Housing News

Canadian woman appeals for $600,000 for mandatory archaeological dig

Published

10 years ago

March 27, 2011

Buy a home, get a swarm of archaeologists

Vancouver resident, Wendi Mackay purchased her parent’s home and rather than remodel, she had the house moved off site and began plans to build a new home, permits and all. The foundation was poured and she learned that there may be aboriginal artifacts on the site and that on the off chance that were true, she would be required to obtain a permit under the Heritage Preservation Act.

In order to get clearance for the permit, she would be required to hire archaeological consultants. After three months and a $62,000 bill, she was told they were only halfway done and now, the $600 trench required under the foundation had turned to an $8,000 ordeal.

Three months later, no permit, drained bank

Mackay scrapped plans for a basement, shelled out $70,000, had no report to produce to the government, was losing time and was getting frustrated, feeling there was no accountability in the process, that they could dig infinitely.

At this point, bone fragments were found which were deemed to be of possible aboriginal origin and the government stated that people should rest in peace and this build site prevented it.

“Dear lady, sorry about your bad luck. Love, Gov’t”

The government suggested that having an archaeological survey prior to purchasing a home is like an inspection and that Mackay should have (but was not legally required to) have one prior to purchasing the land.

It seems unfair, given that there was already a home there that passed inspection, but when she heard there “might” be artifacts, instead of digging first and begging forgiveness later, she stepped up. It is unclear as to whether she has been given the final building permit to continue building or not.

Mackay filed a $600,000 lawsuit for her losses but lost. She is now filing an appeal with the B.C. Court of Appeal for the same amount.

Similar issues in America

In America, we deal with a similar issue in respecting Indian burial grounds and developers often look the other way when they hear of possible historical remains, as when they don’t, it is extremely costly to hire a full archaeological dig.

0 Shares

Up Next

Housing recovery more difficult than throwing money at it – Nevada builder sued

Don't Miss

Wells Fargo denies telling homeowner to skip payments, offers $2 loan modification

The American Genius Staff

The American Genius is news, insights, tools, and inspiration for business owners and professionals. AG condenses information on technology, business, social media, startups, economics and more, so you don’t have to.

6 Comments

Austin

Austin tops the list of best places to buy a home

When looking to buy a home, taking the long view is important before making such a huge investment – where are the best places to make that commitment?

Published

6 years ago

May 29, 2015

Lani Rosales, COO + News Director

Looking at the bigger picture

(REALUOSO.COM) – Let us first express that although we are completely biased about Texas (we’re headquartered here, I personally grew up here), the data is not – Texas is the best. That’s a scientific fact. There’s a running joke in Austin that if there is a list of “best places to [anything],” we’re on it, and the joke causes eye rolls instead of humility (we’re sore winners and sore losers in this town).

That said, SelfStorage.com dug into the data and determined that the top 12 places to buy a home are currently Texas and North Carolina (and Portland, I guess you’re okay too or whatever).

They examined the nerdiest of numbers from the compound annual growth rate in inflation-adjusted GDP to cost premium, affordability, taxes, job growth, and housing availability.

“Buying a house is a big decision and a big commitment,” the company notes. “Although U.S. home prices have risen in the long term, the last decade has shown that path is sometimes full of twists, turns, dizzying heights and steep, abrupt falls. Today, home prices are stabilizing and increasing in most areas of the U.S.”

Click here to continue reading the list of the 12 best places to buy a home…

Housing News

Average age of houses on the rise, so is it now better or worse to buy new?

With aging housing in America, are first-time buyers better off buying new or existing homes? The average age of a home is rising, as is the price of new housing, so a shift could be upon us.

Published

6 years ago

March 2, 2015

Dawn Brotherton, Staff Writer

The average home age is higher than ever

(REALUOSO.COM) – In a survey from the Department of Housing and Urban Development American Housing Survey (AHS), the median age of homes in the United States was 35 years old. In Texas, homes are a bit younger with the median age between 19 – 29 years. The northeast has the oldest homes, with the median age between 50 – 61 years. In 1985, the median age of a home was only 23 years.

With more houses around 40 years old, the National Association of Realtors asserts that homeowners will have to undertake remodeling and renovation projects before selling unless the home is sold as-is, in which case the buyer will be responsible to update their new residence. Even homeowners who aren’t selling will need to consider remodeling for structural and aesthetic reasons.

Prices of new homes on the rise

Newer homes cost more than they used to. The price differential between new homes and older homes has increased from 10 percent traditionally to around 37 percent in 2014. This is due to rising construction costs, scarcity of lots, and a low inventory of new homes that doesn’t meet the demand.

Click here to continue reading this story…

Housing News

Are Realtors the real loser in the fight between Zillow Group and Move, Inc.?

The last year has been one of dramatic and rapid change in the real estate tech sector, but Realtors are vulnerable, and we’re worried.

Published

6 years ago

February 25, 2015

Lani Rosales, COO + News Director

Why Realtors are vulnerable to these rapid changes

(REALUOSO.COM) – Corporate warfare demands headlines in every industry, but in the real estate tech sector, a storm has been brewing for years, which in the last year has come to a head. Zillow Group and Move, Inc. (which is owned by News Corp. and operates ListHub, Realtor.com, TopProducer, and other brands) have been competing for a decade now, and the race has appeared to be an aggressive yet polite boxing match. Last year, the gloves came off, and now, they’ve drawn swords and appear to want blood.

Note: We’ll let you decide which company plays which role in the image above.

So how then, does any of this make Realtors the victims of this sword fight? Let’s get everyone up to speed, and then we’ll discuss.

1. Zillow poaches top talent, Move/NAR sues

It all started last year when the gloves came off – Move’s Chief Strategy Officer (who was also Realtor.com’s President), Errol Samuelson jumped ship and joined Zillow on the same day he phoned in his resignation without notice. He left under questionable circumstances, which has led to a lengthy legal battle (wherein Move and NAR have sued Zillow and Samuelson over allegations of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and misappropriation of trade secrets), with the most recent motion being for contempt, which a judge granted to Move/NAR after the mysterious “Samuelson Memo” surfaced.

Salt was added to the wound when Move awarded Samuelson’s job to Move veteran, Curt Beardsley, who days after Samuelson left, also defected to Zillow. This too led to a lawsuit, with allegations including breach of contract, violation of corporations code, illegal dumping of stocks, and Move has sought restitution. These charges are extremely serious, but demanded slightly less attention than the ongoing lawsuit against Samuelson.