How am I doing?

Asset allocation, risk, diversification and rebalancing. Pros/cons of hiring a financial advisor. Seeking advice on your portfolio?
Clock Watcher
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 723
Joined: 15 Jan 2007 02:34

Re:

Post by Clock Watcher »

kombat wrote:Actually, it definitely did exist. However, the Conservative government recently passed legislation closing the loophole, several years after we participated in the program. But they made the legislation retroactive. There's currently a case before the courts to decide whether or not it's legal to go back in time and retroactively disallow loopholes that were legal at the time.
That sounds like something very dangerous for a government to do. If that is in fact the issue, I hope your legal challenge is successful.
Clock Watcher
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 723
Joined: 15 Jan 2007 02:34

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Clock Watcher »

One of my neighbors came around and I donated some money. I later contacted that charity (legimate) because I did not receive a tax receipt. They had no records of that donation, nor any record of that neighbor. That made me a bit cynical. From now on, I probably won't respond to any door-to-door charity soliciations.
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kombat »

Another quick update.

On the S&D Land Banking investment: When we originally participated in August, 2006, they told us that it usually takes 3-5 years to complete the planning and rezoning work, and realize a return on our investment. However, we just got a letter from S&D telling us that due to the current economic climate blah blah blah, they don't anticipate progressing with our development any time soon. They're asking all the participants to vote on whether we want S&D to try and sell the land now, as-is, and get what they can for it, or whether we want them to keep sitting on it for a few more years and see what the real estate market looks like. I voted to pull the plug and get our money out.

On the charitable donation tax scheme: No news on this. We got the letter from CRA last year, demanding that we repay our refund, with penalties, which we promptly paid. We filed a Notice of Objection, which keeps our foot in the door in case the lawsuit (which is currently on hold, pending the result of some other lawsuit) goes our way and entitles us to our refund back. We've also added our names to a class-action lawsuit against Parklane Financial themselves (the ones who ran the donation program).

Currently, we owe $340,000 on a house worth $425,000. We have no other debt whatsoever. We have $130,000 in RRSPs, $25,000 in cash in the bank for an emergency fund, vacation fund, and car replacement fund (when the time comes). We haven't added much to RRSP's over the past 2 years, as we've instead been using our money to pay what we owed to CRA, and then we used it to build up an emergency fund (which we didn't have before). We're now debating whether to use our monthly surplus to return to investing in RRSP's, or focus on paying off the mortgage. I'm voting for the mortgage. If we actually get any money back from S&D (we invested $77,000), then I plan to put all of that money on the mortgage as well.

So that's where we are currently. I just turned 35. My wife is 34.
User avatar
Nemo2
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 9670
Joined: 02 Jan 2006 14:27
Location: Belleville

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Nemo2 »

They're asking all the participants to vote on whether we want S&D to try and sell the land now, as-is, and get what they can for it
So, an S&D proxy buys it for peanuts.....then around she goes?
Exit, pursued by a bear.
William Shakespeare, Stage direction in "The Winter's Tale"
User avatar
Flights of Fancy
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1072
Joined: 25 Mar 2008 12:45

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Flights of Fancy »

So, what is your sense of how accurate the predictions/advice on this forum were? Just curious. 8)
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kombat »

FoF:

I never doubted the advice and predictions. The problem was, I didn't get the advice until after I'd already made the "investments." ;)
User avatar
AltaRed
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 33398
Joined: 05 Mar 2005 20:04
Location: Ogopogo Land

Re: How am I doing?

Post by AltaRed »

An expensive lesson(s). Thank you for sharing it (them) with us.
Imagefiniki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kombat »

UPDATE:

Well, the land banking saga with S&D has taken an unexpected turn. In early April, I got an email from S&D basically acknowledging that the sale of the property is taking much longer than they expected, and they're offering unit holders an exit strategy. The letter outlined 2 options, and asked each unit holder to indicate their preference. Once the votes are tallied, they'll go with the option chosen by the majority of unit holders.

One option is to just maintain the status quo, where S&D continues to shop our land around to developers, trying to sell it to someone. So far, no bites.

The other option offered was for S&D to obtain a mortgage on the land and use the proceeds to return our original principal investment back to all unit holders. S&D would basically be buying back the land. They would then continue to try and sell it. Once they do eventually sell it, they would deduct any mortgage interest and fees from the sale proceeds, and distribute any remaining profit to the former unit holders (i.e., us). If the sale proceeds are less than the mortgage interest and fees, S&D will absorb the difference. We would not be on the hook for any more money.

Needless to say, I immediately voted for the "get a mortgage and give us back our money" option. I'm pretty optimistic that most of the other shareholders are as anxious to exit this deal as I am, and will vote similarly.

I'll keep you posted.
User avatar
ghariton
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 15954
Joined: 18 Feb 2005 18:59
Location: Ottawa

Re: How am I doing?

Post by ghariton »

kombat wrote:I'll keep you posted.
Thanks for sharing, kombat.

We learn from mistakes, whether our own or others'.

George
The juice is worth the squeeze
gsp_
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 2318
Joined: 12 Apr 2011 17:48
Location: Montreal

Re: How am I doing?

Post by gsp_ »

kombat wrote:other option offered was for S&D to obtain a mortgage on the land and use the proceeds to return our original principal investment back to all unit holders. S&D would basically be buying back the land. They would then continue to try and sell it. Once they do eventually sell it, they would deduct any mortgage interest and fees from the sale proceeds, and distribute any remaining profit to the former unit holders (i.e., us). If the sale proceeds are less than the mortgage interest and fees, S&D will absorb the difference. We would not be on the hook for any more money.
Hmmm, what's in it for them?

IMO assessing the other party's motivation in concluding a financial transaction is paramount in your decision making process.
User avatar
Pickles
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 4215
Joined: 27 Sep 2006 09:44
Location: Toronto

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Pickles »

gsp_ wrote:
kombat wrote:other option offered was for S&D to obtain a mortgage on the land and use the proceeds to return our original principal investment back to all unit holders. S&D would basically be buying back the land.
Hmmm, what's in it for them?

IMO assessing the other party's motivation in concluding a financial transaction is paramount in your decision making process.
My thoughts exactly. How is S&D "basically buying back the land"? Sounds to me like the investors will be borrowing money with the land as collateral (the mortgage), not getting back their principal at all (a sale).

I wonder what institution would offer a mortgage on undeveloped land that no one wants to buy. Could it be, perchance, another investment group managed by S&D who has decided this strategy will provide them with a steady stream of mortgage payments at your expense?

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the situation but istm that unless S&D really buys back the land -- in which case they would have no further obligation to you -- that the owners group will ultimately be responsible for the mortgage debt.
Regards,
Pickles
Rooster
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 174
Joined: 16 Jan 2012 13:03

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Rooster »

kombat wrote: The other option offered was for S&D to obtain a mortgage on the land and use the proceeds to return our original principal investment back to all unit holders. S&D would basically be buying back the land. They would then continue to try and sell it. Once they do eventually sell it, they would deduct any mortgage interest and fees from the sale proceeds, and distribute any remaining profit to the former unit holders (i.e., us). If the sale proceeds are less than the mortgage interest and fees, S&D will absorb the difference. We would not be on the hook for any more money.
As others have alluded to, much clarification is needed.

S&D would not be "basically buying back the land". You and your co-investors would be borrowing against the land. You and your co-investors would be on the hook for the principle + interest. As for S&D promise to make up any shortfall and pay interest, what's it backed on? I would not trust anything other than a written undertaking backed by a first lien security on S&D's assets (which I would have appraised). You won't get that, so S&D's pledge may well not be more than thin air.

You need to invest a bit of money here and go to a real estate lawyer. Have your title examined, that restrictive convenant examined and get sound advice on what your options are and how to get out.

I've just read through this thread. Interesting to say the least. You sound like an intelligent and candic guy. If I can offer my take on this situation, you let yourself be talked into these situations and exercise a high amount of willful blindness because you dearly want it to be true. You want to make high returns. Higher than a prudent investor could expect in this yield environment. Therefore, even if your gut is sounding alarms, you silence it and rationalize your participation in the schemes. There is an inevitable reality, though, and that is that you are taking on way too much risk and therefore ending up with severe losses of capital rather than a high return. I would strongly advice that you rethink your propensity to get duped in by promises of high returns. Think of them as very likely to result in an important loss of capital. Stop reaching.
FinEcon
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 1306
Joined: 03 Aug 2005 13:41

Re: How am I doing?

Post by FinEcon »

Rooster wrote: I've just read through this thread. Interesting to say the least. You sound like an intelligent and candic guy. If I can offer my take on this situation, you let yourself be talked into these situations and exercise a high amount of willful blindness because you dearly want it to be true. You want to make high returns. Higher than a prudent investor could expect in this yield environment. Therefore, even if your gut is sounding alarms, you silence it and rationalize your participation in the schemes. There is an inevitable reality, though, and that is that you are taking on way too much risk and therefore ending up with severe losses of capital rather than a high return. I would strongly advice that you rethink your propensity to get duped in by promises of high returns. Think of them as very likely to result in an important loss of capital. Stop reaching.
This is probably the most intelligent and useful thing I have read on this board in months, if not years. Most of what the average person calls 'investing' is no such thing, it is more generally described by the above whether the funds went to real estate, franchise, tax avoidance schemes, etc. I would add only one thing to the very end: Stop reaching and start thinking (for yourself). And break out the calculator already.

Kombat, thanks a ton for sharing this awful experience. I would love to see the prospectus, do you have it in PDF and if so do you have any qualms with posting it up? We might be very suprised at what the vultures here will pick up in a retrospective look through. If you don't feel comfortable posting it, that's totally understood. Every one of these type of offers (pitched private investments to non savy investors) I've ever seen has been an adbsolute turd designed to guarantee the propreitors do, even in the worst case, reasonably well at the expense of those who provide the capital.
Show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome

--Charlie Munger
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kombat »

Pickles wrote:How is S&D "basically buying back the land"? Sounds to me like the investors will be borrowing money with the land as collateral (the mortgage), not getting back their principal at all (a sale).
I don't have the letter with me, but it was worded to indicate that S&D would obtain the mortgage, and the proceeds would be distributed to the original investors (us). S&D would make the payments on the mortgage until the land is sold, at which time the mortgage would be paid off, S&D would recoup the interest they paid on the mortgage, fees would be paid, and if there were anything left after all that, it would be distributed amongst the original unit holders.

The letter did say that we would not be required/expected to supply any more funds. We would get back at a minimum, our original investment. It's possible/probable/certain that we'll never get another dime beyond that, but honestly, at this point, I don't care. Even just getting back our original "investment" would make me monumentally happy.
Pickles wrote:Could it be, perchance, another investment group managed by S&D who has decided this strategy will provide them with a steady stream of mortgage payments at your expense?
I don't really care, because we won't be the ones making the mortgage payments. We'll get back our investment, sign over the titles, and walk away. Someday down the road, we may or may not get another cheque. But (at least according to the letter) we will not be getting any bills.
Pickles wrote:Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the situation but istm that unless S&D really buys back the land -- in which case they would have no further obligation to you -- that the owners group will ultimately be responsible for the mortgage debt.
As I understand it, S&D is taking out a mortgage and buying the land back from us.
Rooster wrote:S&D would not be "basically buying back the land". You and your co-investors would be borrowing against the land. You and your co-investors would be on the hook for the principle + interest.
Negative. As I've said, according to the letter, S&D will be the mortgage holder. We (the investors) will not be signing any loan papers.
Rooster wrote:As for S&D promise to make up any shortfall and pay interest, what's it backed on?
The paper it's printed on, like any other contract, I guess. And they all seem to hold up in court just fine. Obviously we're at the beginning stages of this, and no legal papers have been presented yet. They're just collecting votes right now to determine what the majority of unitholders want to do.
Rooster wrote:you let yourself be talked into these situations and exercise a high amount of willful blindness because you dearly want it to be true. You want to make high returns. Higher than a prudent investor could expect in this yield environment.
First of all, we got into this deal 7 years ago, so gimmie a break. Sure I was a little naive back then, but we're not talking about last week. It was 7 years ago.

Secondly, "this yield environment" is completely irrelevant, because as I said, this deal was made 7 years ago. The yield environment 7 years ago was quite different.

Thirdly, yes of course I "got talked into" this deal. My "financial advisor" said it was a good deal, lots of other people in the "Investment Club" had already signed on, S&D was a real, live company with a long history of doing these type of land banking deals, I was a relatively new investor and was a little too trusting of friendly "experts" who seemed to know a lot more about finance than me. What reason did I have to doubt any of them? I had no idea that people in general were such deceptive, conniving, thieving scumbags. Don't worry, now I know better. Cut me some slack.
Rooster wrote:I would strongly advice that you rethink your propensity to get duped in by promises of high returns.
Gee, thanks for the insight, but don't worry, I've figured that out for myself in the 7 intervening years.
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kombat »

gsp_ wrote:Hmmm, what's in it for them?
As far as I can tell, protecting their image, and the fact that they've had our capital to use for the past 7 years.

S&D's business model is attracting investors to fund their projects, with the promise of a great return in a fairly short (3-5 year) timeframe. In the current economic environment, they've not been able to achieve that. In our case, for example, we've been waiting 7 years, and S&D has not been able to secure a buyer for our particular development.

If this is allowed to continue, eventually more and more unit holders like myself will grow frustrated, and there is a risk of this story being picked up by the mainstream media. This would tarnish S&D's image and make it much more difficult for them to attract new investors in the future.

So "what's in it for them" is basically appeasing us disgrunted investors and offering us a clean exit strategy whereby we don't make too much noise on the way out.

In the meantime, S&D has had our capital to use for the past 7 years. So returning our original principle to us 7 years later, without adjusting for inflation, they've basically had a multi-million dollar loan at 0% for 7 years with which to fund other investments and profit from us.
User avatar
Norbert Schlenker
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 7960
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 09:56
Location: An Argument Surrounded By Water
Contact:

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Norbert Schlenker »

kombat wrote:
gsp_ wrote:Hmmm, what's in it for them?
As far as I can tell, protecting their image ...
Oh, I can think of another possibility. If I were the land banker and I had a buyer after all these years, I would

a) buy out the understandably impatient investors for what they put in to the deal
b) sell the land the next day to a recently incorporated shell at what I just paid, thus taking me off the hook for any top up I promised
c) have the shell sell to the buyer I've finally found at a nice markup
d) go to Disneyland

But that's just me.

P.S. Sorry for your travails, kombat. At a certain point, it's a pleasure just to have the pain stop.
Nothing can protect people who want to buy the Brooklyn Bridge.
Rooster
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 174
Joined: 16 Jan 2012 13:03

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Rooster »

Couple points:

- How can S&D mortgage (ie. give as collateral to ensure loan obligations are meet) what isn't theirs? Seriously, this isn't making much sense (i'm a lawyer). If S&D wanted to buy you out it would buy you out, either with cash or with financing it arranges on their end. If the mortgage is on the land you own it means that the lender can take your land as payment in the event of default under the loan. Let me say that again, should there be a default under the loan (ie. failure to make payment) the lender can take possession of your land if the mortgage is given on the land.

- How does it even make sense that the loan amount would be sufficient to cover your purchase price? A lender will typically only lend a portion of the value of the property.

- If S&D is indeed willing to guarantee to make investors whole, make sure its written in a clear and unequivocal manner (get it checked by a lawyer). Even with a clear undertaking, your sole recourse in case S&D defaults is against S&D's assets. If you fail to have S&D grant you security on its assets, you would be an unsecured creditor. What's S&D's (the actual legal entity who will be give you a guarantee if there is one given) net assets? Are you comfortable that it provides you, as an unsecured creditor, with sufficient coverage? You likely have no way to know and your claim may therefore not be worth much more than the proverbial paper its written on.

Given the above, what would, say, stop an S&D affiliate from making the loan and then have S&D default on the loan and have the affiliate exercise its security interest on the land leaving you with no land and an unsecured claim against S&D? I'm not saying this will happen, but you look to be exposed in the way you describe the proposed transaction.

This is $80k. You should not be doing this without counsel. I VERY strongly encourage you to retain a seasonned real estate attorney to look over your file and counsel you.

As to my more general commentary, I did not mean to sound harsh. I stated it because I feel that is the thought process of people that get caught up in these sort of schemes. Again, not to sound harsh, but you are not an innocent victim in this. The appeal of gain lead you to disreguard basic precautions. Reasoning along the lines of "well, I was counselled, I didn't know any better, not my fault" is exactly the type of willful blindness (caused by appeal of gain) that leads people into these traps. I've seen it a few times. Almost always the exact same reasoning. Only reason I'm bringing this up is to help you realize (if not already done) the thought process that may have lead you here and thefore to help you change it. Again, if it's lesson learned then my apologies for bringing this up. As others have stated, I appreciate your candor and openness.
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kombat »

Rooster wrote:- How can S&D mortgage (ie. give as collateral to ensure loan obligations are meet) what isn't theirs? Seriously, this isn't making much sense (i'm a lawyer).
How does a person get a mortgage to buy a house they don't own yet? Same way, I would imagine.
Rooster wrote:If S&D wanted to buy you out it would buy you out, either with cash or with financing it arranges on their end.
Right. That's what's happening. If this is the route the majority of unit holders choose to go, and S&D is able to secure a mortgage, then we will be signing over the titles to the land (our units) to S&D. S&D will own the land and the mortgage. The proceeds of the mortgage will be distributed to the (former) unit holders, in the same amounts we originally bought in for.
Rooster wrote:If the mortgage is on the land you own
We will no longer own it. S&D will.
Rooster wrote:it means that the lender can take your land as payment in the event of default under the loan.
Of course - except they'd be "foreclosing" on property S&D owns, not us. We would no longer own the property. We'd be the former owners.
Rooster wrote:- How does it even make sense that the loan amount would be sufficient to cover your purchase price? A lender will typically only lend a portion of the value of the property.
I'm not a mortgage broker or a realtor. But we paid $x for the land 7 years ago. Presumably, the land has appreciated in value since 2006, at least a little bit. As such, maybe it's worth $(1.2)*x now. S&D only needs to get a mortgage for $x. So they'd be getting a morgage with 80% LTV. I suppose it's also possible that they could put up some of their working capital as collateral, since I'm assuming CMHC insurance is out of the question on a property like this and thus S&D will need to keep the LTV below 80%.
Rooster wrote:Given the above, what would, say, stop an S&D affiliate from making the loan and then have S&D default on the loan and have the affiliate exercise its security interest on the land leaving you with no land and an unsecured claim against S&D?
Because we are not getting a "claim" against S&D. We're getting the cash - the proceeds of the mortgage.

If I sell you my house for $300,000, and you took out a mortgage to get that money, and then you subsequently default on that mortgage, what do I care? It's your house now. I've got my $300,000. What happens now is between you and the bank. If they foreclose on you and take the house, that's completely irrelevant to me. They can't come to me and take back the $300,000.
Rooster wrote:This is $80k. You should not be doing this without counsel. I VERY strongly encourage you to retain a seasonned real estate attorney to look over your file and counsel you.
When the paperwork comes in, I will certainly have a real estate lawyer take a quick look and ensure there aren't any obvious "gotchas" buried in the legalese, that's good advice.
Rooster wrote:As to my more general commentary, I did not mean to sound harsh. I stated it because I feel that is the thought process of people that get caught up in these sort of schemes. Again, not to sound harsh, but you are not an innocent victim in this.
I understand what you're saying, but I disagree. How am I not an "innocent victim?" You say it is the "thought process" of people that get caught up in these schemes to presume that 10-12% rates of return are easily achievable. I now know they're not, but I wasn't born knowing that, and they certainly don't teach you that in school, so how was I supposed to know? The Wealthy Barber used a 10% rate of return in his book, Dave Ramsey uses 12% in all his calculations (and he's on TV all the time - he MUST be an expert, right?) - so again, I ask you, how was I supposed to know they were blowing overly optimistic rates of return up my butt? It's a billion-dollar global real estate development company that has an A+ rating by the Better Business Bureau and has been in business for decades. I was surrounded by friendly people in nice suits who were telling me the "opportunity" was a sure-thing.

As I said, I now know better, but only through the painful process of getting burned. I suppose you could make a case that my parents failed to properly prepare me for avoiding such snake-oil schemes, but if they didn't know either, how can it be their fault for not teaching me something they didn't know themselves?
Rooster
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 174
Joined: 16 Jan 2012 13:03

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Rooster »

If it's an outright sale to S&D, then there is no problem (other than enforcing the top up provision as Norbert alluded to).

If it's a sale, then your vote should only be on whether to sell to S&D at the offered price. Nothing else.

The way I understood your posts, S&D would be taking out a loan on the land and distributing proceeds to unitholds while it continues to search for a buyer. S&D states that it would make the loan payments in the interim and pay itself back payments it made when a sale is closed. The balance, if any, goes to the unitholders. This is a completely different scenario. Here, the land you still own is backing S&D's undertaking to repay loan.

Why are they submitting to a vote a proposal to get a mortgage on the land and use proceeds to distribute? If they want to buy, they should seek financing and propose to unitholders a purchase price.

This is again sounding very convoluted which is a hallmark of scams.

Be careful. If they want to buy, they should simply be submitting an offer with clear purchase price payable at closing.

Note that they have been unable to sell this land for 7 years. Why should you believe that it has appreciated in value from your purchase price enabling them to secure financing in an amount equal to your purchase price?
Last edited by Rooster on 02 May 2013 15:11, edited 1 time in total.
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kombat »

Rooster wrote:Note that they have been unable to sell this land for 7 years. Why should you believe that it has appreciated in value from your purchase price enabling them to secure financing in an amount equal to your purchase price?
I'm actually fairly certain it hasn't, but I'm still hopeful.

After we bought into the deal, I did a title search on the property and learned that S&D bought the entire plot of land (113.5 acres) from a farmer for something like $2.5 million.

A few months later, they then chopped it up into 454 quarter-acre "units" that it sold to investors like us. We bought 4 units, for around $19,000 each.

If you run those numbers backwards (454 units at $19,000 each), you'll see that S&D valued the land at $8.6 million. That was the point at which it became clear to me how S&D makes their profits.

We'll see where it goes from here, and I'm still guardedly optimistic, but I'm not holding my breath. I just want out.
Rooster
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 174
Joined: 16 Jan 2012 13:03

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Rooster »

I'm trully sorry you are going through this and wish you good luck.

I'd advise retaining a lawyer to walk through options.
User avatar
kcowan
Veteran Contributor
Veteran Contributor
Posts: 16033
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 20:33
Location: Pacific latitude 20/49

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kcowan »

I am unfamiliar with this thread. Kombat, where is this property that has not appreciated from 2006 through 2013? Is it in Canada? Urban or rural? I suspect it is rural near a major urban centre.
For the fun of it...Keith
Rooster
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 174
Joined: 16 Jan 2012 13:03

Re: How am I doing?

Post by Rooster »

kcowan wrote:I am unfamiliar with this thread. Kombat, where is this property that has not appreciated from 2006 through 2013? Is it in Canada? Urban or rural? I suspect it is rural near a major urban centre.
The real question is whether he paid fmv for it.

When did S&D purchase it for $2M?
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kombat »

kcowan wrote:I am unfamiliar with this thread. Kombat, where is this property that has not appreciated from 2006 through 2013? Is it in Canada? Urban or rural? I suspect it is rural near a major urban centre.
Leduc, AB, right next to the highway, just south of a golf course.
kombat
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 929
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 09:23
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: How am I doing?

Post by kombat »

Rooster wrote:The real question is whether he paid fmv for it.
They told us at the time it was - they even had a certified land appraiser sign off on the valuation. But admittedly, this is where I assume any wrinkles in the plan lie.
Rooster wrote:When did S&D purchase it for $2M?
Less than a year before they subdivided the land and sold the units to investors like us.
Post Reply