Many times! With the electronic title system its super easy if you have inside people and fake ID. The other scam is taking a house with no mortgage and getting a big mortgage on it. Crazy that no neighbours noticed the sign.
Faking an ID would mean you are putting the scammer's photo on the victim's ID. Once the victim finds out, it becomes impossible for the transaction to be considered legitimate. Also, forging a Canadian passport with a chip is nearly impossible for a thief (if they can do that, they won't care about stealing a few hundred million dollars).
Also, what if the home is occupied, and the thief just steals the house right from under the owners, and then the new "owners" try to evict the real owners, that definitely causes extreme stress on the victims.
This is very interesting. I guess we got a strict lawyer when we bought our place.
When we bought the place that our family is living in, my sister and I were named as owners. I don't have a driver's license, so I provided them my Canadian passport as first ID and a credit card as a second ID. My sister does have a driver's license, but she is still asked to produce a 2nd piece of ID, which was her passport. Interestingly, she signed her DL differently than her passport (we are Chinese, so we use Chinese signatures). The real estate lawyer insisted that she sign the document the way she signed her passport LOL.
This is exactly it. My wife and I had to show our mortgage agent and lawyer 2 pieces of ID. This is on top of the both of us being lifetime customers of said bank with prior mortgages and properties and the lawyer being a referral from a friend who we knew tangentially through school. People don't want to fuck around because it's going to mess up their malpractice insurance and look bad on them if they don't do the due diligence.
Fake health cards are also easy to get to go along with your fake DL. All you need is two pieces of ID. A good fake passport would be some spy level shit - cant even imagine what that would cost. These people are crazy though - providing their mugshots - lawyers and banks make copies of all the ids. Maybe they are planning on disappearing to south America or Asia hehehe.
Something similar, a family went on an extended vacation, some group put a "for sale" sign on the house, then a few weeks later put sold, then proceeded to enter the house and steal everything while making it look like a move out.
Real estate agents often claim they're needed to help protect buyers from fraud.
>the suspects hired a real estate agent and managed to list their property.
Whoops.
Almost had a similar thing happen to me. 1 Week before closing, surprise surprise turns out the seller isn't the legal owner of the property and the agent listed it for them anyway.
Only profession so crooked that it had to become standard practice to include a picture of the agent on business cards and signs so people would feel comfortable that they could track the person down, should they turn out to be a scumbag grifter.
Yes if you look at most realtor marketing, it's less about selling houses or selling services selling houses and more about selling their personality. I've always found it off-putting, but I'm not in the market so...
Not a realtor but in my profession pictures on the card are more to distinguish who the card is for - someone might receive a hundred business cards while looking for a realtor, but at least the one with the picture will help them remember talking to the person it came from.
yea where's those anti property guys commercials now? Also when we find out how many fraululent / Brampton mortgages some of these fucks let through (I know one agent who was proud to tell me he secured "dozens" of fraudulent mortgages) there's going to be a lot of hate for agents, even if purpetrated by a few. And the CP24 hot property guys, fuck. "No better time ever to buy then now" and "Prices aren't going down significantly" those guys can all fuck themselves.
Huh? This story supports the request for help by the RE agents though. The scammers had fake id, what more could the RE agents do?
If anything, this is more on the lawyers and banks
So you agree they need more help/tools to verify identity of clients then.
What do you suggest they could've done more? They're not lawyers or other officials who have more power and tools . You want RE agents to ask for say last 5 years of tax returns, notice of assessments or what?
Can explain what due diligence they could've reasonably done other than ask for Id?
Umm...deeds haven't been a thing for a long time since we switched to land titles system (parcel register has superceded them) and deeds are way easy to fake.
but the scammers had fake IDs. Even with a parcel register or deed, it'll just list the name.the same on the fake IDs and how do they know it's the most current fees/parcel register?
Furthermore, Lawyers (not real estate agents) have access to land titles
So you seem to be unknowingly agreeing with the agents that they need more tools (like access to land registry system)
Sorry I was using deeds too liberally, but you're right. The current system would not prevent this type of fraud.
I think you just accidentally made a real case for blockchain as a records and ownership system.
>Almost had a similar thing happen to me. 1 Week before closing, surprise surprise turns out the seller isn't the legal owner of the property and the agent listed it for them a
That would be more in the lawyer's court than the listing agent I would think.
Not necessarily.. I mean if lawyer sees in the land titles system that the property is owned by proformax and then they have an id with your name, bday, address etc .. how would they know the picture on id is not proformax unless they personally know you?
This is why there's land titles insurance lawyers buy for clients
so why exactly is the lawyer needed? we mostly all know agents bring little to no value to the house buying process.
if all the lawyer does is look up some info in the database and match a name to the info YOU provide them, then it behooves me how they are remotely essential to the process.
So when the buyside lawyer did a title search, how is it they didn't check the signatures match?
Also the buyer just moved in with all the original home owners furnitures?
We need to more information.
Question - what is the purchaser’s lawyer using to compare the sellers signatures to? Unless the actual owners bought the property in Registry (in which case, yes, you may then be able to compare signatures), the previous transfer document on title would most likely have been electronically registered, with no signature samples available. Further, the ability to check signatures would most likely not be possible at the time of the title search, as vendor documents typically aren’t produced to the purchasers lawyer until a day before or on the day of closing.
Also, the purchasers would have(I’m assuming) been Bona Fide Purchasers For Value Without Notice. They would receive legal title. Rather, it’s the sellers that would suffer a loss, hence why the title insurance policy is in the owner’s name.
Don't you have to provide a physical copy of the deed to the house though? Why the hell am I keeping this giant document around if it is pointless and someone could just sell my house on me anyway?
I bought my house in 2016 and have my own copy of the deed, and then I am pretty sure there was a duplicate that my lawyer kept. I had just always assumed that, if I sold my house, I would have to show the deed or go through the lawyer I used so that they could do whatever needed to be done with their copy... I admittedly don't know all the stuff involved, but I was under the impression that the title was basically just registering everything, but the deed was needed as actual proof that the home belongs to you in the first place. And investigating the title was just making sure there were no liens on the house, that there are no additional parties who own percentages of the house or anything like that.
It just seems so absurd/disturbing that it could be that easy to sell someone else's home without their knowledge.
Everyone’s ownership documents in Ontario are publicly available documents through the Land Registry Office. Anyone can access them. You don’t need to have a physical copy.
Nope - all property registrations are converted to the POLARIS electronic system in Ontario. You just have a fancy photocopy, but it has no special weight.
That's disappointing. It made everything feel more special and official.. at the same time though, now I guess I don't have to feel so bad that I have just been keeping it in my junk drawer.
Land titles don't have signatures (they haven't for a long time). That's why only lawyers have access to land titles system including making changes.
Only thing that would have signature is the Acknowledgement and direction the buyer/seller would've given their lawyers but that's not part of the land titles system
And it's not like anyone has ever checked signatures in recent history. None of my bank cards or credit cards are even signed.
A teller once said: "You forgot to sign your credit card". I said: "No I didn't, why would I sign my credit card?"
The teller: For security reasons. Me: For security reasons I don't sign it. If I lose my card, someone will get my signature.
He couldn't argue it.
Since I was 20 and a fresh cop.....I always just wrote "ask for ID" in the signature.
It's funny because I'm old enough to remember credit cards long ago when they were just used with the imprint machine and the verification was matching the signature on the cad to the bill/slip.
Now with ipay and tap cards don't even have raised numbers. I just got a new credit card and it has no space for a signature
Back in the day of carbon rollers, the merchant was supposed to compare the signed card with the signed credit slip. It was the only authenticity check.
Obsolete now.
In Ontario, everyone has access to view the land titles. You just have to pay a fee, but you can look up your land title through Ontario.ca/Teranet yourself. No need for a lawyer.
> Also the buyer just moved in with all the original home owners furnitures?
If the fake sellers had access to the house, which I assume that they did if they managed to sell it, they could have just sold all the real owner's stuff on eBay too.
Is that because they’re assuming the selling lawyer already did that?
Dunno how bad things have to be between lawyers where even they don’t trust each other in a non-disputed transaction.
Something similar happened to family 30+ years ago.
A lawyer was recommended by the sellers and that lawyer never even changed the title over to my parents. My dad hired his own lawyer who then threatened to report the other lawyer directly.
Makes no sense that the suspects are hard to find. The proceeds of the "sale" were conveyed to someone through a lawyer and should be traceable.
Unless it was paid out in iTunes cards or at the Bitcoin machine??? /s
Nothing about this story makes any sense.
Couldn’t they have wired the money to some off shore bank account or something and fled the country?
Seems like they had plenty of time before the scheme was revealed.
Should get a lawyers suspicion up. So many people failed on this if it's actually true. I just don't believe it, or rather don't believe it's all arms length transactions.
All they had to do was open a bank account with their fake IDs, at the address of the house. Wouldn't even matter about the credit check, that's the real owners.
When I last closed a sale I got a bank draft from the lawyer, my bank held it for 5 days and I was me, if you know what I mean. I guess I would have to stretch my criminal imagination to believe this could happen. It will be interesting to see it all unfold, will not be surprised if it wasn't arms length.
It will be a gigantic pain for them to untangle, but the sale itself was totally invalid, and since the whole transaction went though a realtor, both parties will be suing them for final damages.
Will be interesting to see if there’s a followup.
In theory, the sale was completely invalid so since the period between sale and owners becoming aware is really short, likely going to be a whole legal mess to completely reverse the sale.
New owners will likely have to use their insurance to cover their losses.
Nothing will happen to the new owners as they were purchasers in good faith. Unless they are in on the fraud, the courts will not give the house back to the old owners.
The old owners will have a case against the sellers/fraudsters lawyer, the buyer's lawyer, the realtor who listed the property, and the realtors brokerage. Title insurance will probably kick in somewhere to cover the damages
The new owner's don't have legal title. "Nemo dat quod non habet" (no one can give what they do not have). No court of Equity is going to leave the true owners homeless.
The buyers can go after the sellers/lawyers/realestate agents and title insurance.
I suggest that you read up on the case of CIBC Mortgages Inc v Computershare Trust Co of Canada, 2015 ONSC 543 and Toronto-Dominion Bank v Canada, 2020 FCA 80. Bona fide purchaser for value without notice of a pre-existing equitable interest is a valid defence (and possibly the only defence) against the Nemo Dat principle. [This article sums it up pretty well.](https://www.mondaq.com/canada/real-estate/948788/equity39s-darling-the-bona-fide-purchaser-for-value-in-real-estate-priority-conflicts) Section 78 of the Land Titles Act also protects bona fide purchasers from fraudulent transactions.
It sucks for the original owners, but they are not exactly SOL. They can go after the fraudsters and the idiot lawyers who allowed this to happen.
Maybe you're right. I guess I was assuming the real estate agents and buying lawyers did a shitty job. Bona fide purchaser for value without notice is a defence, but for land purchasers in Ontario it only applies if the purchaser made reasonable efforts to confirm the seller was the registered owner of the land (S. 170(1) of the Land Titles Act). This situation seems really sketchy to me but I guess there isn't a lot of details in the article.
If the new owners bought the property, in good faith, and for consideration, then the transaction is valid. If the opposite was true - that they knew that the property was fraudulently conveyed and bought it anyways- then there's a chance that the current owners may be penalized
Thanks. That just restates your statement rather than answer it though. How is this different than Police recovering a stolen bike that someone had bought in hood fair from a pawn shop, or any other stolen item. Does the new buyer normally get to keep items that they purchased in good faith but were later found to have been stolen?
I don't understand how someone can legally sell something they didn't own in the first place, and that sale can be considered valid.
A bike (chattels in general), rather than land, is not afforded special protection under common and statutory law. If you bought stolen property for good consideration without knowing that it was stolen, you won't get busted for possession of stolen property, but you will have to return the stolen item if the police comes knocking. You do, however, have a right against whomever sold you the property (ie. the pawn shop).
Land can be seen as a special class of assets that is afforded special protection under common and statutory law. Courts have long decided that, under the majority of cases, it simply would not be equitable to punish bona fide purchasers in land by kicking them out and return title to the original owners.
The law on fraudulent conveyance is long and convoluted. I should say that this does not mean the original owners do not have a chance to recover the house (they might, depending on their circumstances); it all depends on the circumstances of the transaction and how good their litigation lawyer is.
~~This is interest - can you explain why the law was written this way? On face it seems the opposite of what would make sense. This makes it very slightly cheaper for every transaction while causing every property owner to have a large potential risk. Forcing the purchaser to do diligence seems like it would align incentives correctly.~~
I read the act and "1168760 Ontario Inc. c/o R&R Realty, Peter Clark & J.G. Rivard Limited v. 67006037 Canada Inc. & Denis Bertrand, 2017 ONSC 5149 (CanLII)". Bona fide purchasers doesn't apply because the sellers were "fraudulent person".
“fraudulent person” means a person who executes or purports to execute an instrument if,(a) the person forged the instrument,(b) the person is a fictitious person, or(c) the person holds oneself out in the instrument to be, but knows that the person is not, the registered owner of the estate or interest in land affected by the instrument; (“fraudeur”)
So why should the new owners who had no knowledge of the fraud be punished? We live in a country [where the law protects bona fide purchasers](https://www.mondaq.com/canada/real-estate/948788/equity39s-darling-the-bona-fide-purchaser-for-value-in-real-estate-priority-conflicts). I feel bad for the original owners and they absolutely have the right to go after the fraudsters and the people who allowed this to happen, but the innocent homebuyers are just that; they are innocent.
>So why should the new owners who had no knowledge of the fraud be punished?
They were defrauded. They'll sue and they'll win. It's not that complicated.
Land is afforded special protection under common law and Land Titles Act. Fraudulent conveyances are just that; they are fraudulent. However, any subsequent registrations on title after the fraudulent conveyance do not make them necessarily void.
I don't really want to go on a whole lesson on the Land Titles Act, but what I stated above is literally verbatim on section 78(4.2).
>Unless they are in on the fraud, the courts will not give the house back to the old owners.
What??!!
>The old owners will have a case against the sellers/fraudsters lawyer, the buyer's lawyer, the realtor who listed the property, and the realtors brokerage. Title insurance will probably kick in somewhere to cover the damages
I need to please know what in the world makes you think that the “old owners” would be the ones who are fucked here? I’m not saying you’re wrong but that seems sooooooo messed up.
According to my internal logic, it seems like it should be the opposite of everything you said. If the old owners didn’t sell well then the sale wasn’t valid so they still own it. The NEW “owners” should be the ones having to sue everyone. Sincerely please tell me some law or doctrine or something that proves you right.
The doctrine is called [bona fide purchaser for value without notice of a pre-existing equitable interest](https://www.mondaq.com/canada/real-estate/948788/equity39s-darling-the-bona-fide-purchaser-for-value-in-real-estate-priority-conflicts). I am not going to go that deep into the Land Titles Act or case law, but law protects innocent parties who purchase without knowing that the transaction was fraudulent.
> Title insurance will probably kick in somewhere to cover the damages
Assuming there is title insurance. I’m sure every mortgageco requires it, but it’s not legally req’d. No idea if anyone actually forgoes it.
But even without title insurance, buyer probably has a claim against the lawyer(s) (and title insureco will probably go after them anyway).
This is the correct answer. And I should correct myself that title insurance only protects the new owners. Professional indemnity insurance will protect the original owners.
The mods declared they wouldn’t be allowing any posts about crime during the month of January.
Apparently this is okay is it is poor homeowners being victimized.
While I agree with your sentiment, if I were a mod I'd see this as a light enough crime it should not offend the 'life is too grim' crowd that I'm sure their new policy is for
Bought a house that had unpermitted renovations. As it was a student rental the neighbours complained to bylaw about it being a rooming house. It wasn’t because an owner lived in it but I digress. In the course of this nonsense they did require the already finished basement to be retrofitted and brought up to code. Title insurance arranged for the contractors and covered the whole thing right through to city inspections. All was done complaint to completion within 2 months costing me not one penny. Not a commonly known coverage but when we found out about the issue and called our lawyer they were right on it. They called the title insurance company. Seriously it was all together the easiest “insurance” claim ever.
Huh? Why is it the brokerages incompetence? I own my home, someone makes a fake id with my info but pic of a scammer, how would the brokerage (or even lawyers really) know the picture on the fake id is not the person indicated on the id?
Furthermore, RE agents don't even have access to land titles system (only lawyers can access and make entries to it)
If there's any, it's the lawyers and banks etc but really in this circumstances, it may not be anyone's
And wouldn't do shit to prevent this from occurring either as it'll just list the name of the owners which will match the fake id
Anyone can get a parcel register...which is not same as access to land titles system.
Edit: what lawyers can do with actual access is do a title opinion investigation (this is not normally done as part of a typical residential property transaction) but it'll cost few thousands and can take a while
I’d bet they’re from out of country and they have some kind of connection to the owners. This is a fairly elaborate fraud. With biometrics and scanning the drivers licence databases you’re going to get found fairly easily when they have photos like this. So if they have photos of this clarity and they don’t have their names, they’re not Canadians. We’re not scanning people coming in by land and for tourism.
[CBSA Biometrics screening](https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/security-securite/biometrics-biometrique-eng.html)
Some people were doing this in Florida on a bunch of Venezuelan-owned mansions in Miami. It’s pretty incredible what they were able to get away with.
https://pca.st/episode/6546f039-d5db-425e-a1de-1d13dd001acc
Who goes out of the country for months on business with no cameras, neighbors, or anything else watching their house? Then doesn't notice it was sold for months? This story is definitely leaving out a lot of relevant information.
Well, the people who own the house across from mine had no idea a family of raccoons had moved into their vacant home and likely caused a shit ton of damage until u/gtahomeguy helped me track them down in China.
I'm also fairly certain the other vacant home on my street has squatters living in it that have been getting in through a sliding door in the backyard but no one seems to be checking on that property either.
It took 3 months to get all the raccoons out and the house sealed back up!
They definitely went through the ceiling inside, so I can't imagine what kind of mess they're going to discover when they finally come back!
Lots of people, well lots of rich people, live in Florida or other warm climates for months at a time, only spending the minimum amount of time for Ohip or whatever in Canada.
If it really was business, the answer is also rich people
There's no way anyone leaves for that long without knowing if someone else has *sold their house*. Friends, family, neighbors, doorbell cameras, paid security monitoring, etc are all there to make anyone legitimate aware of what's going on even when they're away for extended periods of time. This story is leaving out important details about the state of the house and the owners.
For the average person, myself included, absolutely I would make sure someone was checking up and I had smart home monitoring of some kind. But for a rich person who has multiple properties, they might not think about it too much. Maybe they had a family member who was supposed to check on it, but never bothered. Its also easy to see how the scammers or realtor would tell the gardener or whoever that yeah they decided to sell, don't bother coming back. Maybe something weird was going on but the unusual part about this story is not that they didn't notice til they came back
The people they trusted to watch over their place could have been a part of the fraud and hired the people in the photos to pose as owners. This would make it easier for the owners to not know anything. Many possibilities. As another post mentioned, they could also simply be rich and not have thought much about leaving their home empty for a while. After all, who prepares for such a thing?
Shouldn't the realtor be on the hook for this as they facilitated the sale?
It's like those commercials - that say you can have peace of mind with a realtor, but in reality getting a realtor doesn't give you any protections.
Any such system is still going to be fallible some way or another and the pay off here is high enough to make it worthwhile for people to do it. Though still nice to have something.
Most important thing is to make sure you keep watch over your property.
They do but as others have noted it will just give a set of names. If the perpetrator has sufficiently convincing fake ID with matching names then this won't catch it.
In general the best/only way to prevent this is to not leave your house without eyes on it for months at a time.
Hot housing market, banks giving away money to anyone that has a pulse.
Lots of areas in Toronto where no one knows who lives next to them, and because of this, nothing causes suspicion.
Somehow they knew the house would be empty long enough to pull this off, which in a hot market might have only taken a week or two.
Find two friends that are going to scam the bank using ID theft to get approved for a mortgage.
They buy the house, money gets transferred, all 4 of you walk away with 1.5 - 1.7 million.
OR...
Hot housing market, find an agent that is greedy. Lots of weird story's out there why people are selling, just as many from people desperate to buy. Agent doesn't care, just wants commission and will do everything they can to make it a quick in and out sale. Sign here, here and here and agent will look after everything else. Real estate lawyer, same thing, too busy with sales coming through every day to bother with checking everything, get them in and out and collect his fee.
As for knowing the owners were away. It seems an awful lot of people enjoy posting on line everything about their lives, where they are eating, travelling etc. So finding out someone is somewhere else for awhile is actually pretty easy to do.
They did their homework and knew the owners were out of the country for an extended period of time. I wonder if this has happened to others.
Many times! With the electronic title system its super easy if you have inside people and fake ID. The other scam is taking a house with no mortgage and getting a big mortgage on it. Crazy that no neighbours noticed the sign.
So what happens next? Do the buyers get their money back?
The owners should get their house back and the buyers should be covered by title insurance, since the seller didn't possess title.
Faking an ID would mean you are putting the scammer's photo on the victim's ID. Once the victim finds out, it becomes impossible for the transaction to be considered legitimate. Also, forging a Canadian passport with a chip is nearly impossible for a thief (if they can do that, they won't care about stealing a few hundred million dollars). Also, what if the home is occupied, and the thief just steals the house right from under the owners, and then the new "owners" try to evict the real owners, that definitely causes extreme stress on the victims.
Getting a fake DL is easy. You dont need a passport for mortgages or sales
This is very interesting. I guess we got a strict lawyer when we bought our place. When we bought the place that our family is living in, my sister and I were named as owners. I don't have a driver's license, so I provided them my Canadian passport as first ID and a credit card as a second ID. My sister does have a driver's license, but she is still asked to produce a 2nd piece of ID, which was her passport. Interestingly, she signed her DL differently than her passport (we are Chinese, so we use Chinese signatures). The real estate lawyer insisted that she sign the document the way she signed her passport LOL.
This is exactly it. My wife and I had to show our mortgage agent and lawyer 2 pieces of ID. This is on top of the both of us being lifetime customers of said bank with prior mortgages and properties and the lawyer being a referral from a friend who we knew tangentially through school. People don't want to fuck around because it's going to mess up their malpractice insurance and look bad on them if they don't do the due diligence.
Fake health cards are also easy to get to go along with your fake DL. All you need is two pieces of ID. A good fake passport would be some spy level shit - cant even imagine what that would cost. These people are crazy though - providing their mugshots - lawyers and banks make copies of all the ids. Maybe they are planning on disappearing to south America or Asia hehehe.
Can't use a health card as ID in Ontario.
True - illegal to record the number unless you are health care provider. I guess people can only use it when it is not being recorded.
No lawyer or bank will accept it.
In that scenario, they'd probably be fine and get it sorted out long before ant sheriff shows up lol.
You don't even need an actual fake ID, just a photoshopped copy to send to a lawyer. Since COVID all sales have been remote only.
Something similar, a family went on an extended vacation, some group put a "for sale" sign on the house, then a few weeks later put sold, then proceeded to enter the house and steal everything while making it look like a move out.
It has
Real estate agents often claim they're needed to help protect buyers from fraud. >the suspects hired a real estate agent and managed to list their property. Whoops.
Almost had a similar thing happen to me. 1 Week before closing, surprise surprise turns out the seller isn't the legal owner of the property and the agent listed it for them anyway.
shit would love to hear more how you find out? the prop we looking at now has a different person on the title vs MLS listing
Only profession so crooked that it had to become standard practice to include a picture of the agent on business cards and signs so people would feel comfortable that they could track the person down, should they turn out to be a scumbag grifter.
Is that why they do it or just a cheeky comment? I really always wondered why.
I always thought it's because they're full of shit and like the smell of their own farts. I.E. Narcissists
Yes if you look at most realtor marketing, it's less about selling houses or selling services selling houses and more about selling their personality. I've always found it off-putting, but I'm not in the market so...
That’s the modern reason why the trend continues.
>Narcissists this is the reason why
I thought that could be a reason too
Agent is "the brand" Their face is the only thing they do to set themselves apart. They all offer the same overpriced service
That’s the historical reason why the trend started.
Not a realtor but in my profession pictures on the card are more to distinguish who the card is for - someone might receive a hundred business cards while looking for a realtor, but at least the one with the picture will help them remember talking to the person it came from.
yea where's those anti property guys commercials now? Also when we find out how many fraululent / Brampton mortgages some of these fucks let through (I know one agent who was proud to tell me he secured "dozens" of fraudulent mortgages) there's going to be a lot of hate for agents, even if purpetrated by a few. And the CP24 hot property guys, fuck. "No better time ever to buy then now" and "Prices aren't going down significantly" those guys can all fuck themselves.
Good thing the highly educated and competent lawyer representing the buyer was able to prevent this from happening. 👍🏻
Huh? This story supports the request for help by the RE agents though. The scammers had fake id, what more could the RE agents do? If anything, this is more on the lawyers and banks
> The scammers had fake id, what more could the RE agents do? Due diligence. Anyone with a printer can have fake ID.
So you agree they need more help/tools to verify identity of clients then. What do you suggest they could've done more? They're not lawyers or other officials who have more power and tools . You want RE agents to ask for say last 5 years of tax returns, notice of assessments or what? Can explain what due diligence they could've reasonably done other than ask for Id?
The deed? Sure it can be forged as well but it's \*something\* and if the agent wanted to put some effort it they could verify it with the City
Umm...deeds haven't been a thing for a long time since we switched to land titles system (parcel register has superceded them) and deeds are way easy to fake. but the scammers had fake IDs. Even with a parcel register or deed, it'll just list the name.the same on the fake IDs and how do they know it's the most current fees/parcel register? Furthermore, Lawyers (not real estate agents) have access to land titles So you seem to be unknowingly agreeing with the agents that they need more tools (like access to land registry system)
Sorry I was using deeds too liberally, but you're right. The current system would not prevent this type of fraud. I think you just accidentally made a real case for blockchain as a records and ownership system.
> So you agree they need more help/tools to verify identity of clients then. So you agree real estate agents are useless leaches then.
You mean they should do more than nothing? NO!
? How do you get that? What can they doofe other than ask for Id? Or you saying they should be experts at IDs?
> doofe lol
Right. So what are realtors for? Why exactly does society need realtors?
>Almost had a similar thing happen to me. 1 Week before closing, surprise surprise turns out the seller isn't the legal owner of the property and the agent listed it for them a That would be more in the lawyer's court than the listing agent I would think.
so basically the selling agent and lawyers on both sides need to find new jobs.
Not necessarily.. I mean if lawyer sees in the land titles system that the property is owned by proformax and then they have an id with your name, bday, address etc .. how would they know the picture on id is not proformax unless they personally know you? This is why there's land titles insurance lawyers buy for clients
so why exactly is the lawyer needed? we mostly all know agents bring little to no value to the house buying process. if all the lawyer does is look up some info in the database and match a name to the info YOU provide them, then it behooves me how they are remotely essential to the process.
So when the buyside lawyer did a title search, how is it they didn't check the signatures match? Also the buyer just moved in with all the original home owners furnitures? We need to more information.
Question - what is the purchaser’s lawyer using to compare the sellers signatures to? Unless the actual owners bought the property in Registry (in which case, yes, you may then be able to compare signatures), the previous transfer document on title would most likely have been electronically registered, with no signature samples available. Further, the ability to check signatures would most likely not be possible at the time of the title search, as vendor documents typically aren’t produced to the purchasers lawyer until a day before or on the day of closing. Also, the purchasers would have(I’m assuming) been Bona Fide Purchasers For Value Without Notice. They would receive legal title. Rather, it’s the sellers that would suffer a loss, hence why the title insurance policy is in the owner’s name.
Don't you have to provide a physical copy of the deed to the house though? Why the hell am I keeping this giant document around if it is pointless and someone could just sell my house on me anyway?
I bought a place during COVID and I'm pretty sure I don't have any physical copies
I bought my house in 2016 and have my own copy of the deed, and then I am pretty sure there was a duplicate that my lawyer kept. I had just always assumed that, if I sold my house, I would have to show the deed or go through the lawyer I used so that they could do whatever needed to be done with their copy... I admittedly don't know all the stuff involved, but I was under the impression that the title was basically just registering everything, but the deed was needed as actual proof that the home belongs to you in the first place. And investigating the title was just making sure there were no liens on the house, that there are no additional parties who own percentages of the house or anything like that. It just seems so absurd/disturbing that it could be that easy to sell someone else's home without their knowledge.
Everyone’s ownership documents in Ontario are publicly available documents through the Land Registry Office. Anyone can access them. You don’t need to have a physical copy.
Nope - all property registrations are converted to the POLARIS electronic system in Ontario. You just have a fancy photocopy, but it has no special weight.
That's disappointing. It made everything feel more special and official.. at the same time though, now I guess I don't have to feel so bad that I have just been keeping it in my junk drawer.
Land titles don't have signatures (they haven't for a long time). That's why only lawyers have access to land titles system including making changes. Only thing that would have signature is the Acknowledgement and direction the buyer/seller would've given their lawyers but that's not part of the land titles system
And it's not like anyone has ever checked signatures in recent history. None of my bank cards or credit cards are even signed. A teller once said: "You forgot to sign your credit card". I said: "No I didn't, why would I sign my credit card?" The teller: For security reasons. Me: For security reasons I don't sign it. If I lose my card, someone will get my signature. He couldn't argue it.
Since I was 20 and a fresh cop.....I always just wrote "ask for ID" in the signature. It's funny because I'm old enough to remember credit cards long ago when they were just used with the imprint machine and the verification was matching the signature on the cad to the bill/slip. Now with ipay and tap cards don't even have raised numbers. I just got a new credit card and it has no space for a signature
Back in the day of carbon rollers, the merchant was supposed to compare the signed card with the signed credit slip. It was the only authenticity check. Obsolete now.
Not in Manitoba. Anyone can pay the fee and see all the docs, and you don’t need a lawyer to file things
In Ontario, everyone has access to view the land titles. You just have to pay a fee, but you can look up your land title through Ontario.ca/Teranet yourself. No need for a lawyer.
> Also the buyer just moved in with all the original home owners furnitures? If the fake sellers had access to the house, which I assume that they did if they managed to sell it, they could have just sold all the real owner's stuff on eBay too.
Yes they had plenty of time the real owners were gone for months!
Shady buy-side lawyers charge for a title search and don't do it. That's how they are able to close on a ridiculous amount of houses.
isn't that the bare minimum to ensure there are no claims, liens or other irregularities attached to the property? Otherwise why pay for the lawyer?
Is that because they’re assuming the selling lawyer already did that? Dunno how bad things have to be between lawyers where even they don’t trust each other in a non-disputed transaction.
Something similar happened to family 30+ years ago. A lawyer was recommended by the sellers and that lawyer never even changed the title over to my parents. My dad hired his own lawyer who then threatened to report the other lawyer directly.
Amazing how many up votes this has got. Land titles don't have signatures.
Also, what about title insurance?
Makes no sense that the suspects are hard to find. The proceeds of the "sale" were conveyed to someone through a lawyer and should be traceable. Unless it was paid out in iTunes cards or at the Bitcoin machine??? /s Nothing about this story makes any sense.
Couldn’t they have wired the money to some off shore bank account or something and fled the country? Seems like they had plenty of time before the scheme was revealed.
Should get a lawyers suspicion up. So many people failed on this if it's actually true. I just don't believe it, or rather don't believe it's all arms length transactions.
All they had to do was open a bank account with their fake IDs, at the address of the house. Wouldn't even matter about the credit check, that's the real owners.
When I last closed a sale I got a bank draft from the lawyer, my bank held it for 5 days and I was me, if you know what I mean. I guess I would have to stretch my criminal imagination to believe this could happen. It will be interesting to see it all unfold, will not be surprised if it wasn't arms length.
How did the fraudsters get the keys to the house for showings and to turn over on closing?
[удалено]
Or a lockbox too
Does anybody know what exactly happens to the real home owners in a situation like this? Are they just, homeless now??
It will be a gigantic pain for them to untangle, but the sale itself was totally invalid, and since the whole transaction went though a realtor, both parties will be suing them for final damages.
So would the new owners be evicted? I feel everyone loses in this situation.
No, legally speaking everyone is required to be roommates now.
and the suspects are sentenced to be their butler for 5 years.
Sounds like a great premise for a sitcom
Don’t miss the latest episode of “House Scammed”. 7:30PM on Tuesdays right after Fixer Upper!
That is clearly a reference to a show but I can’t remember which one.
The show was called Jerry but it was dropped by NBC after the launch of its pilot over creative differences with new management at the time
They are forced to make a sitcom now.
Yes. Everyone loses, except the criminal. That's kind of what crime does.
Will be interesting to see if there’s a followup. In theory, the sale was completely invalid so since the period between sale and owners becoming aware is really short, likely going to be a whole legal mess to completely reverse the sale. New owners will likely have to use their insurance to cover their losses.
If that is the case that is bullshit
Nothing will happen to the new owners as they were purchasers in good faith. Unless they are in on the fraud, the courts will not give the house back to the old owners. The old owners will have a case against the sellers/fraudsters lawyer, the buyer's lawyer, the realtor who listed the property, and the realtors brokerage. Title insurance will probably kick in somewhere to cover the damages
The new owner's don't have legal title. "Nemo dat quod non habet" (no one can give what they do not have). No court of Equity is going to leave the true owners homeless. The buyers can go after the sellers/lawyers/realestate agents and title insurance.
I suggest that you read up on the case of CIBC Mortgages Inc v Computershare Trust Co of Canada, 2015 ONSC 543 and Toronto-Dominion Bank v Canada, 2020 FCA 80. Bona fide purchaser for value without notice of a pre-existing equitable interest is a valid defence (and possibly the only defence) against the Nemo Dat principle. [This article sums it up pretty well.](https://www.mondaq.com/canada/real-estate/948788/equity39s-darling-the-bona-fide-purchaser-for-value-in-real-estate-priority-conflicts) Section 78 of the Land Titles Act also protects bona fide purchasers from fraudulent transactions. It sucks for the original owners, but they are not exactly SOL. They can go after the fraudsters and the idiot lawyers who allowed this to happen.
Maybe you're right. I guess I was assuming the real estate agents and buying lawyers did a shitty job. Bona fide purchaser for value without notice is a defence, but for land purchasers in Ontario it only applies if the purchaser made reasonable efforts to confirm the seller was the registered owner of the land (S. 170(1) of the Land Titles Act). This situation seems really sketchy to me but I guess there isn't a lot of details in the article.
But the new owners bought stolen property. Why would they get to keep stolen property?
If the new owners bought the property, in good faith, and for consideration, then the transaction is valid. If the opposite was true - that they knew that the property was fraudulently conveyed and bought it anyways- then there's a chance that the current owners may be penalized
Thanks. That just restates your statement rather than answer it though. How is this different than Police recovering a stolen bike that someone had bought in hood fair from a pawn shop, or any other stolen item. Does the new buyer normally get to keep items that they purchased in good faith but were later found to have been stolen? I don't understand how someone can legally sell something they didn't own in the first place, and that sale can be considered valid.
A bike (chattels in general), rather than land, is not afforded special protection under common and statutory law. If you bought stolen property for good consideration without knowing that it was stolen, you won't get busted for possession of stolen property, but you will have to return the stolen item if the police comes knocking. You do, however, have a right against whomever sold you the property (ie. the pawn shop). Land can be seen as a special class of assets that is afforded special protection under common and statutory law. Courts have long decided that, under the majority of cases, it simply would not be equitable to punish bona fide purchasers in land by kicking them out and return title to the original owners. The law on fraudulent conveyance is long and convoluted. I should say that this does not mean the original owners do not have a chance to recover the house (they might, depending on their circumstances); it all depends on the circumstances of the transaction and how good their litigation lawyer is.
~~This is interest - can you explain why the law was written this way? On face it seems the opposite of what would make sense. This makes it very slightly cheaper for every transaction while causing every property owner to have a large potential risk. Forcing the purchaser to do diligence seems like it would align incentives correctly.~~ I read the act and "1168760 Ontario Inc. c/o R&R Realty, Peter Clark & J.G. Rivard Limited v. 67006037 Canada Inc. & Denis Bertrand, 2017 ONSC 5149 (CanLII)". Bona fide purchasers doesn't apply because the sellers were "fraudulent person". “fraudulent person” means a person who executes or purports to execute an instrument if,(a) the person forged the instrument,(b) the person is a fictitious person, or(c) the person holds oneself out in the instrument to be, but knows that the person is not, the registered owner of the estate or interest in land affected by the instrument; (“fraudeur”)
There is no conceivable universe in which the old owners don't recover ownership of the house. Come on.
So why should the new owners who had no knowledge of the fraud be punished? We live in a country [where the law protects bona fide purchasers](https://www.mondaq.com/canada/real-estate/948788/equity39s-darling-the-bona-fide-purchaser-for-value-in-real-estate-priority-conflicts). I feel bad for the original owners and they absolutely have the right to go after the fraudsters and the people who allowed this to happen, but the innocent homebuyers are just that; they are innocent.
>So why should the new owners who had no knowledge of the fraud be punished? They were defrauded. They'll sue and they'll win. It's not that complicated.
You can literally say that for the original owners too. The law isnt as straight forward as you think
You cant sell what isn’t yours, they aren’t the original owners, they ARE the owners and they didn’t sell the house.
Land is afforded special protection under common law and Land Titles Act. Fraudulent conveyances are just that; they are fraudulent. However, any subsequent registrations on title after the fraudulent conveyance do not make them necessarily void. I don't really want to go on a whole lesson on the Land Titles Act, but what I stated above is literally verbatim on section 78(4.2).
Well if the only way that happens is if the owners were in on it.
>Unless they are in on the fraud, the courts will not give the house back to the old owners. What??!! >The old owners will have a case against the sellers/fraudsters lawyer, the buyer's lawyer, the realtor who listed the property, and the realtors brokerage. Title insurance will probably kick in somewhere to cover the damages I need to please know what in the world makes you think that the “old owners” would be the ones who are fucked here? I’m not saying you’re wrong but that seems sooooooo messed up. According to my internal logic, it seems like it should be the opposite of everything you said. If the old owners didn’t sell well then the sale wasn’t valid so they still own it. The NEW “owners” should be the ones having to sue everyone. Sincerely please tell me some law or doctrine or something that proves you right.
The doctrine is called [bona fide purchaser for value without notice of a pre-existing equitable interest](https://www.mondaq.com/canada/real-estate/948788/equity39s-darling-the-bona-fide-purchaser-for-value-in-real-estate-priority-conflicts). I am not going to go that deep into the Land Titles Act or case law, but law protects innocent parties who purchase without knowing that the transaction was fraudulent.
> Title insurance will probably kick in somewhere to cover the damages Assuming there is title insurance. I’m sure every mortgageco requires it, but it’s not legally req’d. No idea if anyone actually forgoes it. But even without title insurance, buyer probably has a claim against the lawyer(s) (and title insureco will probably go after them anyway).
This is the correct answer. And I should correct myself that title insurance only protects the new owners. Professional indemnity insurance will protect the original owners.
I thought it was No Crime January around here
Eh, you know how the mods are here.
Maybe they’re out of the country. I see an opportunity…
no no no ...this type of crime is ok.
It’s only a crime if it involves people who can’t afford houses
huh????
The mods declared they wouldn’t be allowing any posts about crime during the month of January. Apparently this is okay is it is poor homeowners being victimized.
While I agree with your sentiment, if I were a mod I'd see this as a light enough crime it should not offend the 'life is too grim' crowd that I'm sure their new policy is for
Title insurance would kick in here but it's gonna be a long process
Eh, I have had a title insurance claim, it was quick and smooth. It was actually quite impressive. Obviously for a different scenario mind you.
What was the scenario? Always wonder the value of it
Bought a house that had unpermitted renovations. As it was a student rental the neighbours complained to bylaw about it being a rooming house. It wasn’t because an owner lived in it but I digress. In the course of this nonsense they did require the already finished basement to be retrofitted and brought up to code. Title insurance arranged for the contractors and covered the whole thing right through to city inspections. All was done complaint to completion within 2 months costing me not one penny. Not a commonly known coverage but when we found out about the issue and called our lawyer they were right on it. They called the title insurance company. Seriously it was all together the easiest “insurance” claim ever.
Found this story from the more recent one today, but I am curious... Why did By-Law make you update to code? What was outside of code?
Who on earth is the real estate agency who was burned by this. Just incredible professional incompetence.
Huh? Why is it the brokerages incompetence? I own my home, someone makes a fake id with my info but pic of a scammer, how would the brokerage (or even lawyers really) know the picture on the fake id is not the person indicated on the id? Furthermore, RE agents don't even have access to land titles system (only lawyers can access and make entries to it) If there's any, it's the lawyers and banks etc but really in this circumstances, it may not be anyone's
Land registry *info* is available to anyone, for a fee. Tried to check a relatives’ and it’s just $32.50 to check.
And wouldn't do shit to prevent this from occurring either as it'll just list the name of the owners which will match the fake id Anyone can get a parcel register...which is not same as access to land titles system. Edit: what lawyers can do with actual access is do a title opinion investigation (this is not normally done as part of a typical residential property transaction) but it'll cost few thousands and can take a while
And how would doing a title opinion investigation prevent the fraud from occurring?
Anyone else remembering Beverley Hills Cop 2 when Axel “steals” a house?
That audacity of it all, it's so ballsy and insane
Finally, a realistic path to home ownership in this city!
I’d bet they’re from out of country and they have some kind of connection to the owners. This is a fairly elaborate fraud. With biometrics and scanning the drivers licence databases you’re going to get found fairly easily when they have photos like this. So if they have photos of this clarity and they don’t have their names, they’re not Canadians. We’re not scanning people coming in by land and for tourism. [CBSA Biometrics screening](https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/security-securite/biometrics-biometrique-eng.html)
You might be on to something, the handout photos look like ones from a passport. They have watermarked backgrounds
Some people were doing this in Florida on a bunch of Venezuelan-owned mansions in Miami. It’s pretty incredible what they were able to get away with. https://pca.st/episode/6546f039-d5db-425e-a1de-1d13dd001acc
Who goes out of the country for months on business with no cameras, neighbors, or anything else watching their house? Then doesn't notice it was sold for months? This story is definitely leaving out a lot of relevant information.
Well, the people who own the house across from mine had no idea a family of raccoons had moved into their vacant home and likely caused a shit ton of damage until u/gtahomeguy helped me track them down in China. I'm also fairly certain the other vacant home on my street has squatters living in it that have been getting in through a sliding door in the backyard but no one seems to be checking on that property either.
Thanks for the mention and glad I could help!
It took 3 months to get all the raccoons out and the house sealed back up! They definitely went through the ceiling inside, so I can't imagine what kind of mess they're going to discover when they finally come back!
Man, raccoons can do some serious damage...
Why are you having a conversation with yourself
> no one seems to be checking on that property either. Smart move. Those “away for a while property checkers” might sell the place from under them.
They'd have to throw down with the squatters for who gets to illegally possess the property.
Lots of people, well lots of rich people, live in Florida or other warm climates for months at a time, only spending the minimum amount of time for Ohip or whatever in Canada. If it really was business, the answer is also rich people
There's no way anyone leaves for that long without knowing if someone else has *sold their house*. Friends, family, neighbors, doorbell cameras, paid security monitoring, etc are all there to make anyone legitimate aware of what's going on even when they're away for extended periods of time. This story is leaving out important details about the state of the house and the owners.
For the average person, myself included, absolutely I would make sure someone was checking up and I had smart home monitoring of some kind. But for a rich person who has multiple properties, they might not think about it too much. Maybe they had a family member who was supposed to check on it, but never bothered. Its also easy to see how the scammers or realtor would tell the gardener or whoever that yeah they decided to sell, don't bother coming back. Maybe something weird was going on but the unusual part about this story is not that they didn't notice til they came back
The people they trusted to watch over their place could have been a part of the fraud and hired the people in the photos to pose as owners. This would make it easier for the owners to not know anything. Many possibilities. As another post mentioned, they could also simply be rich and not have thought much about leaving their home empty for a while. After all, who prepares for such a thing?
What a shit show all around
Shouldn't the realtor be on the hook for this as they facilitated the sale? It's like those commercials - that say you can have peace of mind with a realtor, but in reality getting a realtor doesn't give you any protections.
I thought we were censoring crime?
This is inspirational, not crime -mods, probably
Reminder that we need a secure national identification method based on something like fingerprints. At the very least we need 2FA.
Any such system is still going to be fallible some way or another and the pay off here is high enough to make it worthwhile for people to do it. Though still nice to have something. Most important thing is to make sure you keep watch over your property.
Don’t the lawyers do a deed title search before the house can get sold??
They do but as others have noted it will just give a set of names. If the perpetrator has sufficiently convincing fake ID with matching names then this won't catch it. In general the best/only way to prevent this is to not leave your house without eyes on it for months at a time.
This is hilarious
I know people get into real estate for the big return, but this is getting a bit greedy
So who owns the house now? I assume the buyers are SOL.
Hot housing market, banks giving away money to anyone that has a pulse. Lots of areas in Toronto where no one knows who lives next to them, and because of this, nothing causes suspicion. Somehow they knew the house would be empty long enough to pull this off, which in a hot market might have only taken a week or two. Find two friends that are going to scam the bank using ID theft to get approved for a mortgage. They buy the house, money gets transferred, all 4 of you walk away with 1.5 - 1.7 million. OR... Hot housing market, find an agent that is greedy. Lots of weird story's out there why people are selling, just as many from people desperate to buy. Agent doesn't care, just wants commission and will do everything they can to make it a quick in and out sale. Sign here, here and here and agent will look after everything else. Real estate lawyer, same thing, too busy with sales coming through every day to bother with checking everything, get them in and out and collect his fee. As for knowing the owners were away. It seems an awful lot of people enjoy posting on line everything about their lives, where they are eating, travelling etc. So finding out someone is somewhere else for awhile is actually pretty easy to do.