Facing eviction on WFN

[Farmmaa]

Actually.......just for verification, it is leased land and the landowner (Tomat) has to abide by the residential premises laws of WFN.

Yes, it is land leased from Tomat by Princess Enterprises.
You, the tenants, do not lease your land.
You rent it on a month to month basis.

[the truth]

I wonder if the WFN could simply take back the land that hwy 97 sits on after the bridge...

sure they can, they can do what they want when they want, all they have to do is find a bone in the earth and say its on ancient burial grounds they do it all the time

[zerograv]

Wow. OK.

You had to read, sign and submit a 60 page document to the WFN when you purchased your mobile home ? Really ?
I suggest you check your agreement again.

You are not required to sign or submit anything to the WFN.

You would have been required to read, sign and agree to a copy of the park's Lease Agreement...which is a completely separate and totally unrelated piece of paper and has nothing to do with the WFN.

You have to do both actually, if you didn't I'd check it out.

[chapjuan]

Man, there is a lot of misinformation on this thread. I live on leased land, and love it by the way. All banks will offer mortgages on mobiles and leased land, if it has value then interest can be made.

When you buy a home on wfn land you are required to receive a copy of their tenancy agreement and bylaws. It's included with the paperwork required to file for tenancy.

In regards to the people with the house on lakefront. I definitely don't know all the details so I can't really make judgment but it sounds like we haven't received all the information.

The land owner (Tomat) leases the land from WFN, who has to abide by the WFN Residential premises laws. She has 4 parks, which most of the lots are rented out and the renters Own their homes. The land owner, her sisters and a numbered company also owns many lots in the parks which they rent out to renters. The land owner has decided that she wants one certain garage in all 4 parks, which is on a lot owned by the Mr. Schneider and Mr. Arnot (who payed for the garage when they bought their home) when they got notification that the land owner is "taking over" their garage, they declined. Then the got an eviction notice, no compensation, no nothing, just get out! NICE. Yes I know way too mucha bout what is going on. They went to arbitration with WFN and lost because apparently it's not a financial hardship to lose your home. Went for another review, and lost that one as well. Apparently........no one is safe on WFN land.

[chapjuan]

Yes, it is land leased from Tomat by Princess Enterprises.
You, the tenants, do not lease your land.
You rent it on a month to month basis.

She still has to abide by the WFN premises laws though. There are rules as to when you can and cannot evict someone.

[mwalsh]

Actually.......just for verification, it is leased land and the landowner (Tomat) has to abide by the residential premises laws of WFN.

If this is in fact a leased land, there would be a lease agreement, not a month to month rental.

[Farmmaa]

You have to do both actually.

No, you do not.
The WFN offices, I assure you, do not collect, not do they want, 60 page documents sent in to them from every person who buys a mobile home in one of the parks on their land.

There is no WFN agreement to sign, nor is there a copy of their Residential Tenancy Act handed out to be signed.
it is not an agreement...it is simply a documentation outlining their bylaws. No where on it for a signature.

Your residential agreement is not with the WFN, it is with the lease holder of the land.

[zerograv]

No, you do not.
The WFN offices, I assure you, do not collect, not do they want, 60 page documents sent in to them from every person who buys a mobile home in one of the parks on their land.

There is no WFN agreement to sign, nor is there a copy of their Residential Tenancy Act handed out to be signed.
it is not an agreement...it is simply a documentation outlining their bylaws. No where on it for a signature.

Your residential agreement is not with the WFN, it is with the lease holder of the land.

Lol of course you wouldn't have to send in a copy of the entire document, don't be so naive. The forms are on their website, if you live on wfn land I'd fill them out if you never received them from your landlord.

[Farmmaa]

The land owner (Tomat) leases the land from WFN, who has to abide by the WFN Residential premises laws. She has 4 parks, which most of the lots are rented out and the renters Own their homes. The land owner, her sisters and a numbered company also owns many lots in the parks which they rent out to renters. The land owner has decided that she wants one certain garage in all 4 parks, which is on a lot owned by the Mr. Schneider and Mr. Arnot (who payed for the garage when they bought their home) when they got notification that the land owner is "taking over" their garage, they declined. Then the got an eviction notice, no compensation, no nothing, just get out! NICE. Yes I know way too mucha bout what is going on. They went to arbitration with WFN and lost because apparently it's not a financial hardship to lose your home. Went for another review, and lost that one as well. Apparently........no one is safe on WFN land.

Tomat is the land OWNER.
There is no lease on that land...she owns it.

The tenants do not own the land they are living on...sorry, but they don't. They are renting it.

Tomat can decide if she wants to use a permanent building ( a garage ) for park maintenance or storage.
it is not fair, but it is, in fact, legal.

[chapjuan]

You need to use the quote feature properly. Thanks

[nle]

this doesn't surprise me at all I bought my home on Indian Land in Winfield, they do what they want when they want ...explain this to me I pay "pad rental" every month I do NOT own the land my home sits on yet every single freaking year I have to go to City Hall and pay taxes on my property (which is fine) AND the land I rent what a joke..so much power they have now ...I personally had nothing to do with what happened years and years and years ago yet what they are doing to us is bad , the worse thing to me is they should know better as they know what it feels like to be bullied

[chapjuan]

this doesn't surprise me at all I bought my home on Indian Land in Winfield, they do what they want when they want ...explain this to me I pay "pad rental" every month I do NOT own the land my home sits on yet every single freaking year I have to go to City Hall and pay taxes on my property (which is fine) AND the land I rent what a joke..so much power they have now ...I personally had nothing to do with what happened years and years and years ago yet what they are doing to us is bad , the worse thing to me is they should know better as they know what it feels like to be bullied

I completly agree with you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And apparently if they like your house more than their own, it's apparently legal to just take it from you!!!! Very nice I say.

[zerograv]

this doesn't surprise me at all I bought my home on Indian Land in Winfield, they do what they want when they want ...explain this to me I pay "pad rental" every month I do NOT own the land my home sits on yet every single freaking year I have to go to City Hall and pay taxes on my property (which is fine) AND the land I rent what a joke..so much power they have now ...I personally had nothing to do with what happened years and years and years ago yet what they are doing to us is bad , the worse thing to me is they should know better as they know what it feels like to be bullied

I see what you are trying to say, but at the same point you didn't have to live there if you didn't agree with it.

[Bpeep]

I feel for them, I really do. I couldn't imagine getting evicted from my home, especially if I owned it.
Renting has its place tho- renting a house or apartment is where renting belongs.
Renting property but owning the house on it is, well, in my opinion really stupid.
What amazes me is how many people own houses on rented land.
What the hell is happening to us? There's thousands of properties for sale. No need to rent land.
Buying modular homes for 300 k on rented land is dumb too. The building isn't worth it.
Blowing another 100k on improving an overpriced building on rented land is dumber yet.

[chapjuan]

I feel for them, I really do. I couldn't imagine getting evicted from my home, especially if I owned it.
Renting has its place tho- renting a house or apartment is where renting belongs.
Renting property but owning the house on it is, well, in my opinion really stupid.
What amazes me is how many people own houses on rented land.
What the hell is happening to us? There's thousands of properties for sale. No need to rent land.
Buying modular homes for 300 k on rented land is dumb too. The building isn't worth it.
Blowing another 100k on improving an overpriced building on rented land is dumber yet.

I was stupid. I paid 214k for my home. it's in a park, I pay rent, I am steps from the beach, beautiful home, 3 car garage, awesome cul de sac with wonderful neighbors. for me to buy a lot this close to the water, build a house, put in a heated garage, everthing that I want (that I have now) it would have costed me a lot more than what I paid. I moved here from Saskatchewan, not realizing what I was getting into. I know there is a lease, but I also read the residential premises laws. I read my tenancy agreement, I felt safe. Now I don't. If it wasn't for this.........I think I would still do it again. I consider my home very beautiful and everything I wanted and I didn't have to pay an arm and a leg for it. Yes I do pay rent........that part sucks!!!!!!!! But my house in sask, which was built in 1923 and falling down, is more money than what I paid for this place. Its all what you want, and I have everything I want here.