This week I made a video on sale of property conditions: what they actually mean for a seller, and the tips to protect them, before accepting.

In this newsletter, I want to focus on one thing the video touches on that I think doesn't get enough attention:

How to assess whether the condition has a real chance of being fulfilled.

Because the time is the risk.

The standard OREA sale of property condition is remarkably thin.

It says the offer is conditional on the sale of the buyer's property. That's it.

• It doesn't require the buyer to list their property.
• or list it at a reasonable price.
• or make a genuine effort to sell at all.

A seller can accept one of these conditions and watch their listing sit conditionally sold on MLS for three or four weeks while the buyers haven't done a thing.

I've seen it.

Then the condition expires. The deal dies. And the listing has to go back to market with other buyers wondering why someone walked away.

That stale listing problem is real, and it's where sellers feel the cost most directly.

So before advising a seller to accept one of these, here's what you can look at:

Is the buyer's property already listed?

This is the first question. If it's not already on MLS, that could be a concern. Are they close? Are pictures done? When are they planning on listing?

The buyer is asking your seller to accept risk before they've taken even the most basic step toward fulfilling the condition.

It doesn't make the offer unacceptable, but it impacts timelines and informs the conversation about what obligations need to be established.

Is it priced in line with the market?

A listed property that's overpriced is almost the same as one that isn't listed at all. The condition isn't going to fulfill. You're just waiting longer to find that out.

Pull up the listing. Look at the comparables. If the price is out of range and the sellers seem attached to it, that's a signal.

The conditional period isn't going to fix a pricing problem.

Is there co-operating brokerage commission?

Seems like a no-brainer... I know. But I've seen it happen.

A seller agreed to an SOP conditional offer, only to find out that the buyer was listing their own home as a FSBO.

Don't let that happen.

— — —

None of these are automatic deal-killers. Sometimes the offer is strong enough, the other property is realistic enough, and accepting the condition is the right call.

But the standard clause gives you nothing to work with on its own.

These 3 things are what you need to pay attention to.

Latest YouTube Video:
SALE OF PROPERTY CONDITIONS: 3 TIPS BEFORE ACCEPTING

As Realtors, you're the ones drafting the Agreement of Purchase and Sale.

And conditions are one of the most important parts of that document. I'm seeing more of them drafted from scratch for specific situations, not just pulled from the OREA standard clauses.

If you're going to be good at drafting, you need to understand the mechanics behind what you're building.

I made a "Conditions 101" video earlier this week, and I've written about the anatomy of a condition here before.

But today I want to go one layer deeper: the different options of fulfillment.

Every condition falls into 1 of 3 categories. These get taught in the real estate course, guaranteed to show up on the exam... but very few agents walk away with a real understanding of how they work in practice.

Condition Precedent

This is the standard. If you've written a conditional offer, you've almost certainly used one.

A condition precedent means something has to happen before the deal becomes firm.

The buyer has a window to complete their due diligence, and if they're satisfied, they deliver written notice to the seller confirming the condition is fulfilled. Once that happens, the deal goes firm.

If the buyer doesn't deliver that notice by the deadline, the deal is null and void and the deposit is returned.

It also usually includes an option to be waived.

Here's a common example using financing:

"This Offer is conditional upon the Buyer arranging, at the Buyer's own expense, a new first mortgage satisfactory to the Buyer in the Buyer's sole and absolute discretion. Unless the Buyer gives notice in writing delivered to the Seller not later than [date] that this condition is fulfilled, this Offer shall be null and void and the deposit shall be returned to the Buyer in full without deduction. This condition is included for the benefit of the Buyer and may be waived at the Buyer's sole option."

The important thing to notice is the default outcome. If the buyer does nothing, the deal dies.

The buyer has to take action to keep the deal alive.

This is what 97% of conditions look like.

Condition Subsequent

A condition subsequent looks very similar on paper. But the default outcome flips.

Instead of the buyer having to deliver notice that the condition is fulfilled, the deal is treated as firm unless the buyer delivers notice that the condition is not satisfied.

Here's what that looks like using the same financing example:

"This Offer is conditional upon the Buyer arranging, at the Buyer's own expense, a new first mortgage satisfactory to the Buyer in the Buyer's sole and absolute discretion. This condition shall be deemed to be fulfilled unless the Buyer gives notice in writing delivered to the Seller not later than [date] that this condition is not satisfied, in which case this Offer shall be null and void and the deposit shall be returned to the Buyer in full without deduction. This condition is included for the benefit of the Buyer and may be waived at the Buyer's sole option."

The difference is in the bolded language. If the buyer does nothing, the deal goes firm.

The buyer has to take action to get out of the deal, not to stay in it.

That's a significant shift. Same condition, same due diligence, but the consequences of silence are completely reversed.

True Condition Precedent

This one is different from both.

A true condition precedent is a condition that neither the buyer nor seller can fulfill or waive.

It depends entirely on a third party.

The example I always use is a condition on severance consent.

I've facilitated a few Agreements of Purchase and Sale for land that was conditional upon the municipality granting a severance.

In these cases, the municipality has to approve the severance before the transaction is legally possible. The buyer can't fulfill that condition. The seller can't fulfill it. Neither side can waive it. It's completely outside both parties' control.

The deal simply cannot proceed until the third party acts.

You won't see these as often as the first two, but when you do, recognize them for what they are. No amount of negotiation between buyer and seller changes the timeline. The deal waits.

– – –

Understanding your options as a drafter puts you in a better position to build the right fulfillment mechanism for the deal and your client's needs.

Latest YouTube Video:
REAL ESTATE CONDITIONS EXPLAINED: DON'T SIGN UNTIL YOU WATCH THIS

Earlier this week I posted a video on closing dates: what to watch for before agreeing to one, and why the date itself matters more than most people think.

One of the things I talked about was the risk of scheduling a purchase and sale on the same day.

I want to go a bit deeper on that here, because the mechanics of what actually happens when things go sideways are worth understanding.

The reason same-day closings create risk isn't complicated.

When your client is buying and selling on the same day, the proceeds from the sale are almost always what funds the purchase.

That means one deal has to complete before the other can. They're not just connected by a calendar date, they're financially dependent on each other.

Most of the time, it works. But when it doesn't, the situation moves fast.

If the sale runs into a delay, for any number of reasons, your client can't close on the purchase on time.

And at that point, they're in breach on the purchase.

Best case scenario: the seller of the purchase agrees to an extension. But they have no legal obligation to do that, and there's often a price. Extension fees on residential deals can be significant and the seller usually has the leverage to set the terms.

Worst case scenario: they say no. Or they had a change of heart about the deal to begin with, and the breach gives them the opening they needed. That puts the deposit at risk and turns a closing delay into something much more serious.

A deal not closing on time has the potential to affect a whole chain of closings, not just the two your client is involved in.

Bob Aaron, another Toronto real estate lawyer, wrote a good article about a 2024 case that shows that domino effect in action:

• The buyers on one deal couldn't close on time because their mortgage funds were delayed.
• The sellers, who were relying on those proceeds to fund their own purchase the same day, were forced to pay $75,000 to get an extension from their seller.
• They then successfully sued their buyers to recover it.
• The court found the outcome was foreseeable: when proceeds from one deal are funding the next, a delay anywhere in the chain creates liability everywhere in it.

Link to the full article here.

Latest YouTube Video:
The Biggest Closing Date Mistakes Buyers Make

A Realtor asked me this recently:

What happens if a seller dies after the APS is signed but before closing?

It's one of those scenarios that feels unlikely until it happens on your file. And when it does, the answer depends on a few things.

Here are the three (3) scenarios:

1) There's a joint tenant on title.

This is best-case scenario for the transaction.

When property is held as joint tenants, the right of survivorship means the deceased's interest automatically goes to the surviving owner(s). No court process. No probate.

From there, the surviving owner(s) can execute the transfer and close the deal. In most cases, the original closing date is still possible.

There's a little paperwork involved, but nothing that would cause a significant delay.

2) Property is exempt from probate.

If there are no joint tenants, the next question is whether the property qualifies for something called the First Dealings Exemption.

This is a provision in Ontario's land registration system that allows certain properties to be transferred without going through probate.

The easiest way to explain it... if a property was purchased in the 1990s or earlier and was never sold, it might qualify.

I actually recorded a full video on the exemption this week if you want to understand how it works.

If the property qualifies, the estate trustee named in the will can work with a real estate lawyer to complete the sale without waiting on probate.

With a cooperative trustee and proper legal support, the deal has a chance to close on time.

3) Probate is required.

This is where things slow down considerably.

If the property doesn't qualify for the exemption and there's no surviving joint tenant(s), the estate will need to go through probate before anyone has the legal authority to sell.

That process takes time, and the chances are slim that the estate will be in a position to close on the original date.

At that point, the parties have a few options:

• They can agree to extend the closing date by mutual agreement.
• They can sign a mutual release and walk away from the deal.
• Or, if the estate can't close on time, the buyer may have a claim for damages.

None of those are ideal. But that's the reality when probate is the only path forward.

Latest YouTube Video:
First Dealings Exemption

Earlier this week I published a video on deposit forfeiture in Ontario — what a deposit actually is, why you lose it if you default, and the narrow circumstances where a court might step in to give it back.

But I want to use today's newsletter to go one level deeper.

Because a recent Ontario court decision — Menon v. Simpson, (December 2025) is an extreme example of when damages go well beyond the deposit.

Here's what happened:

• In May 2023, a buyer signed an Agreement of Purchase and Sale for a property in Mississauga at a purchase price of $8,385,000.
• The seller granted an extension, in exchange for an additional deposit and per diem payments.
• The closing was extended again to September 14, 2023. Then again, to a final closing date of October 16, 2023.
• The buyer still didn't close.
• The seller relisted and ultimately sold the property to another buyer for $6,550,000.
• That's a difference of $1,835,000 from what the defaulting buyer had agreed to pay.
• On top of that, the parties agreed the seller's carrying costs (mortgage interest, property taxes, and related expenses) accumulated while the property sat back on the market.
• Total damages claimed: $2,385,000.

This wasn't a dispute about whether the buyer had to pay the seller damages... but rather how much?

And the buyer's defence was mitigation.

They argued that the seller hadn't done enough to minimize their losses, that they should have listed at a lower price from the start, and that they should have accepted a $7,000,000 offer that came with a $2,000,000 vendor take-back mortgage.

The court rejected the arguments and granted judgment in the seller's favour.

How the seller mitigated:

• Relisted the property within two weeks of the breach
• Listed at the same price as when the original APS was signed
• Reduced the asking price on several occasions over time
• Engaged in active discussions around further price reductions
• Explored leasing the property as an alternative
• Marketed beyond MLS — including in limited-circulation publications targeting high-end buyers in that market

The court found that was enough.

The seller took reasonable steps, which is the legal test.

The resulting sale price reflected the real market loss.

On the VTB offer specifically:
The court noted that a vendor take-back mortgage is not the same as cash. Accepting that structure was not comparable to the deal the defaulting buyer had signed, and the seller had no obligation to take it.

So what does this case actually tell us about mitigation?
Reasonable steps don't mean perfect steps.

Relist promptly. Price reasonably. Reduce over time. Market properly. Consider alternatives. That's the framework the court looked at.

The seller was awarded $1,835,000 in lost sale proceeds, $550,000 in carrying costs, prejudgment interest, and just over $20,000 in legal costs.

Latest YouTube Video:
What Happens to Your Deposit If You Walk Away From a Deal?

I've reviewed seven status certificates over the last two weeks, and it got me thinking about one of the documents I use for insights.

Also, I made a more in-depth YouTube video on the review process — if you haven't seen it yet, the video link is here.

But here today, I want to talk about the budget.

Status certificate packages come in a couple different forms — sometimes a single large document, sometimes a folder with 15 to 20 documents inside.

Either way, the budget will be in there.

It's easy to read, and it answers two good questions.

When are condo fees likely to increase next?

The budget will show you the corporation's fiscal year somewhere near the top of the page.

Condos issue their new budget for the start of a new fiscal year.

And most of the time, that means an increase in condo fees.

So, if the fiscal year runs June to May, the owners should expect a change in the condo fees starting June 1st.

How much did fees go up last year?

This one takes a bit of simple math.

The budget will show you the current year's Common Element Fee — that's the technical term for what buyers know as condo fees.

It will usually also show you the same line item from the prior year.

Divide the current year number by the prior year number, and you've got the year-over-year percentage change.

In the example above, that's a 4% increase.

Like most things in a status certificate, that number needs context before you draw any hard conclusions. It's a starting point, not a verdict.

– – –

I'm not suggesting this becomes part of your standard process — that's what we're here for.

But if you're curious, or you just want a better sense of the buildings you're looking in, this is a quick and easy way to get there.

Especially for those of you doing a lot of condo business in Toronto, building up that kind of working knowledge over time is genuinely useful.

Latest YouTube Video:
The Condo Status Certificate Review

This week I answered a handful of real estate Reddit questions on camera. Real scenarios, real legal answers.

One of them was about exactly this situation, and if you haven't watched it yet, the video is here.

But I want to go a little deeper on it.

Because the Reddit question was written from the buyer's perspective, someone asking whether they were entitled to the hot water tank outright.

And the answer is yes.

What the post didn't get into is what happens when you're the buyer's agent and the amendment request lands in your inbox.

That's where it gets interesting.

Here's the scenario: a property sells with a hot water tank rental. The rental is listed on MLS. But when you submitted the offer, Clause 6, the rental items section was left blank.

The listing agent didn't catch it. The seller signed. The deal went firm.

A few days before closing, someone on the seller's side figures it out. And then your phone rings.

The framing is usually some version of: it was an honest mistake, everyone knew it was a rental, can we just do a quick amendment?

It's going to feel like a reasonable request. It isn't.

Here's the legal reality: the APS governs the transaction, and it's assumed to have been drafted intentionally.

When you reviewed that offer with your client, the blank Clause 6 reflected that they were not agreeing to assume any rental contract.

Whether it was an oversight or deliberate doesn't change that. The seller signed an agreement saying the buyer assumes no rentals, and typically, a rental item like a hot water tank is treated as a fixture, meaning without that clause, it's included in the deal.

We don't go by what the MLS listing says. It doesn't form part of the agreement.

I had this come up on a file not long ago. Seller's side called with the same pitch: mistake, oversight, can we amend.

We reviewed the APS, confirmed the clause was blank, and held our position. The seller had to pay out of pocket to buy out the rental contract before we closed.

The amendment request puts subtle pressure on the buyer's agent to be cooperative, to smooth things over, to just sign.

But signing an amendment in that moment means your client is voluntarily assuming a financial obligation they were never legally on the hook for.

That's not cooperation — that's giving something away for nothing.

Your job isn't to fix the other side's drafting error. Your job is to know your client's position and protect it.

In this case, the position is strong. Use it.

Latest YouTube Video:
Real Estate Lawyer Answers REDDIT Questions

You’ve been hearing about Joint Tenants vs. Tenants in Common since your first real estate exam.

And I’m not going to bore you with the distinctions for the hundredth time.

(But if you do want a refresher, I recorded a full video on it this week)

Today, I want to cover a lesser-known point about joint tenancy:

Joint tenancy can be severed... unilaterally.

When two or more owners take title as joint tenants, they get the right of survivorship.

Meaning: if one owner dies, their interest passes automatically to the surviving owner(s), outside their estate.

And while that may have been the plan when they purchased, plans change.

Maybe one owner later decides they don’t want the other owner to automatically receive their share if they die.

Here’s the part that surprises people:

You don’t need the other owner’s consent to sever a joint tenancy.

It's not an “amendment” that requires everyone to agree.

Joint tenancy is fragile.

A single joint tenant can take steps to sever it.

The most common method is to register a transfer to themselves that breaks the joint tenancy.

This has the effect of converting the ownership into a tenancy in common.

And once it’s severed:

• the right of survivorship is gone, and
• that owner’s share no longer “automatically” passes to the other owner(s) on death — it passes through the owner’s estate instead.

I’ve even had a situation once where a surviving spouse called to do the Survivorship Application after her husband passed away, only to learn the joint tenancy had been severed earlier, without her realizing it.

Latest YouTube Video:
Joint Tenants or Tenants in Common?

Earlier this week, I made a video about disclosure requirements and stigma. 

Here’s the legal baseline in Ontario:

• Real estate transactions are governed by caveat emptor... buyer beware.
• Sellers do not have to volunteer every fact that might matter to a buyer.
• Sellers must disclose known latent defects that make a property dangerous or unfit for habitation.
• Stigma (death in the home, prior criminal activity, etc.) generally does not require disclosure unless it creates danger.
• Sellers cannot misrepresent or mislead. If asked directly, they must answer truthfully.

So knowing that, how do you protect your buyer client?

Don’t rely on voluntary disclosure, they won't always be there.

That means, you need to have the conversation. What does your buyer actually care about?

• Prior illegal activity?
• An unnatural death?
• Reputational issues?

You should be able to clearly explain what a seller does and does not have to disclose — because that tells you what needs to be addressed proactively.

Once you identify a concern, take two steps:

1. Make specific inquiries in writing. Create a record.
2. Draft it in the offer.

Use targeted representations and warranties.

For example, a clause where the seller represents, to the best of their knowledge and belief, that the property has not been used for the growth or manufacture of illegal substances. Or that there has been no unnatural death or suicide in the property.

The goal is not to turn every deal into a risk audit.

The goal is clarity.

If it matters to your buyer, it belongs in the agreement.

Latest YouTube Video:
What Sellers Don't Have to Tell You

If you’re preparing for a new listing, one of the best ways to avoid surprises during the selling process is to do a pre-listing title search.

As a Realtor, having a basic understanding of title can help you catch problems early... when they’re easier to fix.

It’s also a great way to prove your value to your client at the listing stage.

You can obtain a Parcel Register (commonly referred to as a Title Search) through your GeoWarehouse access, or through the public site OnLand.ca, usually for under $40.

I also made a video showing how to do it here.

Anyways — here are 4 things I recommend checking when you’re preparing a new listing:

1) Registered Owners

First, make sure the "Owners' Names" match the person(s) you’re dealing with.

Sounds obvious, but I often see Agreements that are missing a name, or include someone who is not actually on title.

• You’re speaking to one spouse, but both are on title
• The “seller” is actually an estate trustee
• Someone thinks they own it… but they don’t

2) Mortgages / Charges

What (and how many) mortgages are registered against the property?

Mortgages appear under the instrument type "Charge".

Is there one mortgage? Two? Is it a Private mortgage?

You will see who the lender is (under "Parties to" column), and pay attention to the "Amount" registered.

If the mortgages are higher than the value of the property, you can run into a real closing problem:

• the seller may not have enough proceeds to pay out the debt
• they may not be able to convey clear title
• and yes… it impacts whether commission can be paid.

So check this, and don't work for free.

3) S/T, T/W or Easements in the Legal Description

Look at the legal description for flags like S/T , T/W or Easement — which signal the property may be subject to rights-of-way or easements.

Why it matters: you want to be able to convey accurate information to potential buyers.

If the seller isn’t clear on any rights-of-way or easements that do appear in the description, have them engage a real estate lawyer early — we can give an opinion so you're able to explain it properly to potential buyers.

4) "Other" Registrations (liens, cautions, notices, etc.)

Finally, scan for registrations that should trigger further investigation.

• liens
• cautions
• notices

And pay special attention to recent registrations — newer entries are more likely to reflect an active dispute, unpaid issue, or something that can delay (or prevent) a clean closing.

Even if it turns out to be nothing, finding it early gives you time to deal with it instead of discovering it when the buyer’s lawyer raises it right before closing.

– – –

If something looks odd, this is where a quick call to a real estate lawyer can save you from a surprise objection mid-deal — and it helps you give cleaner, more confident information to buyers upfront.

Latest YouTube Video:

How to READ a Title Search in Ontario

If you’ve ever had to explain chattels vs. fixtures, you’ve probably used one of these sayings:

If it is not nailed, screwed, or glued to the house, it is a chattel; if it is attached, it is a fixture.

If you turn the house upside down, anything that falls out is a chattel, and anything that stays put is a fixture.

These are industry sayings, helpful to a point, but they don't fully articulate the legal nuances.

So for those of you that like to nerd out on this stuff, I've summarized the legal test that courts apply when deciding chattel vs. fixture:

Start with attachment

This sets the presumption

• Not attached (resting by its own weight) → presumed chattel.
• Attached (screwed/bolted/plumbed/built-in) → presumed fixture.

How attached is it?

The degree of annexation

• To what degree is the item physically connected to the land or building?
• Would removing it cause appreciable damage (to the property, or the item)?
  → favours fixture.
• Can it be removed cleanly with little to no impact. → favours chattel.

Why is it attached?

The purpose or objective intention of the item

• Is it attached to improve the property as a property? (ex. security system protecting the home) → favours fixture.
• Attached mainly to help the item function as an item (ex. picture hung on a wall) → favours chattel.

The Real Takeaway

There are no hard and fast rules here.

These are fact-driven questions, and small details can change the result.

Which is exactly why the goal isn’t to “know the test” so you can argue about it later — the goal is to avoid the dispute in the first place.

Build the right habits:

The more specific you are on inclusions and exclusions, the better.

Even noting the make, model, or colour of an appliance can save you a lot of trouble if the seller tries to pull a fast one on closing.

Latest YouTube Video:
What's Included in Your New Home (Chattels and Fixtures)

Most early buyer conversations are about financials and budget.

What can they afford? How much cash do they need to close?

If you understand the breakdown of closing costs, you can set proper expectations and setup your clients for success.

Here's what buyers actually pay, beyond the Purchase Price:

Closing Adjustments

This isn't necessarily a cost — it's an adjustment on a pro-rated basis. Property taxes can result in a credit to either buyer or seller depending on the time of year. For condos, common expenses are adjusted. For tenanted properties, rent, rent deposits, and interest are adjusted.

This can result in your client sending a little more or a little less to the seller on closing depending on where these fall.

Land Transfer Tax

A tax on transferring property ownership. In Toronto, buyers pay twice — provincial and municipal. First-Time Homebuyers receive a Rebate of up to $4,000 on provincial LTT and $4,475 on Municipal LTT.

Registration Fees

The government charges $85 per document registered on title. All purchases require the registration of the Transfer document. If there's a mortgage, that needs to be registered as well — meaning most buyers pay $170 total ($85 + $85).

Title Insurance

A one-time premium protecting against title defects, fraud, and survey issues for as long as they own the property.

Legal Fees

What the lawyer charges to handle the transaction.

– – –

Example

Purchasing a $700,000 condo in Toronto

– – –

The $128,725.87 is what the buyer sends to their lawyer in order to close.

And remember, they've already paid the $35,000 deposit out of pocket earlier in the process.

Total out-of-pocket cost to the buyer: $163,725.87 (assuming 80% LTV mortgage)

A significant portion of the out-of-pocket cost is the deposit and down payment. For transparency, here are the actual transaction costs:

Total Transaction Costs: $24,168.96

This includes:

• Land Transfer Tax (Provincial + Municipal + Admin Fee): $21,065.89
• Registration Fee: $170.00
• Title Insurance: $448.20
• Legal Fees: $2,484.87

Land Transfer Tax is over 85% of the total transaction cost.

These calculations can get confusing, and of course they change for properties outside of Toronto, or when the buyer is paying cash, or if there are more significant adjustments.

To make it easier, we built our Legal Fee Calculator to actually calculate all of these costs, so you or your clients can have a full picture at the click of a button.

Latest YouTube Video:
The REAL Cost of Buying a Condo in Toronto

Back in 2023, I wrote about exterior maintenance in residential lease agreements and the use of a "severable contract".

The issue was this: under the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA), landlords are responsible for maintaining “common areas.”

So, any clause in a lease that tries to shift that responsibility to a tenant is unenforceable.

If you wanted the tenant to handle grass and snow, it had to be done through a separate agreement — completely unrelated to the lease.

But the confusion was always around single-family homes.

Even though there are no “common areas,” the LTB was still applying the same exterior maintenance rule across the board.

Which meant the only solid legal advice at the time was: always use a severable contract.

Then in 2024, we got this Court of Appeal decision:

Crete v. Ottawa Community Housing Corporation (2024 ONCA 459) 

And finally, we have a real precedent that distinguishes “common areas” and exclusive-use spaces in the context of the RTA.

So here’s how I now summarize this area of law:

• Common Areas: The landlord is responsible for maintenance under the RTA, and a lease clause shifting that duty to a tenant is unenforceable. (Use a separate agreement)
• Exclusive Use Areas: A lease clause can assign exterior maintenance to the tenant, as long as the area is truly for that tenant’s exclusive use.

To help clarify, here’s the RTA definition:

“exterior common areas” includes roads, pathways, parking areas, garbage storage areas, grounds for the use of tenants and, in a mobile home park or land lease community, the sites on which homes are situated

Latest YouTube Video: 5 ILLEGAL Lease Clauses

Over the years, I’ve had a few Realtors ask if they should include a clause like this in the APS:

RELEASE OF DEPOSIT:
Should the Buyer fail to complete this agreement on the completion date, at no fault of the Seller, the deposit shall be deemed to be released by the Buyer and paid to the Seller by the deposit holder, without deduction. This clause shall constitute the Buyer’s irrevocable consent to release such deposit and no further written release shall be required.

But there’s a problem: it doesn’t work.

If you read the clause carefully, you'll notice the words:

“…at no fault of the Seller…”

This is a legal determination of fact.

Who decides whether the seller was at fault?

You can bet the seller thinks they weren’t. And I bet the buyer disagrees.

Someone has to decide.

And when it comes to enforcing contracts and deciding the facts — that someone is a judge.

So even with this clause included in the APS, you end up exactly where you started.

There are no shortcuts for the deposit release.

They get released under 3 circumstances:

• The deal closes
• Both parties sign a Mutual Release, or
• A court order directs the deposit to one side

That’s it.

Latest YouTube Video:

Reading Time: 1 minute

It’s hard to believe I’ve been writing this newsletter for over two years now.

What’s been most rewarding are the relationships that have come from a few hundred words landing in your inbox each week.

This year was a big growth year for us, and I’m excited about what’s coming in 2026.

The substance won’t change, but over the last few weeks I’ve been building a more intentional, connected flow of topics, while still leaving room to react to what I’m seeing in practice week to week.

Thank you for reading, engaging, and sharing your feedback throughout the year.

I genuinely appreciate it.

I’ll be taking the next couple of Fridays off from writing and will be back with fresh insights on January 9, 2026.

Wishing you a wonderful holiday season and a happy New Year!

Reading Time: 2 minutes

I get a lot of questions from Realtors about how the Land Transfer Tax (LTT) rebate applies when buyers are spouses.

It comes up often because clients inevitably ask about it when discussing closing costs and budgeting.

So here’s how it’s determined:

Are the couple considered spouses?

For the LTT Rebate, spouses are:

• Two people who are married, or
• Two people who are not married but have:
  • Lived together continuously for at least 3 years, or
  • Are in a relationship of some permanence and share a child (biological or adopted)

When the buyers are spouses

• If neither spouse has ever owned a home, they qualify for the full rebate
  • Up to $4,000.00 for Provincial LTT
  • Up to $4,475.00 for Municipal LTT (Toronto)
• If one spouse previously owned a home, but not while they were spouses, they can still claim the full rebate
• If one spouse owned a home at any time while they were spouses, neither buyer qualifies, even if:
  • Only one name was on title, or
  • They didn’t live in the home together

When the buyers are not spouses

• Each buyer is assessed individually
• A buyer who has never owned a home can claim the rebate based on their ownership share

Understanding whether buyers are legally spouses, and when that status began, is the difference between a full rebate, a partial rebate, or no rebate at all.

Featured Video:

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Status Certificate reviews are one of the most commonly requested topics here.

So this week, I wanted to give an outline of what I'm actually looking for when I review them, and the things that matter to your clients and their decision.

Level and Unit Numbers

The first thing I do is verify the legal description of the unit, plus any locker, and parking (if applicable). I make sure it matches what’s in the APS, and confirm whether those spaces are owned, exclusive-use, or missing altogether. It’s both a small thing, but arguably the most fundamental to the Agreement.

Common Expenses

Next, I confirm the monthly common expense, check for any arrears, and review the fiscal year end — that year end is our indication for upcoming increases. I'm also looking for notes about circumstances that could lead to increase in the common expense or special assessments.

Reserve Fund

After that, I move on to the Reserve Fund. This is the condo’s long-term savings plan. I check when the last reserve fund study was completed (should be within 3 years), whether the condo has implemented the funding recommendations, and how those recommendations may impact the future common expenses.

Litigation

Here i'm looking for any active or recent lawsuits involving the condo. Checking to see if the matter is covered by insurance and at worst case scenario, what that liability could look like based on the unit's potential exposure.

Insurance

I review the insurance certificate to make sure the Corporation has adequate coverage in place, both for the building itself and for liability risks.

Leasing

There's usually a section that shows how many units in the building are leased and whether there are any rental restrictions. I always include this in my review to give our client a sense of the owner-occupancy to understand what kind of community they’re entering into.

Lifestyle and Rules

I don’t review this section in depth unless a client specifically asks. That’s because what matters varies from buyer to buyer. Rules on smoking or pets can be either a selling feature or a deal breaker, depending on the person. During my review call, I always encourage clients to tell me what’s important to them so I can clarify any questions for them here.

Red Flags and Additional Info

In general, i'm using my experience to spot anything that seems out of the ordinary. If something doesn’t sit right, it’s a prompt to dig deeper. I’ll also follow up with condo management if additional details are needed, especially if the client or Realtor noticed anything unusual during showings or conversations with the listing agent.

– –

Remember: a status certificate review isn’t a pass/fail test.

It’s about giving the client the full picture of the context, risks, and obligations so they can make an informed decision that works for them.

And if you ever have a question about a certificate or want to better understand what’s in there, feel free to reach out.

Latest YouTube Video:

Reading Time: 5 minutes

One of the most frustrating issues in the closing process is the discovery of minor property damage or broken appliances right before closing.

The buyer's legal remedy is technically post-closing. This means the buyer has to initiate a claim after they take possession and chase the seller for a judgment and payment.

These types of issues are generally not a valid reason to refuse to close.

In my firm, we always advocate for our clients by attempting to negotiate a holdback when these issues are discovered.

The difficult part is that I usually don't have any legal leverage to push with. If the seller disagrees or doesn't want to cooperate, we still have to close.

Any agreement to a holdback is usually done out of good faith, and I'd say we're successful about half the time.

Recently, one of the agents we work with asked if there was anything they could do in the drafting stage to better protect their clients.

So, I did some research and found an interesting article by Brian Madigan.

He provides some sample clauses regarding testing appliances and, more importantly, contractually agreed-upon holdbacks.

I have repurposed his examples into a "Detailed" version and a "Subtle" version :

1. The Detailed Clause

In the event that any one or more items of such equipment, appliances, chattels and fixtures are not in good working order as determined in the sole discretion of the Buyer, then, the Buyer shall be entitled to holdback the sum of $X.XX, which shall be held in trust by the Buyer’s solicitor for a period of X days following completion of the transaction. The Buyer’s solicitor subject only to the direction of the Buyer shall 1) pay any invoices for repair or replacement, and 2) remit the balance to the Seller. Provided further, that the Seller shall be obligated to fulfill his obligations under the Agreement notwithstanding such holdback and shall pay the amount of any deficiency to the Buyer within 30 days following any such demand.

2. The Subtle Clause (Can be added to the end of a Good Working Order clause):

In the event that any one or more items of such equipment, appliances, chattels and fixtures are not in good working order, the Buyer shall be entitled to an appropriate holdback for such deficiencies.

The challenge is getting the seller to agree to this in the APS.

The Detailed version will obviously be more difficult, but it all depends on your negotiating leverage.

And hey, if there was ever a market to get away with this...

Just to be clear, I don't have any case law on the efficacy of these specific clauses, and there's always room for dispute in contract. But having this in the APS would certainly provide us with more leverage at closing.

Latest YouTube Video

Reading Time: 4 minutes

You see this line on almost every warranty clause:

The Seller represents and warrants that the chattels and fixtures as included in this Agreement of Purchase and Sale will be in good working order and free from all liens and encumbrances on completion. The parties agree that this warranty shall survive and not merge on the completion of this transaction, but apply only to the state of the property at completion of this transaction.

It's a strange sounding phrase that confuses a lot of people.

But it stems from the legal doctrine of merger.

The general rule in real estate is once a deal closes, the Agreement of Purchase and Sale is "dead."

The contract is considered fulfilled and it "merges" (absorbs) into the Deed.

That creates a problem.

If the contract is dead, the promises inside it (like "Good Working Order") are dead too. If your client moves in and finds the furnace is broken, there's no recourse.

This is why we the phrase “survive and not merge” is added.

It means, even though the deal is done, this specific promise stays alive.

• Survive: The promise lives past the closing date.
• Not Merge: The promise doesn't disappear into the Deed.

Without those words, your client buys the house "as is" the moment they get the keys.

With them, they have legal recourse if there's a problem.

But remember...

This clause does not extend the warranty itself. It only extends the time you have to enforce it.

It is not a 1-year guarantee that the appliance won't break. The warranty still only applies to the state of the property on the day of closing.

• Scenario A: The dishwasher works on closing day but breaks two weeks later. Not covered.
• Scenario B: The dishwasher was already broken on closing day, but the buyer didn't run it until two weeks later. Covered.

The clause allows you to sue in Scenario B. It lets you look back in time and enforce a promise about the closing day, even though the deal is already done.

The hard part, of course, is proving it

So, whenever you write a warranty clause, make sure you include that phrase. It’s what keeps the door open for your client's legal recourse.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

Your client has a firm Agreement of Purchase and Sale.

Before closing, there's a fire at the property.

Now what?

In situations like this, everything starts with the Insurance clause in the APS.
(#14 on Form 100 / #18 on Form 101).

INSURANCE: All buildings on the property and all other things being purchased shall be and remain until completion at the risk of Seller. Pending completion, Seller shall hold all insurance policies, if any, and the proceeds thereof in trust for the parties as their interests may appear and in the event of substantial damage, Buyer may either terminate this Agreement and have all monies paid returned without interest or deduction or else take the proceeds of any insurance and complete the purchase. No insurance shall be transferred on completion...

If there is "substantial damage" to the property before closing, the buyer has two options:

1. terminate the agreement and receive their deposit back, or
2. take the insurance proceeds and complete the purchase.

Now the next logical question is what is "substantial damage"?

After looking through case law, there's no clear legal test.

Courts have ruled that the cost of the repairs, quality, character, use and consequences of the damage must be considered.

They've found damage to be “substantial” when issues like major water penetration, removed flooring or drywall, or uncertainty about hidden problems make the home’s true condition unclear or significantly impaired.

I know... not very helpful.

There are also two implied rights that arise from the Insurance clause to allow the buyer to make their decision.

The first, is the buyer's right to inspect the property when there is a legitimate dispute about whether damage is "substantial".

The Second, is the buyer's right to obtain details of the insurance coverage, if any.

But while they do have a right to review insurance details, they do not have the right to wait indefinitely to see if the insurer will pay.

If the buyer is concerned about the sufficiency or certainty of the insurance payout, they have the option to terminate the agreement.

– –

Now, some of you may have heard about a recent case, McDonald v Lowrie where the buyer didn't get the insurance proceeds AND had to forfeit their deposit.

But that was because they tried to force the Seller to agree on a guaranteed amount, and then did not close. By making that demand and refusing to close on the original terms, the buyer repudiated the agreement.

You can read that case here.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

There's more than one definition of a First-Time Homebuyer (FTHB).

It depends on the context.

In Ontario, we use the FTHB designation for 2 key programs:

1. Land Transfer Tax (LTT) Rebate
2. First Home Savings Account (FHSA)

The problem?

They use different criteria.

So some clients see that they qualify under the FHSA definition and assume it applies to the LTT rebate too.

But it doesn’t.

And as real estate professionals, you need to understand the difference.

Land Transfer Tax Rebate

If you're a First-Time Homebuyer you get a Rebate on Land Transfer tax.

For both the Ontario Land Transfer Tax (LTT) and the Toronto Municipal Land Transfer Tax (MLTT), the criteria is:

• At least 18 years old
• Canadian Citizen or Permanent Resident
• Never owned a home anywhere in the world
• If married or common-law, spouse must have never owned a home while they were your spouse
• Must move into the home as principal residence within 9 months

“Ownership” includes partial ownership or inherited property — even a 1% interest disqualifies you.

It’s strict.

And most importantly, there’s no way to “requalify.”

Once you’ve owned, you’re no longer a First-Time Homebuyer under this program.

First Home Savings Account (FHSA)

The First Home Savings Account is a federal program that combines the tax benefits of an RRSP and a TFSA to help first-time buyers save for a home.

I’m seeing more clients using it.

Contributions are tax-deductible, and withdrawals for a qualifying purchase are tax-free.

But the definition of “First-Time Homebuyer” under this program is different.

To qualify, a buyer must:

• Not have lived in a home they (or their spouse/common-law partner) owned at any time in the current calendar year or the previous 4 calendar years.

It’s not about whether they’ve ever owned a home — it’s about whether they’ve lived in one they owned recently.

That means:

• Someone who owned a rental property but never lived in it can still open and use an FHSA.
• A buyer who sold their home more than four years ago will also qualify again.

Why This Matters

A client might qualify as a First-Time Homebuyer under the FHSA definition, but still be ineligible for the LTT rebate.

If you’re helping a buyer plan their closing costs, this matters.

Otherwise, your client could be expecting thousands back on closing that they’ll never receive. And this does happen.

Understanding which definition applies, and when, lets you set expectations early and position yourself as the real estate professional who actually understands the closing process.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

I had a conversation with a Realtor this week that went like this:

Realtor: “We need to get this signed back to the buyers before the irrevocable time!”

Me: Why?

Agent: “What do you mean why? If we miss the irrevocable, the deal’s dead.”

Me: “Is your client planning to accept the offer as-is?”

Agent: “No — we’re changing a few terms.”

Me: “Then you can send it back whenever. It’s not an acceptance, it’s a counter offer. And a counter offer is just a new offer.”

– –

For some of you, this is obvious.

But trust me... it's not for everyone.

Plus, refreshers are helpful.

Signback = Industry Term

“Signback” is really just Realtor shorthand.

In legal terms, it’s a counter offer.

And what’s a counter offer?

A new offer.

That’s it. Nothing more complicated than that.

When Irrevocability Matters

The irrevocable date matters if you’re accepting the offer.

If your client wants to accept what’s been offered to them, they have to do it before that deadline.

But if you’re changing terms — in other words, countering — then it’s a new offer.

You can counter within the irrevocable.
You can counter after the irrevocable.
You can counter two weeks later.

Nothing stops you from doing that.

That said, there is a negotiation etiquette piece here. If you counter long after an offer has expired, it might frustrate the other side or make them feel like you’ve moved on. That’s fair, but it’s not a legal issue.

So Why the Confusion?

Because signbacks feel like they exist inside the original offer.

You're often just editing the same form, adding initials, making a few small changes. It looks like we’re working inside the same agreement.

But you’re not. The moment you change the terms, you’re creating a new offer.

The Legal Rule That Matters

If you send a counter offer within the irrevocable period of the original offer, that counts as a rejection.

Which means you can’t later go back and accept the original offer — even if it’s still technically within its irrevocable period.

Once you counter, that door closes.

One More Point...

Some Realtors think once an offer is signed back, it creates an exclusive negotiation period.

That's not true.

A signback doesn’t stop the seller from accepting another offer. It doesn’t give the buyer “first right” to respond.

It’s just a new offer... and others can still come in.

Remember though, if a Seller has sent a signback (an offer) to a Buyer, this would prevent them from accepting new offers, since acceptance is no longer in their control.

– –

Misunderstanding how "signbacks" work can result in pressure and poor advice.

So here's what to remember:

• A signback is just a new offer
• You can make one at anytime, before or after the irrevocable
• Irrevocable only matters for acceptance
• The only legal rule: once you counter, that's a rejection of the previous offer

The more confidently you understand this, the better you can handle negotiations for your clients.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

Yesterday, the Provincial Government introduced the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025—a new bill proposing several legislative changes.

Among them are some notable updates to how the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) operates.

So, I’ve summarized the proposed LTB related changes that I believe will have the biggest impact, along with my personal thoughts.

– –

1. Remove Ability to Raise New Issues on The Day of a Rent Arrears Hearing
   
   Explanation: Tenants will no longer be allowed to introduce new issues at a rent‑arrears eviction hearing unless they had given prior notice of those issues. In other words, surprise counterclaims or defences would not be allowed. 
   
   My Opinion: This one’s good, eliminating surprise issues means fewer adjournments and more decisions at the scheduled hearing. And it doesn't eliminate legitimate claims that a tenant may have.
   
2. Limit new issues raised at the LTB unless 50% of arrears is paid
   
   Explanation: This would amend the LTB rules so that when a landlord files a rent arrears application, a tenant wishing to raise new issues at the hearing (for example maintenance concerns or other tenant applications) would only be able to do so if they have already paid 50 % of the rent arrears claimed in the landlord’s application. 
   
   My Opinion: This is a sneaky good proposal, it requires a partial clearing of arrears and shifts some burden back onto the tenant to show good faith when entering the dispute process.
   
3. Persistent Late Payment Cases
   
   Explanation: The current law allows a landlord to evict a tenant who has been “persistently” late paying rent or monthly housing charges. But because the Act doesn’t define what “persistently” means, it's rarely enforced. The proposed change would allow the government to set a regulation that actually defines “persistent late payment of rent”. 
   
   My Opinion: Defining this term makes sense. Right now, “persistent late payment” is basically meaningless since adjudicators rarely enforce it for an eviction. By setting a clear test, it should turn an empty rule into something that might actually work.
   
4. Allow the government to prescribe the contents of notices of termination
   
   Explanation: The government wants the power to rewrite the official notice forms. The idea is to make these forms easier to understand for tenants, using plain language and emphasizing the seriousness of the notice. They believe by emphasizing the seriousness, a tenant will be more inclined to address problems, leading to fewer applications.
   
   My Opinion: I'm a big supporter of clear writing and simplifying documents. These forms are due for an update... but I don't believe this will actually lead to fewer applications.
   
5. Compensation Requirements for Landlord’s Own Use Evictions
   
   Explanation: The government is proposing that if a landlord gives 120 days (four months) notice to move into a unit under an “landlord’s personal use” eviction, they would no longer be required to pay the tenant one month’s rent as compensation. If the notice is shorter (60‑119 days), the old rules would still apply. 
   
   My Opinion: I see the logic, why not add an option for homeowners to reclaim the use of their own property without a payment penalty. The tradeoff is two (2) additional months of notice, in exchange for saving the cost of one month's rent payment to the tenant. Whether that's worth it is up to the landlord.
   
6. Shorten the Rent Arrears Eviction Notice Period
   
   Explanation: Right now, if a tenant misses rent, a landlord has to wait 14 days after serving the N4 notice before they can file for eviction at the LTB. The proposal would shorten that waiting period by 7 days, meaning landlords could start the formal process a week earlier than before.
   
   My Opinion: It’s a small change, but a good one. Shaving off a week isn't massive, since most of the waiting happens after the application is filed—but reducing wait times for legal remedies is a positive thing.
   
7. Tribunals Ontario to explore options for increasing access to final Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) decisions and orders
   
   Explanation: The proposal would have the LTB explore options to increase public access to decisions and orders. The idea is to make more case outcomes available in searchable form, so landlords, tenants, and legal professionals can better understand how the LTB is applying the law.
   
   My Opinion: I like this one. As a legal professional working with real estate and rental issues, greater transparency in LTB decisions is a win. It gives us more insight into past outcomes, and how certain facts are treated. Even though LTB members are not strictly bound by precedent, having more accessible past orders strengthens strategy and advice.
   
8. Lease Agreement Expiry
   
   Explanation: This is a weirdly vague promise to review and potentially change how lease‑terms expire under the RTA by exploring “alternative options on lease agreement expiry.”  In other words, instead of a tenancy automatically converting into a month‑to‑month arrangement after a fixed‑term ends, the landlord might gain more control over whether to renew or end the tenancy when the term expires.
   
   My Opinion: This one is by far the most impactful proposed change. If implemented, it essentially eliminates rent control. You'll notice they don't use those words though. I see the upside for homeowners: more flexibility, more control, and an ability to respond to market conditions or personal needs.
   
   This one would be the most controversial proposal and, realistically, the least likely to pass unchanged, hence the vague language.

– –

Now remember, these are just proposed changes. This bill still needs to go through the formal legislative process before anything becomes law. Some parts may be changed or dropped entirely.

If you want to review the full list of proposed changes, you can find the official government summary here.

And as always, i'd love to hear your thoughts. Just Reply.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

This was a new one for me.

I was representing a landlord who owned a condo that was tenanted on a month-to-month basis and was preparing to list it for sale.

My client prepared a Notice of Entry for their Realtor to evaluate the unit, take measurements, note the condition, and prep for listing.

But the Tenant denied the notice.

They wrote back saying the reason for entry didn’t fall under Section 27(1) or (2) of the Residential Tenancies Act.

My first instinct was the LTB must be interpreting this section broadly enough to allow a Realtor access to prepare a listing.

So I did some research. And here’s what I found:

the Landlord’s Real Estate Agent cannot enter to take measurements to prepare the rental unit for proposed sale under subsection 27(1) of the Act.

section 27 of the Act does not permit the Landlord or their real estate agent to enter the unit to measure and videotape the unit to market it for sale.

Now, I get that this isn’t the most common issue. In practice, I’ve seen this type of entry allowed virtually every time... until now.

But it’s a good reminder of a simple fix that can avoid this kind of needless dispute.

Add a clause like this to your Additional Terms:

In addition to the conditions for entry set out in s.27 of the Residential Tenancies Act, and pursuant to s27(1)5 of the Act, the Landlord may enter a rental unit under the following circumstances:

1. To allow their Realtor, or someone acting on their behalf, to take general marketing photos for listing the unit for sale or rent, as long as the photos do not include identifiable personal items or information about the tenant.

2. To allow their Realtor or other professional to conduct a market valuation of the rental unit or building, take measurements, and carry out any other tasks necessary to prepare the property for listing for sale.

3. To check for illegal activity, damage, or the general condition of the unit.

4. To determine if the unit has been abandoned.

And don’t be afraid to include more.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Your deal is firm. Closing is around the corner.

Then your client calls and says:

“I want to add my spouse to title.”

Or

“My accountant says I should close in a corporation.”

Luckily, there’s a simple solution:

The Direction Re: Title.

It’s a short, one-page document signed by the buyer, instructing the seller’s lawyer who should be registered on title at closing.

Most of the time, it matches the names on the APS, but it doesn’t have to.

The buyer can direct the seller to register a different name as the legal owner.

It’s fast, simple, and often keeps the closing on track without needing to amend the deal.

But there are limitations... and they matter.

• A Direction Re: Title doesn’t amend the APS. The person being added has no legal rights under the contract.
• If the deal falls apart, only the original buyer can sue — and only the original buyer can be sued.
• The buyer named in the APS remains fully responsible for closing, even if someone else was to end up on title.
• Some lenders may require the APS to match the names going on title. If that’s the case, a Direction won’t be enough — you’ll need to amend the agreement or prepare an assignment.

– –

As a Realtor, knowing when a Direction Re: Title can be used is a helpful tool. Especially when managing last-minute changes.

Check with your client’s closing lawyer early. It may save you from having to reopen negotiations with the seller’s agent.

And if your buyer is relying on financing, we'll need to confirm with the lender before proceeding.

Check out my latest YouTube Video:

Reading Time: 2 minutes

I built this newsletter to deliver real value.

Every so often, it’s important to pause and make sure I’m moving in the right direction.

And for that, I need your input.

I’ve put together a short 10-question survey.

It takes just 2–3 minutes, and every question has a purpose.

Your feedback tells me what’s working, what to double down on, and where I can add more value in your day-to-day business.

Everyone who completes the survey will be entered into a draw for a $100 Amazon gift card.

Thank you for being a part of the community!

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Selling a property in today’s market isn’t easy.

And when that property is tenanted? Virtually impossible.

Because when vacant possession can’t be guaranteed, the buyer pool shrinks. And if you do generate an offer, it’s usually well below what the same property would sell for vacant.

That’s why I’ve had so many conversations with landlords this year about Cash for Keys agreements.

In many cases, paying cash to a tenant today ends up being cheaper than the discounted price a buyer will want on a tenanted sale.

So, here’s how I approach these situations:

1. Start the conversation.
   Lead with respect. This is voluntary, not a threat. Be clear about the seller’s intentions and frame the offer as a fair trade that leaves everyone better off.
2. Negotiate the two key terms: Price & Date.
   Everything hangs on these.
   Price → agree on a firm dollar amount (no ranges, no “TBD”).
   Date → set a realistic move-out date, with enough time for logistics.
3. Put the agreement in writing.
   This is where most landlords get it wrong by relying on the N11 alone. The N11 is good to have, but it’s not enough. I also prepare a full Mutual Agreement to Terminate Tenancy that works alongside it and covers:

• how and when payment is made
• future rent and Last Month’s Rent deposit
• the condition the property must be left in
• return of keys, fobs, and other items
• consequences if the tenant doesn’t vacate

4. Add the safety net (the L3).
   Once everything’s signed, I always recommend the landlord file an L3 Application with the LTB. That way, if the tenant doesn’t leave, the landlord can apply for eviction without a hearing.
5. Day-of logistics.
   On termination day, the landlord does a walk-through inspection, collects the keys/fobs, and releases the payment to the tenant. Always provide a receipt so everyone has a clean paper trail.

– –

Knowing how and when to have this conversation is important for your business.

Knowing how to execute it properly is even more important.

And if you want my help to do it, I'm always happy to assist.

Oh, and I finally launched a YouTube channel. 🎥

Head over and hit subscribe.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

What time does the seller actually have to be out of the house on closing day?

This part of the APS seems to throw people off...

Somewhere along the lines, an idea formed that a Seller has until 6:00 p.m. to vacate the house.

And I hear it all the time.

But read that clause again:

“This Agreement shall be completed by no later than 6:00 p.m.

This is an outer deadline — the latest point by which the deal must be completed.

It doesn’t give the seller a right to hang around until 6:00 p.m.

Completion happens when the buyer’s funds are received, the requisite deliveries are exchanged between the lawyers.

From that moment, ownership has legally transferred — and the APS requires the seller to deliver vacant possession (unless otherwise agreed).

That means:

• If closing happens at 11:00 a.m., the seller must be out by 11:00 a.m.
• If closing happens at 3:30 p.m., the seller must be out by 3:30 p.m.
• 6:00 p.m. is simply the latest the parties can close.

So when clients ask what time they need to be out of the house, remind your sellers that they need to be ready to hand over vacant possession as soon as the deal closes — whenever that may be during the day.

👉 In practice, majority of closings take place between 2:00–5:00 p.m.

Reading Time: 4 minutes

You’ve probably heard the phrase: “signed, sealed, and delivered.”

And when it comes to real estate offers, that last step — delivered — is the one that really matters.

Let’s look at a scenario:

A buyer submits an offer with an irrevocable of 8:00 p.m.

The seller signs at 7:59 p.m.

But the listing agent doesn’t send it back to the co-op agent until 8:05 p.m.

Is the deal binding?

No, it’s not.

Acceptance Has Two Parts

1. Signing — the offeree signs the APS.
2. Communicating — the acceptance must be delivered back to the offeror before the irrevocable expires.

Without both steps, there’s no contract.

What Counts as “Communicating”?

Clause 3 — Notices — in the standard Agreement of Purchase and Sale makes it clear:

Acceptance is deemed given and received when it’s:

• Hand-delivered to the Address for Service,
• Sent to the fax number listed, or
• E-mailed to the address listed.

Anything short of this doesn’t work.

A conversation about “planning to accept” is not enough. A text saying “we’ll send it later” is not enough.

The notice of acceptance must be in writing — and it must be delivered.

Why Timing Matters

In real estate, timing triggers everything:

• Deposits are due “within 24 hours of acceptance.”
• Conditions run from the moment of acceptance.

Acceptance = Signed + Delivered.

And if acceptance is ever contested — say one side changes their mind — you need to be able to prove it happened in time.

The safest way?

• Use an e-signing platform like DocuSign so you have a receipt with the exact time of signing.
• Pair it with an email delivering the signed APS, timestamped before the irrevocable deadline.

That way, if anyone questions whether the offer was validly accepted, you’ve got clear evidence of both steps.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

When a seller is acting under a Power of Attorney (POA), there’s one critical rule:

The POA dies with the grantor.

That means if the grantor (the person giving the POA) passes away before closing, the POA is instantly invalid.

The attorney no longer has authority to sign documents or complete the transaction.

At that point, the property becomes part of the estate.

Control shifts to the estate trustees, and in most cases, probate is required before the property can be transferred — and that process can take months.

This means that if an Agreement of Purchase and Sale is already in place, it’s unlikely to close on the scheduled Completion Date.

Why this matters?
Many POA sales happen because the grantor is in declining health. As a Realtor, you need to be aware of the risk.

A deal that looks firm on paper can collapse if the grantor dies before closing, leaving everyone stuck in limbo.

So, remember... POAs don’t survive death.

If you’re listing under POA — especially where health is an issue — make sure your clients understand the risk and draft accordingly.