviously don't mind......good luck.

[garygibby]

i like not like yous post thats so frigin true often native land lease is lower and they use their taxes collected to do the things the city says they will but the native actually do it garbage collection roads ect all much better municipal monies being used in the area for wich the money was collected txes are much less and fair ive lived on lease land for some time and i find it far better than the stupid city they reasses your land if the price goes up ya pay if it goes down ya pay and that is gay!! uneducated racists shouldnt post something they are ignorant of!!!

[nickd]

?^ Another reason not to buy on lease land.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

Parker Cove issues originally started off because these "property owners" only had handshake deals/buckshee leases with the landowners which are not legal interests and are not enforceable. Is it a good idea to invest money in a property that you have no legal interest in? I wouldn't do it.

The best advice I could give anyone, on reserve or not, is to know what it is you are buying before you sign on the dotted line. Every lease/sublease on WFN's lands has to be registered or it's not a legal interest. Every non-native house purchaser on WFN's reserve has a sublease. Read it before you sign on the dotted line, and pay attention to the sections "Term", "Renewal of Term" and "Rent". They should be in every sublease and lease and are pretty straightforward.

Investing in a strata? Find out about how the fees are decided. WFN doesn't control strata fees, or set them and they vary from development to development. I assume that these are decided by the strata council of each development, by people who actually live in the development.

I am quite sure that no manufactured home owner has ever held a lease, or a sublease even, in any of the manufactured home parks on WFN's reserves, despite Advocate inferring otherwise.

I am familiar with Parker Cove resort. I know people who live there.
My understanding is the leases between the developer Patrick McBride, and the Parkers was written and legal. In turn, the lease agreements between the developer and the purchasers was written and legal. The developer defaulted, and the natives took back the lease from the developer. The buyer had legal interest in the property lease. That lease was also cancelled, and owners had to re-buy their leases.

People who insure their homes built at Parker Cove have to name the Parkers as the first to collect in the event of a claim.
Also, if you move away, and cannot sell your home, (which is becoming more and more difficult to do due to strategies by the Natives to sell of empty lots with built to suit packages, taking interest away from homes for sale) good luck moving the house off the property.

Regardless of reading before you sign or buy, things can change on leased native land, with monthly and 99 year leases.

Strata fees can change as fast as the board who runs the association, or as fast as unforseen situations arise.

[kay-c]

There are alot of *bleep* lawyers out there .There is actually only one on either side of the lake that is capable of putting it together properly. Glazier or Porelli.