The victim

People need training and a license to own or operate a car. Or a boat. Even a snow machine. Or a quad. You must license your dog. The cable or power company won’t open an account without a credit check. But you can stumble into a binding contract for hundreds of thousands of dollars when buying a property, dreamily devoid of knowledge or consequences.

Just ask Vanessa, the latest victim of her own actions. In predictable fashion – now that’s she’s stared into the bottomless abyss of her own ignorance – she’s run to the media, despoiling the bank that gave her a pile of money.

Here’s the story. It’s all about this property in Outer Bunnypath, Ontario.

Source: Realtor.ca

It’s a one-level wooden pile sitting on the edge of the Rideau River. One bedroom. One bath. The lot is sixty by one-fifty, no garage. No basement. No nearby town, stores or services. Not exactly the kind of isolated place most single women would desire. But she did. Uncontrollably.

Two years ago 384 Gemmel Road, near the hamlet of Jasper, ON (three streets) was realistically listed for $465,000. But that was 2022. Interest rates had yet to start their climb and post-pandemic house lust was in the air. The Microsoft employee apparently lost her perspective and offered $200,000 more than the asking price.

Why? “It was quite ludicrous, there were bidding wars and it was just really stressful,” she told CTV News.

Well, the unthinkable happened. V lost her job seven months later. Worse, she’d opted for the cheapest possible mortgage – a variable-rate loan from Scotiabank. Despite the fact inflation was rising and news of coming interest rate hikes was rampant, she did not lock in.

Of the Big Five major banks, Scotia is the only one which doesn’t offer VRM borrowers static-payment loans. That means when the Bank of Canada ups its policy rate, the mortgage rate – and the monthly payment – also goes up. (As interest rates increased other banks extended amortizations and added to mortgage debt rather than hiking payments.)

Vanessa started missing some payments. Then all of them. She tried selling the house for what she paid, and employed two realtors to do so. No offers. No deal. Three months ago she abandoned the little place. “I moved out of the property and to my knowledge the bank was changing the locks.”

In her mind, doubtlessly, she thought ‘giving back’ the house to the bank would erase her debt and obligation. But that is not the case. Lenders don’t want real estate. They want their money back.

The next step, after various legal letters demanding payment, was for the bank to foreclose on the property, obtaining the right to sell it. Vanessa pled poverty, said she could not afford a lawyer, and sat back awaiting her fate. “You literally go from owning a property and having a job with a great income, to being faced with homelessness in less than a year,” she told the media (which has been working hard to sully Scotia.)

What next?

The house on Gemmel is for sale again. Here’s the listing. The ask is $505,000 and as of today the DOM is 27 days. The real estate market is frosty out in the sticks during February, but the spring may bring a buyer.

If it goes for $500,000 (which is unlikely), Vanessa will have lost her downpayment while being on the hook for defaulted monthly payments, considerable legal and management expenses and the difference between the net proceeds received by the bank and the outstanding mortgage principal. It will be a pile.

Of course, she casts herself as a victim. “I want people to know that this is a possibility for anybody, you know, an educated hardworking woman like myself is now faced with homelessness.”

But the bank didn’t victimize Vanessa. She did that to herself. Her house-horniness washed away common sense when she paid 40% more than list. She agreed to rent a lot of money, then failed on her end of the bargain. How is anyone else to blame?

But perhaps Scotiabank should have refused to extend the mortgage to a newbie homebuyer on a single income with no real estate experience. Maybe when V made her $200,000-over-ask bid the listing agent should have tried to talk her out if it. Or how about her lawyer? Was there an obligation on his/her part to force the naive buyer into abandoning the offer?

Any of those roadblocks might have resulted in CTV doing a story on how ‘the system’ was discriminating against a woman wanting to buy her way into the Canadian dream. After all, this is the era of inclusion, diversity and equality, when everyone gets a pony. If not, it’s the fault of the Boomers. Or Justin Trudeau. Or the man.

Anyway, Vanessa says she’ll declare bankruptcy to wiggle out of her obligations when the hammer comes down. Of course. What else would you expect of her?

About the picture: “This photo is in response to your insulting comments on felines,” writes Kevin. “Chill out, just like Molly on the yoga mat.  Ohmmm. Keep up the great work, we enjoy your blog even more without the canine photos!”

To be in touch or send a picture of your beast, email to ‘[email protected]’.