Norfolt bidders, contact me to SAVE lots of MONEY !!!

[g2020]

You sound more like a caveman than a mountainman.

[worldjohn]

The answer is that the high bigger and second bidder would time it so that nothing like that could happen.  And in the one in a million chance it did happen, then ethically the treasurer should give the high bidder the deposit back.
are you the high bidder? Yes or no
I asked the treasurer for the amounts and names of the bidders and she just sent me the amounts.
does anyone know the name of the high bidder?

[Mountainman]

I am Mountainman.

The cost is the highlands of the Mountainman. You know of what I speak. You are wiser than appears.

But first, you must tell me, void or voidable? Speak to the one you call C##per. You know of what I speak. Mountainman is not stupid. Embrance, but do not fear Mountainman. Rejoice in knowing all.

Mountainman dwells not in caves, but in the hills to the west of the first paper communication. It is the truth, number of the greatest. I say no more. The wisest will know.

Mountainman travels to the valley to teach, but few valley people learn.

Mountainman speaks the truth, but few understand. Worldjohn understands some, but not all. Call the one I ask, but before the high sol after the day of birth, but not later, the collector awaits Mountainman.

I speak only then and only if the answer is correct and in public.

[Jayz]

I think mountainman has a legitimate question and concern. And I think g2020 has answered the question in the very beginning - Treasurer's discretion! The municipality has the right to keep your deposit should the highest bidder default after 14 days, and even if the property gets redeemed before the 2nd highest bidder comes in and takes over the title. If that happens unfortunately, you may still fight to get your deposit back if the judge sympathizes. I tend to think municipalities would not do that, after all they are not in the business to make money by keeping your deposit. But you never know.

[Mountainman]

I am Mountainman.

You know the question, but not the answer.

Tell me this, void or voidable?

Tell me this, will valley collector have sympathy for Mountainman who not pay his obligation?

Tell me this, will valley collector not feast on new harvest?

Tell me this, will valley judge have sympathy for Mountainman who not pay his obligation?

Tell me this, will valley lawyer not barter large with Mountainman with no certainty of the tides?

Tell me this, in or out?

Tell me this, fortune or misfortune?

Tell me this, using valley speak, void or voidable?

Worldjohn, do as I say and ask the one I speak of - he will know.

There is not 3 revolutions of the orb until Mountainman visits the collector to make good the obligation.

[jt]

One other thing you might want to consider - this sounds an awful lot like collusion.  Can the results of a sale be set aside if the bidders have engaged in collusion so that less is paid for the property than the fair value?  Before you go down this road, you might want to talk to a lawyer.

[Mountainman]

I am Mountainman.

You are wise new one - and coming soon to the answer.

Read the words of the valley people who make the rules. The word "fraud" has no place in the Mountain regions but does in the valley. Seek out the words and find the word I speak of.

There is another word that I shall not speak of but gives the question, void or voidable?

From that word does arise the discretion of the collector that many speak of here. Find that that word and ponder the meaning.

Again, void or voidable?

There are but two, and slightly more, revolutions until the collector is made whole.

[g2020]

jt raises a very good point, especially if the treasurer is party to the collusion that effectively takes money from the person losing their property. That is the nice thing about this blog - different points of view. Pfm1010 once raised the issue about helping your competition. His view was that by helping the high bidder you are helping your competion and it would be better to let him suffer. The fact is that the property is assessed at 57k and the high bid was 60k. Left the way it is, the owner gets a very fair price, and the competition takes a beating. Different points of view. Bravo! As I mentioned before, double bidding (putting in two bids yourself, appropriately spaced) can on rare occasions be a good strategy, and there is no collusion.

[Mountainman]

You are wise, elder one. I have watched from my den in the Mountains to the west as you have made your journeys. To the west of the water where the written paper first crossed. Soon, I will go back. But only 2 revolutions left.

Beware some of the wise. They speak twice and only to make great reward. The truths are not easy to find. Be assured, Mountainman speaks only the truth, but the truth that you must find. I show the path, but not the gold.

Look closer at the written rules and ponder, void or voidable? Those words do not appear, but those words are the question. You must find the gold yourselves. Mountainman is not false.

Worldjohn, is Mountainman wrong to barter twice or thrice, to sow the seeds that harvest more?

[Jayz]

Fair value? No kidding. You are coming to the wrong place. Ain't we people here supposed to cheer when somebody wins a taxsale a penny over but still significantly lower than the market?

"fraud" is also overstated in here. It's all about tactic, people. The Act does not prevent you from putting in two bids; the Act can't stop you from surrendering your winning bid and taking over somebody else's. Those who are morally high-standard-ed should think why they are interested in taxsale in the first place - taking away properties from those who are "unfortunate".

To mountainman, first of all, can you stop that "I am Mountainman" in the beginning of each every of your post? Your forum name tells it. And I think we've all gotten it by far your name is "mountainman" although some people had gotten it wrong by calling you "caveman" in the beginning . Secondly, yes, there is risk for doing what worldjohn suggested. But wouldjohn also said it the chance for the property being redeemed after 14 days and before the 2nd comes in is slim. So if you are the highest bidder and you wanna save some money, talk to worldjohn directly and privately to work out a deal that's mutually beneficial. One suggestion may be, since worldjohn is in it for money as well (of course he/she deserves it for what he/she does), he/she may compensate partially for your loss of deposit if that rare incident happens.

[Jayz]

My apology to mountainman. You posted while I was still typing. I withdraw what I wrote in the beginning of the last par of my previous post.

I have nothing but compliment this time. Finally we have a poet on the forum.

[jt]

Jayz - I agree with you that the act does not prevent you from putting in two bids.  G2020 is correct - there is no collusion here because you can't have collusion with yourself.  I'm not sure that I agree with your statement - "the Act can't stop you from surrendering your winning bid and taking over somebody else's".  At this point, there is arguably collusion - if you do a quick canlii search for "tax sale" and collusion, you will find a number of cases that suggest that collusion is grounds for overturning a tax sale result.  You are allowed to withdraw your bid, but it is the agreement with another bidder that might create a problem.  When the two high bidders enter into an agreement that says that one of them will withdraw their bid and cash is changing hands, it sounds to me like collusion/bid rigging.

Here is the definition of bid rigging from the competition bureau:

Bid-rigging occurs when two or more persons agree that, in response to a call for bids or tenders, one or more of them will:

not submit a bid;
withdraw a bid; or
submit a bid arrived at by agreement.

http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/03152.html

I'm not trying to take the moral highroad here - just pointing out the possibility the land owner might challenge the sale.  Maybe this is an unlikely possibility, but I think it is a risk nonetheless.  Maybe the risk is minimal enough to be worth the possibility of the 20k savings. 

[Mountainman]

The new one is fast approaching the truth, Do not stop now new one, for you are close.

But look not yet at the rule of the valley judge. Seek instead the rule maker himself.

The words were chosen for a purpose.

The question remains, void or voidable?

The new one, you are working hard and learning well.

You have learned of these words, in the place where I go.

It is not here but where I sometimes preach.

No doubt you are in disbelief.

The cost is great, the gold awaits.

What is left is your ability to show.

So show it now, go back to the rules themselves.

This is the truth.

For I am

Mountainman

[g2020]

Just to follow up on jt's thread. Yes, mountainman's too, but specifically the aspect of overturning a tax sale and voidable proceedings. I once bought a block of landlocked waterfront near downtown Collingwood. I was the high bidder at 20k and the only other tender was for 10k. I was approached by the second high tenderer, who was a young solicitor who had done his thesis on Tax Sales and at the time was buying tax sale property full time. The second high tenderer had a rather complex proposal as opposed to the simple assignment envisioned by worldjohn, and standard at the time. The 10k bidder gave me an agreement of purchase and sale for 13k, conditional upon him being the successful tax sale purchaser. This way the treasurer is not involved since the tax deed is being engrossed to the actual bidder. I defaulted and purchased from the second high. It took me years to really appreciate the methodology, but I now do. The treasurer was not asked to do anything. I defaulted and had a clear audit trail for CRA to scrutinize my loss. The second high bidder had a recorded sale for easy scrutiny by CRA of his profit. Today there would also be HST clarification so that there would be no future recourse by CRA on registrant/non-registrant liabilities. The gain was split equally with both me and the second high ahead by 3k, but I received a current 4k loss and a deferred 7k gain. Having said all this I would not do it today. In the last few months there have been too many redemtions of the good properties after the sale. I would bid an amount such that I would be so excited to have gotten the property that my only focus would be to get it closed ASAP, rather than lose it. Of course I am scaling back and in the next twelve months my goal is to get no more than one property, so I am very selective, and very very well researched. Hopefully this will help some of you to think through the cost/benefit of buying/selling tenders. Jt has been very helpful, and his reference to CANLII is important. I welcome him/her aboard with a well deserved applaud.

[ErnestBidder]

  Folks, you have to watch your butt on these deals. I have been told that some municipalities will let their lawyer hold all the bids for days & days (almost 2 weeks the first time this came to my attention), to make his informed final decision that the perceived top bidder had properly won the property, and will then, and only then, allow the deed to be issued & registered. I was SO GLAD to be 6th in line at this particular bid opening, the final terms of which were only announced after all bids were opened.

  As well, I've been told that a late redemption is good right up to the second that the deed is registered, so you can be on the threshold of getting the deed in hand, only to be told "sorry"! After checking with other municipal offices, I made it a priority to be ready to close the deal immediately after the bids were opened, and, after that, never bid at a municipality where this practice was standard. I also refused to bid where the staff were unwilling to issue a deed within 24 hours, although I tried for same day.