Ontario Tax Sale Property Forum
Sheriff Sales / Foreclosures => General Discussion => Topic started by: booman on September 27, 2010, 08:22:22 PM
-
Does anyone have any thoughts on how often the property goes to the second bid ?
-
very very rare and only because the first bidder found out that it was a tire dump or toxic etc etc. Noone is going to put 20% down unless they can close the deal.
-
In this game, you're better off coming in 3rd rather then 2nd.
-
It isn't that rare:
It goes to the second bidder when you've bid twice because you want the property, and you've given yourself a big spread - just in case few others bid. Then you find yourself both first and second. You then walk from your first and close under your second.
It also goes to the second when you've found yourself in first place with a big spread and you buy the second bid.
It also goes to the second when you're the second and the first is way out there. Then you sell your bid to the first and then the first walks from his first and closes under your second.
Done all of these many times.
Just remember to cooperate with one another and we all make $$.
-
It isn't that rare:
It goes to the second bidder when you've bid twice because you want the property, and you've given yourself a big spread - just in case few others bid. Then you find yourself both first and second. You then walk from your first and close under your second.
It also goes to the second when you've found yourself in first place with a big spread and you buy the second bid.
It also goes to the second when you're the second and the first is way out there. Then you sell your bid to the first and then the first walks from his first and closes under your second.
Done all of these many times.
Just remember to cooperate with one another and we all make $$.
I disagree with your last statement. If you are the second bidder and you cooperate with the winner you are rewarding stupid bidding. I have had a winner approach me once to buy my bid. I would have made about 2k but I got more enjoyment by having the winner overpay for his property.
-
what would the process be to either 'buy' or 'sell' the second bid?
-
what would the process be to either 'buy' or 'sell' the second bid?
Why don't you shoot a pm to PFM - I'm sure that he would be happy to provide you with a detailed explanation ;D.
-
haha I can only imagine what his thoughts would be
-
It isn't that rare:
It goes to the second bidder when you've bid twice because you want the property, and you've given yourself a big spread - just in case few others bid. Then you find yourself both first and second. You then walk from your first and close under your second.
It also goes to the second when you've found yourself in first place with a big spread and you buy the second bid.
It also goes to the second when you're the second and the first is way out there. Then you sell your bid to the first and then the first walks from his first and closes under your second.
Done all of these many times.
Just remember to cooperate with one another and we all make $$.
I disagree with your last statement. If you are the second bidder and you cooperate with the winner you are rewarding stupid bidding. I have had a winner approach me once to buy my bid. I would have made about 2k but I got more enjoyment by having the winner overpay for his property.
I hope the shoe is on the other foot next time.
It may not be stupid bidding. Often it is all the other bidders that are 'stupid'. Sometimes you see something that others miss. For example, on that recent Northern Bruce sale, I got the waterfront lot and I was the only bidder. I had no available bid to buy. Now I regret not bidding twice. I really didn't think all of the rest of the bidders would be as dumb as the local planners in not being able to read their own zoning maps. That lot is high and dry and mostly zoned Residential. (just click off the 'Evaluated wetland' layer to see it)
But do as you like. According to this page I'm just a 'Newbie'.
-
It isn't that rare:
It goes to the second bidder when you've bid twice because you want the property, and you've given yourself a big spread - just in case few others bid. Then you find yourself both first and second. You then walk from your first and close under your second.
It also goes to the second when you've found yourself in first place with a big spread and you buy the second bid.
It also goes to the second when you're the second and the first is way out there. Then you sell your bid to the first and then the first walks from his first and closes under your second.
Done all of these many times.
Just remember to cooperate with one another and we all make $$.
I disagree with your last statement. If you are the second bidder and you cooperate with the winner you are rewarding stupid bidding. I have had a winner approach me once to buy my bid. I would have made about 2k but I got more enjoyment by having the winner overpay for his property.
I hope the shoe is on the other foot next time.
It may not be stupid bidding. Often it is all the other bidders that are 'stupid'. Sometimes you see something that others miss. For example, on that recent Northern Bruce sale, I got the waterfront lot and I was the only bidder. I had no available bid to buy. Now I regret not bidding twice. I really didn't think all of the rest of the bidders would be as dumb as the local planners in not being able to read their own zoning maps. That lot is high and dry and mostly zoned Residential. (just click off the 'Evaluated wetland' layer to see it)
But do as you like. According to this page I'm just a 'Newbie'.
You may have far more experience than anyone here (or perhaps not) but we all have our own concepts of what constitutes ethical behaviour. Some believe that anything goes in this game while others have a sense of fair play. I do not know where you draw lines and I do not care. For me, I only do things that permit me to sleep well at night. Bid buying and bid selling is out of bounds for me. When I bid, I make a promise that I intend to keep; it is not something to regret later and attempt to avoid if I bid too high. My word is not for sale and this has paid off in spades over the years.
But we all live our lives differently and to each his or her own.
-
really didn't think all of the rest of the bidders would be as dumb as the local planners in not being able to read their own zoning maps. That lot is high and dry and mostly zoned Residential. (just click off the 'Evaluated wetland' layer to see it)
Sorry Walter
Hate to rain on your parade but you should have gone to the "Proposed County OP" tab ..and selected .schedule C Contraints. Then selected .Provincially Significant Wetland
You will immediately understand why you were the only bidder..you cant build its "Provincially Significant Wetland". You have bought $15520
worth of swamp you can never build on.. ( unless you can convince the province to remove that , good luck)
The "evaluated wetlands" you found should have been a big red flag
Check for yourself
http://216.110.239.69:615/website/BruceCountyLocator/locator.asp (http://216.110.239.69:615/website/BruceCountyLocator/locator.asp)
query properties by roll number 410968000110208
Maybe the rest of us arent so dumb afterall
Heres a lesson people.. The minute you find out you are the ONLY bidder on a property, you should triple check everything before you pay the final amount. This is even more true on a waterfront piece ..flags should have gone up everywhere
-
PFM: I had OTS package and it looked like a protected swamp too but my guess was 1/4th of the land in question was residential (and their package said it was buildable possibly). Later on they sent an email about something...not sure if it was about this property?
-
my last statement wasn't directed towards PFM, his home work was brilliant! (I paid for mine ;D), YES, I found that email, which said it wasn't buildable as no building permit will be available.
-
Guess we won't be hearing from Walter anymore... :o :'( ???
-
In all seriousness, Walter may very well be an experienced buyer.. and has made a mistake.. Good lesson for us all , we can all make expensive mistakes if we become complacent..
-
This isn't zoning, This is provincially significant wetlands.. never change that ..and as per camping..that ain't happening either. You may be right about the neighbour kicking in some cash for the extra frontage and the neighbour wont be a dick as he never bid on it.
-
Oh the tedium.
Here's more valuable info - for free.
I read both the zoning bylaw and the new OP. It is the existing zoning that governs (and that was confirmed by the County Planner). That a building permit is currently available is beyond doubt.
Official Plans guide applications for rezoning, and if you are proposing something that falls within existing zoning, without needing a variance, the OP is not applicable, as it is not triggered.
OP's, and utimately zoning bylaws, have to conform to Provincial policy, but the precise limits of the zoning have to be determined in the field, they cannot use not some vague limit on a crude map. No environmental scientist will declare dry rock alvar as wetland. (It has to be wet, or with hydrophilic soils.)
Besides, there is almost a half acre of this lot outside of the evaluated wetland limit as it stands.
(Now the Province is becoming interested in those alvars though.....)
-
One of the crazy things about this business is one minute you are dealing with pigeons and (still dealing) with loggers and on the next one someone starts worrying about turkeys. If Walterlands is the person I believe he maybe is, as a betting person I would be very careful about betting against him.
This one I stood out like most this year as I digest some interesting events of last year so honestly I don't know the specifics and any comment I would make would show my honest ignorance. We all make mistakes (yes I have too) but it is on the ones that no one else believes you can pull off you can win big. The problem is when you lose; the music you face from the boss. (Not all of us are smart like this guy 8) and can say "Don't hit me dear I am wearing glasses") ;D
He could be an extremely experienced (and consequently dangerous) tax sale buyer even though on this board he shows as a newbie. Not absolutely sure but I believe I had occasion to met him in the flesh at my Marmora and Lake wild time a year ago. If so he had very good advice on a rather unique situation.
Waltersland if you met me a year ago PM me and we can update. (I misplaced your number) Be happy to return the kind advice of a year ago. Or alternatively compare notes about how best to resolve the problems associated with the other side of the coin.
-
Sorry Im betting on conservation authoritys , provincial government and the county
Please be sure to post if you get the building permits
-
Sorry Im betting on conservation authoritys , provincial government and the county
Please be sure to post if you get the building permits
Unfortunately in the vast majority of cases you are right (as you normally are) . It takes a real pro to achieve otherwise.
-
Does this means OTS made a mistake and prevented many people bidding on this land??? ??? I am confused now >:(
-
Does this means OTS made a mistake and prevented many people bidding on this land??? ??? I am confused now >:(
OTS only reports what the town tells them to report . As per the town, they said you cant build under this zoning (EH R2 ) and they said to call to see if it can be rezoned. You will have alot of p*ssed of people if the town ignores both local and provincial wetlands and their own sales material and simply issues a permit. The previous owner ( if still alive ) or his family can also come after them as they have severly devalued the property by saying its non buildable. The family is probably out over 100K
Can you build ? This is the question.. Kevin says he can build and the rest of us and city staff are idiots.
This could be a good study of zoning rules etc and, at a minimum, food for the forum.
what it looks like to me is that:
under town zoning the land has a local environmental hazard label so under the town zoning he is screwed by
28.1 USES PERMITTED
No person shall within any Environmental Hazard Zone use any lot for any purpose except for one or more of
the following uses:
-parks, conservation areas, picnic areas, historic sites
-existing agricultural uses
-boat launching and docking and housing
-pumphouse
-forestry
28.2 STRUCTURES PERMITTED
No person shall within any Environmental Hazard Zone erect, alter or use any building or structure for any
purpose except for one or more of the following:
-non-habitable buildings or structures designed for the purposes of flood and/or erosion control
-boat house
No person shall within any Environmental Hazard Zone use any land or erect, alter or use any building or
structure, except in accordance with the following provisions:
Provisions Flood Control Buildings Boat House
minimum building setback from any lot line 10 m (32.8 ft) 10 m (32.8 ft)
6.1.5 Sewage Disposal Systems
A sewage disposal system is permitted in any zone except the Environmental Hazard (EH) Zones..
The section of the lot that is not EH probably is too small for house and septic
One possible help is
28.4 MINOR ADJUSTMENTS TO ZONE BOUNDARY
Notwithstanding the boundaries designated for the EH-Environmental Hazard Zone shown on Schedule ?A? to
this By-law, minor changes may be made to these boundaries without a formal amendment to this By-law.
Such minor boundary changes must be approved in writing by the Grey-Sauble Conservation Authority and
the Chief Building Official of the Corporation.
So you may be able to fix the local wetland label but then comes the "Provincially Significant wetland" designation and the official plan ( both local official plan and county official plan ( which is over 12 years old) Walter says the official plan has no say as long as you don't rezone, looks like he needs to rezone to remove the EH.
The provincial wetland under county official Plan forbids building without an environmental impact study, which can be a simple 1k report to a comprehensive 250K epic novel and you will need complete support from the conservation authority, the township, the county and the province. There is not a simple yes/no with Environmental impact studies. If the town wants you to build the study proves its OK, If they don't want you to build ( IE they read you called the staff stupid or you are arrogant , condescending or annoying to them) then the same study means you cant build.
This is where the fact he is known locally may be good or bad, depends on his relationship with the town
The alternate route is for Kevin to have to province and the townships rezone to remove the EH zoning and have MNR remove provincially significant wetland designation . Then do a official plan amendment. Of course conservation authorities known for simply giving up conservation land without a fight..( good luck)
An additional problem may be that under the R2 he requires 114.8 ft of frontage ( I presume there is no sewers or city water) He has a hundred. As this lot combined with the lot beside under the planning act and he has bought only half of the LT Pin , Did he lose the existing lot rights when the lots combined ( could be over 38 years ago) ? They are still separate by assessment but not by land titles. Again it is the towns call, They can treat it anyway they feel. If Anyone knows the answer please let us know (with references if possible)
At a minimum you probably need a variance which will trigger the officlal plans. If he spent 10k and bought both lots he would have 225 ft and this point would be null.
Can he build ? , Only time will tell. I doubt it but I have been wrong before. If he manages a permit without jumping thru insane hoops he has done very very well on the buy and has friends in the town. ( deals are becoming very rare ) If not, will he lose money? Probably not as he should be able to sell to the neighbour and still make a few dollars or at least break even as long as he doesnt spend a pile on a rezoning attempt.
-
Does this means OTS made a mistake and prevented many people bidding on this land??? ??? I am confused now >:(
I believe OTS tries as much as possible to avoid mistakes (bad for business) and they are contientious. (see your comment about email) The problem is that these situations are tricky and even some of us cannot agree even with all information available. I know the owner of OTS regularly monitors this board but as yet have not been able to figure out what name he is operating under or if he posts.
Overall all the problem is getting worse not better. In my own home hunting ground of Trent Hills they just did a consolidated rezoning and none of us locals including real estate agents knows what it will mean. They have effectively downzoned hundreds of properties with a new zoning category of what I will call "environmentally protected lite".
Bottom line is when you finally get property in a tax sale get it rezoned. In effect use it or lose (the use of) it I have several properties that have the rezoning completed (I do it in winter) and more underway after local elections and I believe under the new zoning bylaws I might no longer get it.
The other problem it can pose is that the buildable area of your property can be greatly reduced possibly to a size it is no longer workable once you allow for setbacks and well and septic needs. I have one 4 acre rural parcel that started out as 2/3 buildable and 1/3 not buildable. After 5 iterations which include delineating the environmentally protected areas with a GPS on the survey I will have now about 15% buildable. As a result I am very careful about buying tax sale property under an acre plus in area which causes real problems with waterfront property.
-
This could be a good study of zoning rules etc and, at a minimum, food for the forum.
Sometimes I feel like an idiot with PFM's eloquent discourses on zoning and just about everything else, and wonder as to why I like all the young bulls on the forum would ever doubt him.
Then I realize as we come into to fall we are entering the traditional season for the (mating) rut for creatures like moose and deer when youngsters like myself get frisky and we have to be put into our place by the senior bulls on the forum.
In any herd they can only be a couple of top alpha males and after a superb discourse like that, suitably chastened I will return to the bachelor herd. My only problem is he like the other top bulls in this forum cover their tracks so well I will never know when I am competing against them. Guess I will have to stick to the scraps and know my place as a slum lot lord in the down and out areas east of Toronto.
Nicely said and done as always.
-
This thread is becoming very interesting and informative as well. PFM's zoning explanation cleared my doubts and I applaud him!. Dave, I agree on "an acre thumb rule for buildables" and thanks for the hints/experience. :)
I am hoping to learn something new if Walter manages to beat the system?...
(I would appreciate if Frank 8) could share his valuable opinion?)
-
OK, so I'm back.
What are you guys talking about....
Netpred, you are right, the maps are often wrong...seen it many times, and it sometimes requires surveys and onsite meetings with conservation and planning officials to get it cleared.
If Walter says it is high and dry, and he knows where the survey bars are...and he is satisfied, then as long as the planners say he can build...he should - quickly - in case they change their mind.
Perfect example...I bought a three acre property in the near north a few years ago on a tax sale. It had 302 feet of frontage. I asked the town planner if I could split it...prior to the sale...and he was telling people that the minimum was 200 feet, and he would photo-copy a page from the local Official Plan stating just that. When I was in to see him about it, I noticed that the big book he took out of his drawer had a stamp across the cover of it...'D R A F T'. A little digging and I discovered that the plan was under appeal, and that it had not been blessed by the Minister...the old plan was still in force, and it only required 150 feet. Day of the sale, I checked to make sure that it was still not approved...and increase my bid to ensure that I got it. I was declared the winner at the sale, and trotted right over to the planners office to file a land division application. After getting speedy approval (since I was right), then surveying and legal work to effect the split, I ended up with two pieces.
Moral of the story...the Planning officials aren't always right. 8)
-
I am hoping to learn something new if Walter manages to beat the system?...
Moe: The issue here is that not all bidders have to beat the system but the recognition that some bidders have a better bidding position then others. They have an option of a partial win that not all bidders will enjoy. Let me script a scenario.
The person I met last fall was a very long term player in tax sale properties. (my belief is possibly 30 plus years.) He also tended to hold properties rather then flip them; in subdivisions and for land holdings he felt had long term value. He really knew the regs and I believe he must have been or still was in some form of land development or possibly worked as a planner.
In addition to knowledge it is possible he had an existing property position in the area. For purposes of my illustration let us assume it was a nice interior buildable lot. Now lets go back to PFM's work and extract some. (In this business I always say the devil is in the details).
28.1 USES PERMITTED
No person shall within any Environmental Hazard Zone use any lot for any purpose except for one or more of the following uses:
-parks, conservation areas, picnic areas, historic sites
-existing agricultural uses
-boat launching and docking and housing
-pumphouse
-forestry
28.2 STRUCTURES PERMITTED
No person shall within any Environmental Hazard Zone erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose except for one or more of the following:
-non-habitable buildings or structures designed for the purposes of flood and/or erosion control
-boat house
The regulations permit a boat house. So with his interior lot he now has a boat house.
For $15,000 I can justify that investment. While not common they have value particularly if you have a cottage lot on an Island or an interior lot. The combination may make something really valuable. "affordable, buildable" waterfront. I know of at least one member of this board who would be very happy to pick up a couple of boat house lots in the right location(s).
Gee I wonder who that would be ???.
-
When I was in to see him about it, I noticed that the big book he took out of his drawer had a stamp across the cover of it...'D R A F T'.
Moral of the story...the Planning officials aren't always right. 8)
Moral of the story modified: Frank is smart enough to buy glasses with mirrors so he can look over the planning officials paperwork from across the desk.
Now I have to find the same eyeglass or is that spyglass firm. ;D
-
I am hoping to learn something new if Walter manages to beat the system?...
Moe: The issue here is that not all bidders have to beat the system but the recognition that some bidders have a better bidding position then others. They have an option of a partial win that not all bidders will enjoy. Let me script a scenario.
The person I met last fall was a very long term player in tax sale properties. (my belief is possibly 30 plus years.) He also tended to hold properties rather then flip them; in surveys and for land holdings he felt had long term value. He really knew the regs and I believe he must have been or still was in some form of land development or possibly worked as a planner.
In addition to knowledge it is possible he had an existing property position in the area. For purposes of my illustration let us assume it was a nice interior buildable lot. Now lets go back to PFM's work and extract some. (In this business I always say the devil is in the details).
28.1 USES PERMITTED
No person shall within any Environmental Hazard Zone use any lot for any purpose except for one or more of the following uses:
-parks, conservation areas, picnic areas, historic sites
-existing agricultural uses
-boat launching and docking and housing
-pumphouse
-forestry
28.2 STRUCTURES PERMITTED
No person shall within any Environmental Hazard Zone erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose except for one or more of the following:
-non-habitable buildings or structures designed for the purposes of flood and/or erosion control
-boat house
The regulations permit a boat house. So with his interior lot he now has a boat house.
For $15,000 I can justify that investment. While not common they have value particularly if you have a cottage lot on an Island or an interior lot. The combination may make something really valuable. "affordable, buildable" waterfront. I know of at least one member of this board who would be very happy to pick up a couple of boat house lots in the right location(s).
Gee I wonder who that would be ???.
Dave
You were sharp enough to spot the boat house...and dam I could use one of those too. Just on a different lake.
-
Mostly just a lurker here but.... wow I learned a lot from this thread. You all made me laugh too.... Thanks for the education.
-
I've spoken with "Waltersland" previously and can confirm he is a tax sale pro. He's won more tax sales than I have years in my life. congrats and good luck on the win.
Really interesting thread